Disengage from Gaza once and for all
Israel's left should support the idea of the European Union's taking effective responsibility for the development of the Gaza Strip, even if Lieberman is the one who proposed it. Anyone who wants to view this idea as European neocolonialism is free to do so.
By Shlomo AvineriEven those who are not fans of Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman must admit that his plan to invite European foreign ministers to visit the Gaza Strip is a creative and positive step. The initiative could also symbolize Israel's final disengagement from Gaza, the consummation of a process that was never completed, primarily due to opposition raised by a defense establishment that has tended to look at the Gaza issue solely from a narrow security perspective, while ignoring the tremendous damage that the blockade has caused to Israel.
If Israel claims that there is no humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, there is no reason to prevent visits to the area, as it has tried to do in the past. As it turns out, after dozens of years of controlling Gaza, in an occupation that failed to prevent the rise of Hamas and the stockpiling and smuggling of arms, it seems that Israel is having difficulty freeing itself from a sense of domination and authority. Though we might quibble over Lieberman's motives, it is now his turn to lead a complex series of steps that might bring to an end a policy that Ariel Sharon initiated, with wide public support: freeing Israel from control and responsibility in Gaza.
After evacuating Israeli settlers from Gaza, we found ourselves locked in an absurd predicament. Israel no longer occupies Gaza, but since it demanded that control over crossing points and the coast remain in its hands, it has created a situation that has no parallel in the world: Israel has no control, but is regarded as being responsible for Gaza. Similarly, the ludicrous idea of enforcing a blockade on 1.5 million people in order to "pressure" Hamas into releasing Gilad Shalit is a proven, unmitigated failure that is tainted by a fundamental moral flaw. And the notion that any sort of Israeli policy will determine who rules the Palestinians, and will weaken or strengthen Hamas or Mahmoud Abbas, is nothing more than sheer hubris.
Should the foreign minister's plan win the support of the prime minister and the defense establishment and be implemented, Israel would allow the European Union to take responsibility for infrastructure development in Gaza and supervision of the cargo entering the region, in coordination with Israeli security officials. The implications of such a development would be complex; even were the EU not to maintain direct contacts with Hamas, clearly these steps could not be taken without some sort of coordination with Ismail Haniyeh's government. The Palestinian Authority, and perhaps the Obama administration, would not be thrilled by such a development, but it undoubtedly would suit Israeli interests.
True, one of the foreign minister's motives might be to reduce the chances of an agreement being forged between Fatah and Hamas, by enhancing the Gaza Strip's status as a separate entity. But so far, even in the absence of Lieberman's initiative, all attempts to obtain such an agreement have failed. Residents of Gaza and Israel are the parties who have paid the price for these failures. The State of Israel must get used to the idea that its border with Gaza should be viewed like its border with Syria. Put simply, Gaza is a foreign country, and the fact that its government is highly unpalatable to Israel is irrelevant. After all, the government in Damascus is not exactly run by lovers of Zion.
Israel's left should support the idea of the European Union's taking effective responsibility for the development of the Gaza Strip, even if Lieberman is the one who proposed it. Anyone who wants to view this idea as European neocolonialism is free to do so. The important point is that after reaching a strategic decision to disengage from Gaza, and after coming to the brink of a civil revolt as a result of this decision, Israel should finish the job. And if the European Union is so concerned about humanitarian aspects of life in Gaza, it should take the reins of responsibility with its own hands.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
It is easy for me as a Jew living in Canada to tell Israel to completely disengage from Gaza....after all the qassams are not landing at my front door. I would want the EU to build up Gaza but to also monitor arms being imported....and we all know arms will be imported. At that point Hamas has to make a decision. Build up a defensive army and grow a society at the same time...or build up the army for the final assault on Israel. If the latter is the decision then the world needs to open their eyes to finally see that Israel is the "sight between the cross hairs" of the Moslem world....followed by the rest of western society.
Syria is a more responsible neighbor than Gaza. President Assad has been actively seeking peace with Israel (which is ignoring him) while the leaders in Gaza have the destruction of Israel as their stated goal.
I am sure Europeans are tickled to death with this idea. They can't wait and will probably make Gaza part of EU.
