|
|
|
Update
from AIJAC
Disengagement
after the Beer Sheva bombings
September
2, 2004
Number 09/04 #01
Today's Update
concentrates on the aftermath of the Beer Sheva bus bombing, and its implication
for Sharon's disengagement plan.
First, Ha'aretz,
a paper generally relentlessly critical of Sharon, praises his determination
and leadership in pushing forward with disengagement. It says the bus
bombing is more evidence that it is needed. For this view, CLICK
HERE
Next, Ha'aretz's
always knowledgeable defence reporter Ze'ev Schiff examines why the Beer
Sheva bombing occurred, and puts it in the context of Hamas's negotiations
with Egypt over the future of the Gaza strip. For his valuable insights,
CLICK HERE.
Finally,
visiting Muslim author Irshad Manji uses the opportunity of the bombing
to take on problems in Palestinian culture and the victomology which prevents
progress and leads to crimes like this. For those who have not already
seen it, this is one not to be missed, so CLICK HERE
Admirable
determination
Haaretz,
Sept. 1, 2004
The two bloody attacks that took place yesterday afternoon on Be'er
Sheva buses are another sad reminder that the hiatus in terror, long as
it may be, is only a welcome temporary phenomenon. The perverse way the
Palestinian terror organizations choose to struggle against the Israeli
occupation is to be condemned in no uncertain terms. Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon concluded that while continuing its struggle against terror of this
type, and lacking the possibility of an agreement with the Palestinian Authority,
Israel must take steps to limit the friction between the two sides.
The purpose of the disengagement plan is first and foremost to shorten the
borderlines between Israel and the Gaza Strip and the northern West Bank.
A few hours before the attacks in the Negev capital, Sharon presented the
Likud faction in the Knesset with the crowded timetable of disengagement.
He announced that on September 14 he will bring the principles of the disengagement
bill, including among other things the principles for evacuation and compensation,
before the security cabinet for its approval.
A memorandum on the bill will be distributed by the end of the month, and
the proposal will be brought to the cabinet before the end of October, in
order to submit it immediately thereafter to the Knesset for its first reading.
The prime minister also reported on the cabinet's decision Monday to place
overall responsibility for disengagement on the security establishment and
the IDF together with the police. He stated that the IDF has already begun
preparing an operational plan for evacuating settlements, and that he intends
to present it to the cabinet within 30 days.
Sharon declared that, in spite of the opposition on the right and in large
segments of his own party, he is determined to present the plan to evacuate
the four groups of settlements for final approval by the cabinet, after
legislation is completed and close to the time of the actual evacuation.
Sharon was hauled over the coals for these statements by Finance Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and Education Minister Limor Livnat. They demanded that
evacuation be carried out in stages, as the cabinet decided on June 6.
Netanyahu reminded the cabinet that evacuation is to be gradual, so as "to
allow monitoring of the process," and prevent Gaza from becoming a "terror
base." Netanyahu also argued that a gradual withdrawal "will limit the chance
of a rift in the nation."
Sharon pledged to carry out the June 6 cabinet decision in both letter and
spirit, and stressed that he does not intend to take advantage of the gradual
nature of the withdrawal to water down the plan.
As in the decision to dismiss the two extreme right-wing ministers, and
in declarations made on the day following his defeat in the vote on evacuation
by the Likud rank-and-file, Sharon yesterday once again demonstrated courage
and admirable commitment to the plan that is so crucial to Israel.
A similar measure of responsibility and gravity could be expected from one
who held the office of prime minister in the past and hopes to do so again.
After all, Netanyahu's efforts to improve the economy will bear no fruit
if he and his friends bring about the failure of the disengagement plan.
The prime minister has made clear that the tragedy in Be'er Sheva has strengthened
him. May his fellow leaders not weaken him.
Back
to Top
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis
/ Hamas selected Be'er Sheva because it was an easy target
By Ze'ev
Schiff
Ha'aretz,
Sept. 1, 2004
The bombing of the buses yesterday proves Hamas' unwillingness to
accept a cease-fire in anticipation of Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza
Strip, as its people told Egyptian officials in Cairo last week.
The meeting in Cairo ended without results, and it was clear that it was
only a matter of time before Hamas found a way to penetrate Israel's defenses.
Be'er Sheva was chosen as a target because the way from Hebron to Be'er
Sheva is relatively easy, in the absence of a defense barrier in the south
of Mount Hebron.
The two suicide bombers arrived from Mount Hebron. The Shin Bet knows
who they were. Yesterday the defense establishment heads convened in Tel
Aviv to discuss Israel's reaction. It would be wrong to expect a decisive
and surprising reaction to the two bus bombings. The only formula Israel
has is continuing to foil suicide bombings on the basis of intelligence
tips relating to specific incidents, by assassinations of persons directly
involved in suicide bombings, stepping up the construction of the separation
barrier, and setting a "price" for those who support terror.
The past few months indicate that this formula has been relatively successful.
