In just a few weeks, Israel will begin to disengage from the Gaza Strip and the northern part of the West Bank. Not only will Israel withdraw all its forces from these areas, but it will also take the painful step of evacuating every Jewish settlement in the Gaza Strip and four in the West Bank.
At its June meeting, the Jewish Community Relations Council unanimously adopted a broad statement of strong support for and solidarity with Israel that also supported the Israeli government’s disengagement plan.
JCRC represents the organized Jewish community on matters of public affairs, functioning as an umbrella of some 80 Bay Area Jewish organizations and synagogues. JCRC develops public policy positions by a process of consensus building. JCRC is committed to the maintenance of strong support for the state of Israel, its right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state in peace and security, and to promote strong American-Israeli relations.
The purpose of creating a community consensus is to promote unity. Consensus does not mean uniformity, however, and determining consensus is not easy. How do you know when you have consensus? Perhaps one nonscientific measure is observing when people on all sides of an issue come to an agreement but can’t believe how much they gave up of their positions — and yet feel good about it! To be sure, there are some whose views are so strongly held that they cannot budge. But, most recognize there is an overarching value for communal unity in finding a position that represents the broadest possible consensus.
This consensus supports the Israeli people and their democratically elected government. This government concluded that it is in Israel’s best interest to initiate this disengagement plan. To be sure, there is also loud opposition in Israel’s open society, but so long as the opposition remains nonviolent, the rights of free speech and lawful dissent which are basic and indispensable in a democratic society must be protected. At the same time, the small fringe that is calling for violence to stop the disengagement must be condemned.
The reasons given by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for disengagement include ensuring that the state of Israel will remain a Jewish and democratic state with a solid Jewish majority. Demographic studies have predicted that in a very short time within the combined areas of Israel proper, the West Bank and Gaza Strip there will be a majority of Arabs. This reality has prompted a number of Palestinians to argue that they should cease demanding an independent state, and instead demand Israeli citizenship for the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, thus transforming Israel’s Jewish population into a minority.
For this reason, JCRC also concluded that the Israeli government’s endorsement of a two-state solution to end the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis should also be supported, with the determination of the final borders and other final status issues left to the parties themselves to negotiate in a peace process free from violence and the threat of violence.
While supporting the right of dissent, whether on the left or right, in our community, we insist that only Israelis have the right to negotiate their security arrangements with their neighbors. We in the diaspora, living in safety far from the region, must not arrogate to ourselves the role of negotiating for Israel. It is the Israelis, and not us, who will directly benefit or suffer from the success or failure of decisions they make in any future peace negotiation.
The disengagement is not without risks. It is clear that terrorists are trying to create the perception that terror works, that Israel is being driven out of Gaza.
This perception must not be allowed to take hold. Apparently the lesson from Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, which took place at night under Hezbollah fire and thus looked like a retreat, has been learned. The disengagement is well-announced far in advance; it is completely in Israel’s control; and any attempt by Hamas and other terror groups to make it look like a retreat under fire will be met with a severe and strong Israeli response.
Hamas and Islamic Jihad are indeed testing the waters. The recent upsurge in violence such as last week’s suicide bombing in Netanya, the firing of dozens of Qassam rockets into Israel and the shootout between Palestinian Authority police and Hamas is an indication the terrorists are defying the authority’s rule.
Consequently, the disengagement plan and any hope for peace can only be successful if there is a commitment on the part of the authority to make a 100 percent effort to disarm the terrorists and their infrastructure, including the removal of existing weapons stockpiles and preventing them from being replenished. The smuggling of weapons across international borders and closing clandestine weapons manufacturing must also be high on Abbas’ agenda.
Clearly the Israeli government and people have done their calculations and determined the risks are greater by staying in Gaza. We who live in the diaspora may be in box seats behind home plate, but we are not on the field, or even the dugout. Our role is to support the Israeli people, particularly when they — through their democratically elected government — are taking serious risks for the sake of security and one day, hopefully, peace.
Yitzhak Santis is director of the Middle East Project of the San Francisco-based Jewish Community Relations Council.