Israel had to defend the Palestinian police (PLO), PLO leaders and European security forces from Hamas terrorist. They ran as soon as they heard the first shot fired. We are to trust the same people again with our security?
The consequence of such a decision is that Israel has the right to COMPLETELY close the border with Gaza, same as it does with Syria and the same it was with Gaza prior to the 1967 occupation. A translation into practical terms: Israel has no obligation to deliver gas, electricity and humanitarian goods or to allow the crossing of the border by any person in Gaza. Gaza's border with Egypt will be, of course subject to whatever they negotiate with Egypt. And as for the sea blockade: International law allows Israel to conduct a blockade as long as there is a state of war between the two entities. Israel may choose of course not to impose a blockade, conditioned on a cease-fire agreement and possible monitoring arrangements.
the comparison is wrong! Syria will not launch attacks against Israel as it is well aware of the cost to the regime of Israeli retaliation. Gaza is a failed and a rogue 'state' (professor DROR would say 'crazy') and will always be.That means not responsible and dangerous if not tightly controlled or emptied of its population, e.g. in an exchange of land AND population. The EU will have NO means to prevent attacks against Israel from the Gaza Islamists and will only continue to blame Israel if we retaliate.
"The EU will have NO means to prevent attacks against Israel from the Gaza Islamists and will only continue to blame Israel if we retaliate. " Oh boy, you know how to get it backwards.... Hamas are retaliating to Israel illegally acquiring Palestinian territory since 1948. You do realize, Israel has NEVER been entirely within it's own sovereign territory
1. Too late, because supposedly Obama is working on the solution of the Palestinian problem within the next couple of years. If so, why rush when the Gaza issue is about to be solved? It will only complicate matters. The US will object. 2. Perhaps unworkable, because full Israeli disengagement means that Gaza will no longer be "occupied", and therefore Hamas (the rulers) will have to declare independence, and will be treated as such. This is the creation of Hamastan, which will be trouble to Israel and Egypt too. This is what Israel was trying to avoid. The only way Abbas will be able to remain relevant is if he too declares independence so the world will give him the recognition. Israel tries to prevent that too. 3. A note of caution: According to the Oslo agreement, which continues to be in effect, Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be treated as one unit. Disengagement will be contrary to that.
Not a bad idea in itself, as long as this is seen as the first (and not last) step. Because next it will be the turn of Jordan and Egypt to break ranks with the West under Persian supervision. Bye-bye USA.
Not a bad idea in itself, as long as this is seen as the first (and not last) step. Because next it will be the turn of Jordan and Egypt to break ranks with the West under Persian supervision. Bye-bye USA.
It is true that a west-bank-gaza state is unfeasible. Muslim power structures hinge on topological contiguity as they are based on segmentally fused extended families. This would not even change if Hamas would conquer the west-bank. So far there is really not much to be gained from waiting for the PA. The problems lie in Gaza itself. The Europeans will not come, unless they are at least acquiesced by Hamas in the first place. But Hamas will not tolerate anybody who precludes them from getting armed. So negotiations will be made who's outcome is ambiguous enough to have it both ways. If Hamas is smart they will accept because there's another asymmetry to be gained from. If they make troubles the Europeans will look the other way, if the Israelis make troubles they have some additional human shields and a Europe that is even more interested in "peace". The flaw in Avineri's article is very easy to discern. He wants to dynamize the system by inviting a third party to the stage. But such games only work if the third party can add new functions to the game. They will, but only to the detriment of Israel. When it comes to the point of normal interstate relations, mainly refrain from violence, Europe will not be willing to structurally substitute Israel and this would be the whole point.
