Exodus

What to make of Ariel Sharon’s plan to evacuate the Gaza settlements?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Ariel Sharon would seem the least likely of Israeli prime ministers to end to more than three decades of Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. After all, as the Israeli paper Ha’aretz reminds, Sharon was “the man who drew the settlement map in the Gaza Strip during the ’70s, in the form of five fingers, with the intention of joining them.” But Sharon on Monday announced plans to evacuate most or all settlers from the Gaza Strip as well as a small number from the West Bank. The day will probably come, he said, when “there will be no Jews in Gaza.”

What gives? James Bennet, of the New York Times, writes that the plans imply that Sharon “does not foresee any end to the conflict with Arabs that, one way or another, he has fought his whole life.” He is determined, though, to prevent a withdrawal to Israel’s pre-June 1967 borders, which he calls militarily indefensible, and, says Bennett, “he appears willing to give up almost all of Gaza to hold onto as much of the West Bank as he can.”

According to Sharon allies who spoke to Bennet, the prime minister wants to avoid having a solution imposed from outside. By acting on his own initiative and sacrificing some territory unilaterally, he hopes to avoid more substantial concessions.

The announcement, made as Muslims observed the major holiday, Eid al-Adha, to uproot 17 of 24 Jewish communities in Gaza, went over badly with large segments of the Israeli public. More than 100,000 marched against Sharon’s plan in Tel Aviv last weekend, ahead of the announcement, and 11 members of parliament staged a walkout on Monday. Two ultranationalist parties threatened to abandon his governing coalition if Sharon went ahead.

On the other hand, leaders of the opposition Labor party offered to support him, and Israeli moderates welcomed the proposal. A poll in the daily Yediot Ahronot showed 59 percent support for Sharon’s plan.

No action has been taken since the announcement. Sharon says he will move only when he judges that the Bush administration’s “road map” peace initiative has failed. Sharon, says Bennet “has been careful not to offend the Bush administration by giving up on its peace initiative … with its commitment to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.” Analysts speculate that he will hold off at least until after U.S. presidential election in November.

Sharon will present the plan to President Bush later this month. First it must pass in Sharon’s cabinet and the Knesset, no sure thing. The White House stopped short of endorsing Sharon’s plan but vaguely praised it as an attempt “to reduce tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.”

Sharon wants American help with the plan. This from the Globe and Mail:

“Mr. Sharon acknowledged that Israel might have difficulty justifying a request for American aid, but said that in the end it would be in Washington’s interest to help with the dismantling of settlements.

They [the Americans] were opposed to the establishment of settlements,” Sharon said. “Now they can say ‘we warned you,’ but the Americans rely on us in the region and what will develop here as part of the president’s vision.

Mr. Sharon was referring to the U.S.-backed “road map” peace plan, whose centrepiece is the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel by 2005.”

Meanwhile, some settlers are playing their own Washington angle. They aim to block the re-settlement efforts by lobbying far-right, Christian allies in Congress, to influence Bush. (Fundamentalist Christian groups that want Jews to reclaim ancestral lands in accordance with Biblical prophecies have reportedly influenced many of the president’s approach to Israel.) Jewish settlers in Gaza claim hereditary right to the territory and are pushing an image of their barbed-wire-encircled villages as tame, suburban subdivisions.

The BBC reports:

“The settler representatives took to the airwaves in the wake of his announcement to denounce the plan as madness, a betrayal, a capitulation in the face of terrorism.

Others said the evacuation would never happen, that Mr. Sharon was simply doing a bit of political manoeuvring for the benefit of the international community.

And they have a point. Ariel Sharon agreed to freeze settlements and remove smaller outposts as part of the US-backed peace roadmap.

He has only dismantled a handful of outposts.”

Sharon defended moving the residents as “evacuation”

for their own safety.

“In December Ariel Sharon announced that unless the Palestinians clamped down on violence, he would abandon the roadmap and instead begin the unilateral disengagement of Israel from Palestinian territory. In other words, Israel would impose its own borders with the Palestinians, without negotiation.

And that would involve withdrawing from Gaza and the West Bank those settlements which Israel can least afford to protect.”

This might mean eventually swapping one-third of the Gaza Strip for West Bank territory, re-drawing the Israel-Palestine border and excluding tens of thousands of Arabs from Israel. This would guarantee an 80 percent Jewish majority among the 6.6 million Israelis, which now includes a lower-income Arab minority of 16 percent.

Squeezing more Arabs into a separate state with borders sketched by Israel would also mean

less land for Palestine.
Whether the Jewish settlements in Gaza stay or go, construction of what some call an “apartheid wall” in the West Bank is proceeding despite international condemnation.

“The Palestinians say they will not allow Israel to dictate which land they can keep.

They see the construction of Israel’s new barrier as an attempt to impose a border that in many places goes far into Palestinian territory, diminishing the size of any future Palestinian state.

What Ariel Sharon sees as a possible solution, they see as a reason to continue the intifada.”

Some view Sharon’s plan as a mere land grab and continued exploitation by Israel. Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmad Qureia applauded Sharon’s recent move but called for Israelis to leave both Gaza and the West Bank.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate