Doc's Talk: Itemizing the Price Israel Paid for the Disengagement

Monday, August 16, 2010

Itemizing the Price Israel Paid for the Disengagement

Hillel Fendel

A summary of the Disengagement and its aftermath, written by a leading Gush Katif resident and activist, concludes that the price Israel paid for the overwhelmingly negative results was a brutal one. The “Disengagement” refers to Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza – an apparently unfeasible scenario that can be attributed exclusively to a man known as the Bulldozer, then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

It followed a “moral, political, and social struggle that… nearly caused a civil war,” writes Dror Vanunu, the Chairman of the Gush Katif Committee. It involved the uprooting of army camps, as well as 21 blossoming towns and communities of Gush Katif in Gaza and four more in Northern Samaria – a total of some 9,000 people. In addition, army camps and military apparatus were removed and new positions set up precisely on the Green Line.

Vanunu lists four “declared aims” of the withdrawal:

1. Paving the way for the peace process

2. Improving the PA’s economy

3. From a legal standpoint, Gaza would no longer be an Israeli responsibility, and the population there would become self-sufficient and responsible for its own welfare

4. Israel would gain international appreciation

However, none of these four goals were achieved, Vanunu writes. Instead, the negative results encompassed all of the above and more, as follows:

* Israeli concessions of Jewish land cast doubt over the traditional Jewish position that this is, indeed, our Biblical and historical homeland.

* Uprooting the government-backed pioneers and using 57, 000 Israeli Defense Force soldiers and policemen to banish them caused a rift in the nation that has yet to mend.

* Israel has spent about 23.5 billion shekels ($6.35 billion) on the Disengagement and its aftermath: 10.8 billion shekels for uprooting the towns, evacuating the army camps, establishing new military bases, finding temporary solutions for Gush Katif refugees (hotels, caravans), and compensation for residents; 1.5 billion shekels for the infrastructure left in Gaza; 1 billion shekels for the long-term temporary housing; 2 billion shekels for protecting in Sderot and the neighboring communities from Gazan rocket attacks; 8.2 billion shekels for the IDF's Cast Lead anti-terrorist offensive (which could have been accomplished prior to the withdrawal by a much smaller force).

* Lost business: The farmers of Gush Katif produced sophisticated technology for organic and conventional greenhouses and general agriculture; exported vegetables, herbs, and flowers amounting to over $100 million a year.

* Israel’s security, instead of improving, deteriorated when Gaza was turned into “Hamastan,” giving even Al-Qaeda and Iran footholds in the region, via the smuggling in of massive supplies of advanced weapons such as explosives, anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, Al-Qaeda fighters, and weapons experts.

* Not being “inside” Gaza's cities hurt Israel's intelligence efforts to prevent terror attacks and the like.

* Thousands of rockets have been fired at Ashkelon, Sderot, Be'er Sheva, Ashdod, and other areas.

* From a legal standpoint, the international community continue to view Israel as legally responsible for the Gazan population. "Humanitarian" flotillas backed by Muslim fanatics are pressuring Israel.

* In addition, pressure has risen for a withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem. The Jews are widely viewed as temporary conquerors not only in Judea and Samaria, but in all of Israel.

* The Goldstone Report, published by the UN in light of Israel’s defensive counter-terror campaign after numerous rocket attacks targeted the citizens of Israel, completely ignored Israel's long restraint and found Israel guilty of war crimes.

* The Palestinian Authority views the Disengagement as a sign of Israeli weakness, leading to the recognition that "Jews understand only strength” and that violence will benefit them more than negotiations. These assumptions led to a Hamas victory in democratic elections in Gaza just a few after the Disengagement.

* Hundreds of public buildings which served the vibrant Gush Katif communities are mainly used today for terror bases. Among them are former synagogues, kindergarten and day care centers, schools, commercial centers, and industrial zones.

* Following the withdrawal, the majority of the population were transferred to pre-temporary living quarters such as tent cities, dormitories, and hotels, where they remained for up to a year. An overwhelming majority - 80% of the population - lost their jobs and businesses.

* The governmental Commission of Inquiry headed by Judge Eliyahu Matza investigated the failure of the Israeli government to provide appropriate solutions for the people from Gush Katif. “This is the most severe violation of human rights in the history of Israel," stated Professor Yedidya Stern, a member of the commission.

Progress that has been made:

In fewer than half of the new communities - Bustan HaGalil, Bat Hadar, Golf-Ashkelon, Bnei Netzarim, Naveh, Yad Binyamin, Mavkiim, Nitzan, and Talmei Yafeh – have permanent homes begun to be built.

In six locations - Hafetz Hayim, B'nei Dekalim, Shomeriya, Yesodot, Neta, and Be'er Ganim (Nitzanim) - infrastructure work has been completed.

In five locations - Amatzyia, Palmachim, N’vei Yam, Nir Akiva, Ariel - infrastructure work has not even started.

Only 157 families (9%) have completed the construction of their permanent homes. Over 1,400 families (85%) continue to live in 18 different temporary sites. Many families, such as young couples, unemployed families and Bnei Menashe, encounter tremendous financial difficulties and will not be able to build their homes without some financial support.

There were 380 agricultural farms in Gush Katif. Only 28% of the farmers have re-established their farms. Only 50% of small business owners of Gush Katif have resumed their activities.

(IsraelNationalNews.com)

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk