Disengagement - Still Probably a Good Idea
We want to reassure our readers from the right that, although we haven't been quite as responsive as we'd like, we have indeed been reading your gloating, anti-disengagement correspondences. We're not sure why the fact that Palestinians aren't willing or able to make peace with Israelis is a justification for a bilateral settlement, but there is one particular flavor of the anti-disengagement gloating that we want to address even though it's a couple of weeks late. Specifically: this absurd idea that a majority of Israelis regret disengagement:
Israelis aren't buying disengagement: A poll shows a majority of Israelis do not believe that disengagement from Gaza has made them any safer: Some 70% of those surveyed replied that the implementation of the disengagement plan did not contribute anything towards peace, while only 20% thought the plan was a stimulus for improved relations with the Arab world
There are at least two errors in this analysis:
(1) The assumption that "contributing towards peace" is the same as being "safer".
(2) The assumption that what Israelis wanted out of the disengagement was to move "towards peace."
The disengagement plan was not supposed to help the Israelis get along with the Palestinians. Exactly the opposite - it was supposed to create a situation in which Israel could tolerably exist even in light of the realization that the Palestinians are not going to give up on their terroristic ambitions for a long, long time.
Anyway, that's irrelevant - this analysis is flawed on its face. If Israelis were turning in any large numbers away from the idea of unilaterally setting Israel's boundaries, Kadima wouldn't be doubling up Labor and Likud in most polls.
Israelis aren't buying disengagement: A poll shows a majority of Israelis do not believe that disengagement from Gaza has made them any safer: Some 70% of those surveyed replied that the implementation of the disengagement plan did not contribute anything towards peace, while only 20% thought the plan was a stimulus for improved relations with the Arab world
There are at least two errors in this analysis:
(1) The assumption that "contributing towards peace" is the same as being "safer".
(2) The assumption that what Israelis wanted out of the disengagement was to move "towards peace."
The disengagement plan was not supposed to help the Israelis get along with the Palestinians. Exactly the opposite - it was supposed to create a situation in which Israel could tolerably exist even in light of the realization that the Palestinians are not going to give up on their terroristic ambitions for a long, long time.
Anyway, that's irrelevant - this analysis is flawed on its face. If Israelis were turning in any large numbers away from the idea of unilaterally setting Israel's boundaries, Kadima wouldn't be doubling up Labor and Likud in most polls.
