Because our doctors make us avoid Ha’aretz editorial (blood pressure related, nothing to really worry about), we don’t really get their good stuff until it gets pushed to us by leftist mailing lists (also blood pressure related, but in a different way). So we missed it when Amira “are you effing kidding – we though one really believed that” Hass wrote the following about a month ago:
If Amira Hass was worth fisking, this is where we’d belabor the part about “every time Israel opens up the border crossings terrorists slip through”, but that’s not what we’re up to in this post. We’d like to bait the other side of the blogosphere (read: our demo (read: bad business decision)).
Sharon gave the Israel and international communities a lot of reasons for the disengagement. As far as they went, they were 100 percent true – Israel had to set its own secure borders because the Palestinians were not going to work with any Israeli government on any reasonable peace deal. But underneath everything there was always the “take Gaza and choke on it” justification – let the Palestinians see what it’s like to manage their own affairs for a while, in a context where their usual “it’s all Israel’s fault” excuses didn’t play. In the best case, they develop a sense of responsibility and come back to the table for a negotiated settlement. In the worst case, they fall into internecine violence (but ) and spare Israeli schoolchildren and cafe diners for a while. So with due respect to the three of you who will be pissed off enough about this post to write to us: it seems that at least that part has turned out to be more or less accurate.
Plus, there’s still our “it was inevitable anyway” argument, which we still – years afterwards – have not heard a compelling answer to. But that’s just gravy. [how long do you intend to continue antagonizing your readers? -- ed there's a time limit?]
Previously: Define “Failure” Please, Disengagement – Still Probably a Good Idea, Disengagement – Violence Was Going To Happen
