Why Disengagement Now Might Not Be the Worst Idea
My support for the disengagement plan is grounded in a lot of different dynamics, but ultimately I think it's impossible to stay indefinitely in all of the territories outside the Green Line. People can have arguments as to whether that's true or not (and judging by the email that I get every time I post something like this, people aren't bashful about having those arguments) - but if that is the case, then now is the time to get out and keep as much as possible.
The case for disengagement becomes simple: the current administration has provided the most advantageous diplomatic situation that Israel has seen for the last 25 years. But it won't stay that way forever - there are already signs that Israel's diplomatic standing is slipping even in the United States. I think Sharon is gambling correctly that the only way to secure up to 50% of the West Bank is to give up Gaza while the Bush administration needs his support and will grant him the quid pro quo. For better or worse this seems to be happening:
Well aware of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's mounting internal political problems, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is unlikely to press him to make additional gestures to the Palestinian Authority now, senior sources in Sharon's office said Thursday night.
Now, of course, this reasoning is predicated on the idea that this Bush - unlike his father - will continue to support Israel. And there is indeed cause to worry on that score. But Bush isn't going to survive forever - and while I'm on the subject, the evangelical support for Israel which has created the current pro-Israel political climate in the US isn't going to survive forever either (although the intellectualized ant-Semitism of the new Left is only going to get more vicious as it becomes more and more identified with the particular anti-American ethos of radical Islam). Things are only going to get worse for Israel - if some evacuation is inevitable, better now than before or after.
[Cross-posted on IsraPundit]
The case for disengagement becomes simple: the current administration has provided the most advantageous diplomatic situation that Israel has seen for the last 25 years. But it won't stay that way forever - there are already signs that Israel's diplomatic standing is slipping even in the United States. I think Sharon is gambling correctly that the only way to secure up to 50% of the West Bank is to give up Gaza while the Bush administration needs his support and will grant him the quid pro quo. For better or worse this seems to be happening:
Well aware of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's mounting internal political problems, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is unlikely to press him to make additional gestures to the Palestinian Authority now, senior sources in Sharon's office said Thursday night.
Now, of course, this reasoning is predicated on the idea that this Bush - unlike his father - will continue to support Israel. And there is indeed cause to worry on that score. But Bush isn't going to survive forever - and while I'm on the subject, the evangelical support for Israel which has created the current pro-Israel political climate in the US isn't going to survive forever either (although the intellectualized ant-Semitism of the new Left is only going to get more vicious as it becomes more and more identified with the particular anti-American ethos of radical Islam). Things are only going to get worse for Israel - if some evacuation is inevitable, better now than before or after.
[Cross-posted on IsraPundit]
