WITHDRAWING FROM GAZA WILL BACKFIRE

WITHDRAWING FROM GAZA WILL BACKFIRE

By Neill Lochery
National Post
February 04, 2004

I must confess that if I were an Israeli soldier serving in the Gaza Strip--or the parent of such a soldier--I would have been thrilled at Monday's announcement by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that he intends to evacuate the 17 Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. Yes, an Israeli withdrawal is a sensible move from a security perspective in terms of saving human life in the strip, but alas, in broader strategic terms, it is a mistake for Israel.

The relocation of the 7,500 settlers will make it easier for Israel to draw a line in the sand and re-enforce its security fence that runs the entire length of the Gaza Strip and which, to a large degree, has prevented attacks on Israelis being mounted from there. So successful has this fence been that attacks on Israelis by Palestinian groups based in the Gaza Strip have been confined to attacks on Israeli settlers or soldiers within the Gaza area.

In strategic terms, however, one is reminded of Israel's last unilateral withdrawal that took place from Lebanon.

At the time, several Israeli generals criticized the rapid withdrawal because it gave the impression that if Israel's enemies can make its life intolerable in disputed lands, the political leadership (under public pressure) will order a unilateral withdrawal. The Palestinian leadership was quick to pick up on this point.

Though few are brave enough to say it, the price for the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon was the Palestinian Intifada, with Yasser Arafat and his cohorts believing Israel can be driven out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by force.

Mr. Sharon is acutely aware of this linkage and has attempted to mask this weakness by stating that the withdrawal will take up to two years to complete.

Nobody believes this nonsense. Not even his deputy, Ehud Olmert, who let the cat out of the bag by stating on Israeli television the withdrawal was part of Israeli's disengagement plan and will be complete by the end of this summer.

Arafat will no doubt portray any Israeli withdrawal as the first great victory for Palestinian forces over the Zionists.

In short, Sharon's moves will inflame the Palestinian violence--not reduce it as hoped. After Gaza we can almost imagine Arafat chanting in Howard Dean fashion, "Next we'll take Hebron, then we'll win in Jerusalem."

So why is Sharon, who is not known as a gambler when it comes to national security, rolling the dice?

Here there are two major reasons: the continuing violence and his own political position.

A report by the Israeli internal security agency, Snin Beth (Shabak) published last week predicted if Arafat stays in charge, Palestinian violence will continue through 2006 and into 2007. It also concluded there could be an escalation of the violence with an increased threat that Palestinian terrorist groups will use a dirty bomb (chemical) against Israeli targets. This would no doubt lead to massive Israeli retaliation and a heightened risk of a regional war.

Sharon wants the effective border in place in Gaza, as well as the West Bank, to help prevent attacks. The Sinn Beth report outlined how important the West Bank fence has been in preventing attacks. The fence, they argue, has led to Palestinian groups having to involve more people in the organization of suicide attacks. This has allowed Israel--which is now busy recruiting Palestinian informants--to break up many groups before the bomber enters an Israeli city or town.

Sharon's argument is that he clearly does not want Israelis to live outside the fence, be it in the West Bank or in Gaza. A sound argument, but not when the evacuation of the settlers beyond the fences will present Arafat with a public victory of sorts.

Politically, Sharon wants the Labour party in the government serving as a safety net for both his peace-making polices and his own personal fate.

On Monday night, he survived a vote of confidence on the Gaza withdrawal by one vote in the Knesset, but the days of this coalition are numbered. Having Labour in the coalition could also help take the political heat away from the corruption scandal that surrounds the Sharon family at present.

On a superficial level, an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza appears a logical move, and will no doubt be welcomed by both diplomats and commentators alike, but it should not take the form of a unilateral withdrawal.

Yes, leave Gaza but not before a political agreement is reached with the Palestinians.

Egyptian President Abdul Gamal Nasser was famed for making political capital out of Israeli political mistakes--despite heavy Egyptian military defeats. Arafat is no Nasser, but it will not take much effort on the part of the Palestinian propaganda machine to portray an Israeli withdrawal as a great Palestinian victory.

Neill Lochery is director of the Centre for Israeli Studies at University College, London.