This is the smartest post from all that contains insight into the Terrorist Org HAMAS mindset since it is deeply rooted in its indoctrinated Muslim Koranic beliefs that negotiations should be only between Muslims and Dhimmis are non negotiable take Note Haaretz readers
Thanks Chafeka, but lest I get misunderstood, I would like to point out that I was not referring to ideology, but social structure. Jihad ideology with the caveats like hudna and shmudna and so on are rather the semantic correlates of a society which beyond clans has no potential for the evolution of more improbable systems like e.g. states. They can temporarily unite against outsider or temporarily refrain from it, but they cannot create a state with closed system boundaries in itself. But this wouldn't rule out the possibility of temporary peace (here's the place for a comparison with Syria, if any, but you could also take Egypt or Jordan). The reason I take it as a given, that Hamas is not prepared to forgo external violence is something else. They are isolated in the Arab world (to put it mildly) and they need resources. All Arab states have a factual monopoly an external trade, so even if the Gazans would produce something to export, the Arabs would hinder its distribution. Trade is too fuzzy to control and always comes with the intermingling of people. People, that is, who support the opposition. What remains as viable "good" is violence in the service of third parties who have an interest in fanning the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Without this service Hamas would simply lack the means to keep enough people happy enough to stick to them.
stop with the lefttist crap. Israel left gaza. Isn't it time the "good" people of gaza recognize israel and renounce violence and uphold past agreements? you know, the quartets demands...? remember those?
Every Hamas remember the Israeli blockade they get down on their knees and thank the good lord
Sounds like high tech "ethnic cleansing". Gaza voters will someday vote in Palestine Israel elections. You are not fooling anyone.
What exactly is that?
If anyone remembers the eu accepted responsibility for the border crossings when Israel left all of gaza. When hamas took over the eu ran for safety. We all know that hamas will bring in rockets, SAMs artillery long range missiles, anti tank weapons if give the chance . hamas will fortify its positions in population centers and attack Israel, Hamas will attack Israel, they repeatedly say so and there will be war. You are very generous with human lives
israel creates problems and then wants others to sort it out. In this case it is being suggested that the EU become responsible for Gaza. At other times the solution that is advocated for the West Bank is that it forms an association with Jordan although Jordan has shown no interest in this. Israel should learn to deal with its own mess. I hope - and am confident - the EU will have no time for this.
israel creates problems and then wants others to sort it out. In this case it is being suggested that the EU become responsible for Gaza. At other times the solution that is advocated for the West Bank is that it forms an association with Jordan although Jordan has shown no interest in this. Israel should learn to deal with its own mess. I hope - and am confident - the EU will have no time for this.
Are you kidding? Israel DOES deal with its own problems, and the world criticizes. Lieberman is nuts, but he's right on this one. The road to peace is for Israel to disengage with the Gaza strip and the West Bank and have the EU or UN come in and deal with it. Israel doesn't want to be the occupier anymore, but also doesn't want to have rockets fired at schoolchildren. Put the EU in charge for a month and watch them squirm when they realize the impossibility of the situation that European colonialism has created. Let those chickens come home to roost.
and won't be accepted worldwide....Dutch
that this whole mess was largely created by Britain, right? European colonialism has set the stage for many of the world's border disputes. Now that Europe is the way it is, you all sit around all day bemoaning states that actually do something or take real steps to protect themselves from Islamists - I agree that it's time for you to do something. Europe should be put in charge of controlling Gaza - then the Europeans can finally see what Israel deals with and can stop criticizing over things they barely understand.
Why does everyone, including the most self-righteous liberals, ignore the fact that there is only one person in Gaza in need of humanitarian aid, and that is kidnapped Israeli Gilad Shalit. He has been held there, incommunicado for over 4 years. Not even a visit from the Red Cross. No contact. That is the war crime, a crime against humanity of the grossest kind.
why does everyone, blah blah blah, ignore the fact that only Israeli people are human beings and the rest is rubbish? Israel, Israel, Über Alles. Remind you of something?
@there is only one person in Gaza in need of humanitarian aid, and that is kidnapped Israeli Gilad Shalit.----- No he is not the only one... If he is the only one for smth, he is the only one who never ever needs humanitarian aid. Cause he was even watching the Africa world cup, is he in need?!
@there is only one person in Gaza in need of humanitarian aid, and that is kidnapped Israeli Gilad Shalit.----- No he is not the only one... If he is the only one for smth, he is the only one who never ever needs humanitarian aid. Cause he was even watching the Africa world cup, is he in need?!
