For some reason today has seen a couple of articles from anti-disengagement bloggers on precisely this potential “trade up” scenario. First Ted Belman, who is among the most reasonable disengagement opponents (quote: “while I agree with you the rhetoric from many on this site and from many disengagement foes has been extreme and uncalled for, the same can be said of the rhetoric from some on the Left. Neither are to be excused. Sharon is patriot and not a traitor”) links to an article effectively proposing that the Gaza-West Bank tradeup is what Sharon has been up to all along:
By withdrawal the Israeli government re-introduces the pre-1967 conditions… A Palestinian state is no guarantor for peace due to the permanent presence of uncontrolled radical forces within the Palestinian political structure…
A policy of containment has limited value, as persistent terrorist attacks will continue to constrain Israel economically and demographically. International pressure to proceed with the Roadmap as the only “solution” will continue to mount to unbearable levels. Implementing the Roadmap however would provide only a short reprieve, and would thereafter develop into its own existential threat with the birth of a Palestinian state.
Disengagement is an effort to create a new dynamic that would make the prospect of the Roadmap entirely irrelevant… Why does this scenario make sense? Because nothing else explains the Disengagement and because Israel has run out of options. It is not only the hostility of the Palestinian Arabs but the present climate of opinion consequent to the global Jihad war. Neither peace nor a strategy of containment remain viable options.
This article is extensive and has triggered an very active debate in the comments section. All of the reasons why disengagement is a good idea are in this article – it gives Israel a freer hand to deal with terrorists after Israel leaves, it gains Israel a temporary boost of international diplomatic capital, and – the ultimate tie-breaker – Israel will eventually have to withdraw from Gaza under international pressure anyway (and at that time, they’ll gain nothing but humiliation). Read the whole thing.
Then, of all disengagement opponents, Lynn B finds reasons to be hopeful about the post-disengagement political situation:
“Sharon vows to “expand” and “strengthen” West Bank settlement of Ariel”… I’ve had enough bad news for one week. I’m going with the glass half full version for now.”
No Zionist is totally comfortable with the disengagement. Let’s hope Sharon knows what he’s doing.
