Ze'ev Schiff

The abuse of prisoners detained at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq proves that it matters not if the occupier declares its aim to enforce democracy or uphold human rights, or if it calls itself an "enlightened occupation" - the degradation of prisoners is an almost unavoidable consequence of an occupation regime.

Now that Washington has turned to the UN for help in getting out of Iraq, it is harder to say what would constitute an American victory. It is no less important to assess the strategic implications of a substantial American failure. These are far-reaching global implications, which will affect Israel as well.

There is very little chance of finding an ordinary solution to the problem of the Gaza Strip. Israel must distance itself from the quagmire at any price, and at least release the only reserves of land, which are in Israeli hands.

The Palestinians now have an opportunity to make a unilateral move of their own - the declaration of a cease-fire, from which they would gain much.

More than once in the past, the IDF has taken a restrained approach, as opposed to the proposals of the political echelon, and especially the prime minister. No longer. If the disengagement plan is carried out in spite of everything, the IDF is setting a high "price tag" for the Gaza Strip in case terrorism continues even after the withdrawal.

The fact that the number of volunteers willing to perpetrate terrorist attacks is increasing also indicates that the current silence of Hamas does not diminish the possibility that it will take Israel by surprise.

This is not the first time in the history of Israel's conflict with the Palestinians that the question of whether to kill Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has been on the agenda. It has come up before, during periods when Arafat was considered a prominent figure possessing national and international status. In one way or another, all the cases in question involved Sharon.

Despite the unceasing terrorist war, it is now clear there has been an improvement in Israel's strategic position over the past year. The military deployment in the Middle East has changed in our favor, and certain threats that appeared grave in the past are gone.

As opposed to the conventional wisdom that Ariel Sharon wants to see Yasser Arafat gone, or even dead, the prime minister apparently has a clear interest in Arafat remaining in the territories and continuing his current activities. When Sharon declares, as he recently did, that Arafat has no "life insurance," he's actually doing it to invite international pressure to not harm Arafat.

What is happening in Iraq is not President George W. Bush's Vietnam, as Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy has said. What is happening in Iraq is more reminiscent of what happened to Israel in Lebanon.

What will happen to the private homes, public buildings, water and road infrastructure, shelters and everything else. Israel's behavior will have an important influence on the atmosphere for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Two years ago, during the Pesach holiday, a revolution took place in Israel's war against Palestinian terror. The suicide attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya on seder night led the Israeli government, which still included members of the Labor Party, to decide to reoccupy the cities of the West Bank.

A few days after the publication of the report in which the Europeans admit anti-Semitism has worsened there, Europe took another step from which the same stench rises. The European parliament effectively redefined Israel's self-defense against terror as an 'act of terror,' because Palestinian civilians are hurt in the war.

The investigative panels in both the United States and Britain are interested, first and foremost, in whether there was any basis for the launch of the war by their leaders. Israel has to look further than this.

The Steinitz report's main flaw is that it lacks a single word indicating that what Israel most needs in the intelligence field is what was called "Net Assessment." That is, a body that would supplement the specific evaluations made by Israel's intelligence organizations by adding an assessment of Israel's capabilities.

Following the liquidation of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the Arabs might think that Israel is behaving like a "crazy state" that no longer takes into account world opinion.

Jerusalem's disaster is that the two peoples are once again leading it toward partition. Once again, it will be a city with a wall in its heart.

With grudging consent from the Americans, the British are now setting up two new operation control rooms, one in Ramallah and one in Gaza, for Palestinian security organizations.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan has not been finally formulated, but even now it is clear that with his plan, he has succeeded into calling into question tactical security doctrines that he held and also convinced many other people to support.

The Americans cannot explain why Sharon spoke in Jerusalem about an insignificant move in the West Bank, while Weisglass spoke in Washington of an extensive withdrawal. As far as they are concerned, this difference makes it worth coming to Israel and taking a closer look.

Unlike the United States in Iraq, the Israel Defense Forces have had occupation forced upon them for decades and there are no real signs of a substantial change in the foreseeable future.

History is playing a joke on Gaza. Sharon is deliberating whether to ask the Egyptians to play an active role in the area, to prevent arms smuggling across the Philadelphi road between the borders of Sinai and the Strip.

After Libya announced that it was giving up the development of weapons of mass destruction and Iran admitted that it had lied outright about its nuclear development, and in Pakistan it was found that one of its scientists had sold know-how concerning the development of nuclear weaponry, there are signs that in Israel the same debate on these issues is proliferating.

There may be great legal differences between them, but the cases of Elhanan Tannenbaum, Mordechai Vanunu, Professor Marcus Klingberg and Brigadier-General (res.) Yaakov Yitzhak share a common security denominator - and it is one that ought to be flashing a red light in someone's eyes.

In order for the disengagement plan to succeed, it must not become a plan for a unilateral withdrawal without any dialogue with the Palestinians. If a disaster is to be avoided, there is a need for operational-practical dialogue on many issues: from the supply of water, electricity, medical equipment and food to policing demands.