Gaza belongs to Israel and the only people that need to disengage and leave are the false Palestinian people. there is no such things as these people ever being around in history. They are made up of all surrounding countries people. from Italian to cavemen Arabic people. Jesus said I come not to bring peace, but division.
While Uri Avineri as usual makes his point cogently and with style, I fear that he misinterprets Lieberman's ultimate objective. I suspect that the Israeli government, once relieved of responsibility for Gaza, would find more than one quasi-legal excuse for separating forever the Palestinians of the West Bank and those in Gaza. It is possible that a divided Palestine is not viable if divided into two parts. One thinks of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Pakistan and Bangladesh were not viable when united.
In fact this is a great counter example. The two separated in a bloody civil war and since they are both recognized, independent states. It would be the Palestinians' decision whether they want one or two states. Please note that according to the Hamas Charter, Abbas and the rest of the PA are traitors, since they are - God forbid - prepared to negotiate a peaceful solution with Israel that is not based on the destruction of Israel.
Get the Europeans to take care of Gaza with its dense Palestinian population (which you want to ger risd of) and then you can keep the West Bank. It doesn't work that way: They are both occupied territories and you can't separate them, much as you would wish you could.
Gaza is Egyptian - let them have it back.
Just the date.....thx
Do you know about the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah ? Do you know about the violent takeover of Hamas in Gaza ? De facto the WB and Gaza are different entities, how much you would like it to be different.
The only way Israel can "disengage" from Gaza consists in letting a Palestinian state be built, and put an end to the illegal policy of occupying the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and developping illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
Will the EU do that?
The EU is not like Israel. The EU has ethics, follows international law, and respects democracy.
that this whole mess was created by the stupid and cowardly actions of the British up to 1947? There were no "ethics" involved in creating Jordan and denying Jews entry to the Holy Land during WW2.
there is NO reason for Israel having to provide ANYTHING to Gaza. Gaza is a separate, hostile entity. Israel is not and should not be obligated to have to support them with waterm electricity, currency, or anything else for that matter, Gazans are Egyptian citizens and gaza is a part of egypt, let Cairo take care of them...
Israel is allowing water, electricity and supplies through it territory, except for arms. Is blocking arms your problem ? Being from New Zealand you are not aware what an hostile neighbour is.
Why should Israel have to supply electricity and water to an entity devoted to destructing it?
European countries and USA have implanted israel in palestine. They must take the reins of responsibility with their own hands. The responsibility to end occupation for once and for ever and let palestinian people decide their future and achieve their goals in freedom and human dignity.
And how you ignore the facts!! Long before there were Arabs, long before the Europeans, the Jews lived in the Land of Israel and it was their land. All others are intruders, guests.
so is it really even theirs, or does it still belongs to the Canonites and Hitites
Disengagement must be a complete withdrawal & lifting the siege from the occupied palestinian territories (Gaza strip and west bank) . Israel is doing a great failure , if it insists upon separating gaza from west bank. Israel is responsible for all the catastrophic situation of palestinian people in palestine and in the diaspora. You can,t flee from your responsibilities. Your dirty aims of separation are very clear.
Including water and electricity. A free Gaza is what pro-terror pro-Arab activists want, why do they oppose?
I enjoy reading this article. As always,Avinery is clear ,simple and intelligent.Out of Gaza was a good idea with bad results. If the EU is willing to take command,why not ?? The Egyptians want do it and Iran is anyway there.
It's easy to make decisions from your safe perch in Tel Aviv. Go live in Sderot and THEN talk about leaving Gaza!
It's easy to make decisions from your safe perch in Tel Aviv. Go live in Sderot and THEN talk about leaving Gaza!
They cannot take care of themselves when attacked by unarmed village people. Why expect European troops will do a better job in Gaza ?
And as part of this, a buffer zone of no less than 1 kilometer should be established on the ISRAELI side of the border - with a second fence to delineate it - in order to allow Gazan farmers the freedom to work their fields without fear of being killed by the IDF.
a buffer zone of no less than 1 kilometer should be established on the GAZA side of the border, with a second fence to delineate it, in order to allow Israeli farmers the freedom to work their fields without fear of being killed by Palestinian terrorists.