Hamas' reply to Egypt was not surprising. Its leadership sees Israel's
disengagement plan as a threat, and even if it cannot prevent it, Hamas
will try to make the IDF withdraw under fire. The Egyptians are familiar
with this position, but want to prove to the residents of the Gaza Strip
that they are doing everything to reduce Israel's military pressures on
them.
Hamas is gaining considerable prestige from its high level meetings with
Egyptian officials. At the end of the last round of talks, Hamas representatives
said they would be willing to have another debate with the Egyptians after
the latter receive Fatah's answer to the cease-fire proposal. They probably
know that Arafat is not ready to issue an explicit instruction for a cease-fire.
Hamas in Hebron is considered one of the hard core terrorist organizations,
characterized among other things by the extreme secrecy with which it
conducts itself. The intelligence services consider it difficult to crack
Hamas cells in Hebron, and when things are quiet in Hebron for a long
time, the Shin Bet gets suspicious, seeing it as the calm before the storm.
After several Hamas attempts to penetrate towns in the Sharon failed,
it chose the southern, open way, where no fence separates Mount Hebron
and the Negev. The fence route in the south has been decided on, but following
the High Court of Justice ruling, the officials in charge started arguing
on whether it should be changed. The planned route is not on the Green
Line, and penetrates quite deeply into Palestinian territory, more than
five kilometers in some places.
Back to Top
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victims
will never be victors over Israel
Sydney
Morning Herald, September 2, 2004
Palestinian suicide bombers have been misguided by extremist
ideology, writes Irshad Manji.
This week's simultaneous bus bombings in Israel, carried out at a time
when the Sharon Government insists on withdrawing from Gaza, raises a
basic question: Why is peaceful co-existence taking so long in the Holy
Land? It is because there isn't only one occupation of the Palestinian
territories. There are two.
The first is a military occupation by the Israeli defence forces,
and the distress it inflicts cannot be denied. Neither can the resentment
fuelled by Israel's security barrier, a combination of fences and walls
that turn some Arab villages into holding pens.
But in the spirit of honesty, liberals like me need to deal with
a second occupation - the ideological occupation of the Palestinian people
by their own leadership.
Over the past 65 years, several offers for an independent state
of Palestine have been floated by the British, the Israelis, the Americans
and the United Nations. Palestinian leaders have rejected every proposal.
Worse, they have never consulted the Palestinian people before saying
no.
AdvertisementAdvertisement
Which brings me to the bigger problem of Palestinian culture - a
popular culture of incitement that doesn't exist in Israel.
Already, I can hear the cries of "racism"! As a Muslim woman, however,
I don't feel the need to toe any tribal line. Culture is the handiwork
of human beings, not of God. To question a particular aspect of Palestinian
culture, then, is to express faith that more humane choices can be made.
Let me illustrate. In June last year the Pew Research Centre for
the People and the Press came out with a poll that speaks volumes about
who makes what choices. The survey found that most Palestinians envision
no way for their rights to be protected as long as Israel exists.
By contrast, among Arab citizens of Israel a solid majority feels
the opposite. Of the Arab-Israelis surveyed, 62 per cent said it is possible
for both groups to have their rights protected.
What accounts for this difference in attitude?
Posters of shaheeds - martyrs - plaster the buildings of the West
Bank and Gaza. Billboards proclaim their undying honour. Adolescents rap
tunes to them while wistfully expressing hope that one day, they will
imitate the self-immolators. Even a soccer tournament on Palestinian Children's
Day is named after a suicide bomber.
I am not implying that Israeli government policies are blameless.
Far from it. As long as Ariel Sharon's Government refuses to arrest the
criminals who set up illegal outposts in the West Bank, for example, such
willful negligence will only feed extremism on both sides.
But let's not lose sight of the larger reality. After the Aqaba
peace summit in June last year, both the Israeli and Palestinian prime
ministers encountered protests. Hardline Israelis resorted to demonstrating
and jeering. Hardline Palestinians resorted to blowing up buses and the
people in them. That's a life-and-death difference in choices.
Many of my fellow liberals would argue that choices do not exist
for Palestinians. They are economically impoverished and desperate.
Not according to Dr Mohamed Al-Hindi, the political leader of Islamic
Jihad. His response was part of a longer interview I conducted with him
in Gaza - on camera and before the construction of Israel's security barrier.
"What's the difference," I asked, "between 'suicide' and 'martyrdom,'
as you folks now call it?"
"Suicide," he replied, "is done out of despair. But most of our
martyrs were very successful in their earthly lives."
Al-Hindi's answer floored me. By his admission, what drives so many
of today's suicide bombers is not that which the material world has failed
to deliver to them, but something besides - perhaps the Koran's promises
for the afterlife or, perhaps more precisely, the ideological exploitation
of the Koran's promise of paradise.
This much is clear: we liberals need to be asking as many tough
questions of Palestinian officials as of their Israeli counterparts. Until
we do, we'll always reduce Palestinians to the status of mere victims.
And that does nothing to recognise their dignity. Or their capacity
for making ethically sounder choices.
Irshad Manji is author of The Trouble with Islam: A Muslim's Call for
Reform in Her Faith (Random House).
Back to Top
|
|
|
