Trade Gaza For The West Bank (Again?!?!)
Ha'aretz has columns about the relationship between Gaza and the West Bank going in opposite directions today. Israel Harel writes:
Ginot Aryeh... Givat Haro'eh, [and] uprooting Gush Katif [in Gaza]... will be offered as sacrifices to President Bush. Sharon will notify him that this is only the prologue... that will precede the main event: the uprooting of settlements in Judea and Samaria.
Aluf Benn writes:
Sharon is prepared to pay with the evacuation of Gaza for American consent to Israel's continued control over a large part of the West Bank. That is why he instructed his national security advisor, Giora Eiland, to chart security lines that Israel could hold for years, "until there is a partner."
Harel is a former chairman Council of Settlers in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (and token settler advocate at Ha'aretz). Benn is the senior diplomatic correspondent for Ha'aretz. Since both authors conceded that the question of the West Bank is a question of Bush and Sharon's relationship, I tend to default to the guy whose job it is to know about Bush and Sharon's relationship.
However, Benn does remind the reader that this kind of plan has failed before in the most spectacular ways:
Sharon is trying to follow in the footsteps of Menachem Begin, who conceded Sinai so that Israel could stay in the West Bank; Ehud Barak, who left Lebanon in order to perpetuate Israel's control of the Golan; and Shimon Peres, who championed "Gaza First" and a deferral of a solution in the West Bank and Jerusalem. All of them enjoyed success in the short term, but left diplomatic time bombs for their successors.
What he doesn't even mention is that it wasn't just Begin who counted on trading the Sinai for the West Bank. Remember that Begin called Sharon to make sure that Sharon wouldn't outflank him on the right, and Sharon signed on to the deal specifically on the Sinai for Yesha logic. And now he's trying it again. What's the definition of insanity?
Ginot Aryeh... Givat Haro'eh, [and] uprooting Gush Katif [in Gaza]... will be offered as sacrifices to President Bush. Sharon will notify him that this is only the prologue... that will precede the main event: the uprooting of settlements in Judea and Samaria.
Aluf Benn writes:
Sharon is prepared to pay with the evacuation of Gaza for American consent to Israel's continued control over a large part of the West Bank. That is why he instructed his national security advisor, Giora Eiland, to chart security lines that Israel could hold for years, "until there is a partner."
Harel is a former chairman Council of Settlers in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (and token settler advocate at Ha'aretz). Benn is the senior diplomatic correspondent for Ha'aretz. Since both authors conceded that the question of the West Bank is a question of Bush and Sharon's relationship, I tend to default to the guy whose job it is to know about Bush and Sharon's relationship.
However, Benn does remind the reader that this kind of plan has failed before in the most spectacular ways:
Sharon is trying to follow in the footsteps of Menachem Begin, who conceded Sinai so that Israel could stay in the West Bank; Ehud Barak, who left Lebanon in order to perpetuate Israel's control of the Golan; and Shimon Peres, who championed "Gaza First" and a deferral of a solution in the West Bank and Jerusalem. All of them enjoyed success in the short term, but left diplomatic time bombs for their successors.
What he doesn't even mention is that it wasn't just Begin who counted on trading the Sinai for the West Bank. Remember that Begin called Sharon to make sure that Sharon wouldn't outflank him on the right, and Sharon signed on to the deal specifically on the Sinai for Yesha logic. And now he's trying it again. What's the definition of insanity?