Israel may well want the EU to shoulder the entire cost of rebuilding what the IDF knocked down (that, after all, has been Israeli policy for decades). The problem is that Israel will insist on bombing the snot outta anything that the EU rebuilds. So why would the EU want to donate billions to rebuild Gaza simply to see Israel blow it all up with some US-donated bombs?
A lot of muslims vote in Europe. Investing in Palestine shows the migrants Europe cares about muslims. Europe is very good in appeasement.
a. It's EU's decision whether to pay for the reconstruction. b. It's pretty much Hamas' decision whether Israel bombs them or not. If they keep the quite, Israel will surely not bomb them. If they will renew launching Quassams, Israel cannot be expected to refrain from bombing Gaza.
"Israel no longer occupies Gaza, but since it demanded that control over crossing points and the coast remain in its hands, it has created a situation that has no parallel in the world:" No, that situation is well-known, and it's called "an occupation". "Israel has no control, but is regarded as being responsible for Gaza." Huh? You just said in the previous sentence that Israel has control over Gaza. If you claim the right to *control* everything that comes in and out of Gaza, and if you claim the right to *go* *back* *in* whenever you want, then you are the "occupying power", precisely because you have A.U.T.H.O.R.I.T.Y. over Gaza.
Interdiction is not control, CT operations are not control.
Interdiction is not control, CT operations are not control.
Thank you Mr. Johnboy ( and all other supporters of human rights) for your very clear view points and for all your efforts to defend the rights of oppressed people.
Thank you Mr. Johnboy ( and all other supporters of human rights) for your very clear view points and for all your efforts to defend the rights of oppressed people.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, U.S. Navy inspected EVERY ship when it was learned the Soviets were trying to stage an attack on Cuban soil. Where YOUR argument falls down is motive. No one in Israel has a motive of preventing material into Gaza which ENSURES life. Can you guarantee the same motives to ensure life exist within Hamas? Maybe you should go back and read the Hamas Charter and familiarize yourself between the term "occupation" and "prevention"... As if to say the Gazans aren't already under occupation without Israel being involved whatsoever...
Narrative: the Palestinians and by extention the Arab and Muslim world are Inocent victims and bare no responsibility for their part in an intractable land dispute. Over 2 billion Muslims ocupong the land mas equivilentvto a third of total land area are being held hostage by a disproportunatly powerfull Jewish minority and a country 11 times smaller than new Zealand.
"During the Cuban Missile Crisis, U.S. Navy inspected EVERY ship"... Let me stop you right there and ask for the names of all those ships that the US Navy stopped from entering Havana. "Where YOUR argument falls down is motive." Ho-hum. The definition of "occupation" is to be found in Article 42 of the Hague Regulations. The word "motive" is conspicuous by its absence.... "No one in Israel has a motive of preventing material into Gaza which ENSURES life" !!!!! Collective punishment is a powerful motiving factor, which is why Israel bemoans the fact that it is outlawed as a means of coercing a popln to Do As We Say And Release Our Soldier....
It is called the "Hague Regulations", and in Article 42 you will find the definition of an "occupation", and there you will find that an occupation is all about who has A.U.T.H.O.R.I.T.Y. over the territory. Israel continues to have the same authority over the Gaza Strip that it had before "disengagement", and that isn't just **my** opinion: it is the opinion of the UNSC, UNGA, EU, USA, Russia, Turkey, Egypt, and every other country in the world that doesn't have the word "Israel" somewhere in its title. What have you got, apart from your own smug belief that it is a self-evidently truth that you are right and therefore the entire world must be wrong?
Every country controlls its side of the borders. Who would you like to controll the Israeli side pf the border with Gaza ? In Oslo, Palestinians and Israelis agreed that Israel would controll the sea.
does not levy or collect taxes in Gaza, does not decide foreign policy in Gaza, does not control movement within Gaza or in and out of Gaza on the Egyptian border (as opposed to controlling its own border with Gaza and conducting a naval blockade). It does continue to supply electricity, water and money to Gaza out of humanitarian recognition that even though the occupation ended these necessities of life could not just be terminated abruptly. So explain exactly how the Israeli army has authority over Gaza.