To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

September 6, 2005 - Vol. 7, Issue 6

Occupied Territories No Longer Have Security Significance, Says New Israeli Security Doctrine: A new Israeli national security doctrine being formulated says that there is no longer any security significance in Israel holding onto the West Bank and Golan Heights.

Full Contact Politics: According to a Brain Base survey of Likud party members conducted for Channel 2's Mishal Cham program, if only two candidates were running to be head of the Likud and its candidate for prime minister, and primaries were held today, 45% would support Benjamin Netanyahu, 34% would back Ariel Sharon, and 21% gave other answers. 50% of Likud members think that the battle between these two leaders will lead to the break up of their party. However, a Shvakim Panorama poll carried out for Israel Radio's Another Matter found that among Likud voters, 52.6% prefer Sharon to be head of Likud and its prime minister candidate, 33.4% want Bibi, 7.9% prefer neither, and 6.1% don't know. A Dahaf/Yedioth Ahronoth survey from last week found that 51% of Likud voters think Sharon should be prime minister, 26% back Netanyahu, and 23% said neither or gave no response. A TNS/Teleseker poll taken for Ma'ariv among Likud members found that 52% of them are in favor of an early primary in their party, even if it becomes clear that such a move will lead to Sharon's resignation and a split in the Likud. However, a Dialogue/Ha'aretz survey released today found the gap between Sharon and Bibi narrowing by 11% among registered Likud members in the past 11 days, but with Netanyahu still leading 44% to 38%. Also, this survey found 52% think Likud primaries should be held on schedule in April, and just 42% want them in November. Finally, a Smith/Globes poll found that a Likud led by Sharon would receive 32% of the vote, similar to its support in the last elections. An independent list headed by Sharon would get 22% of the vote, while Labor headed by Shimon Peres and a Likud led by Netanyahu would each win about the same. 35% of Likud voters and 31% of Shinui voters in 2003 would vote for an independent list headed by Sharon. However, 52% of the public is dissatisfied with Sharon's performance, and only 40% want him to serve another term as prime minister. For Labor, 72% of the public and 79% of Labor voters think Labor will get more votes if Peres heads it.

Going back to the Shvakim Panorama survey, among all Israelis, if elections were held today, here is how three different scenarios would play out in terms of distributing the 120 seats of the Knesset (with the current number of seats for each party in parentheses): if Netanyahu leads Likud, it will get 30 seats (40); Labor/One Nation 27 (21); Shinui 9 (15); Shas 12 (11); Arab parties 11 (8); Meretz-Yahad 8 (6); National Union 5 (7); Yisrael Beiteinu 8 (7); United Torah Judaism (UTJ) 6 (5); and National Religious Party (NRP) 4 (6). [National Union ran with Yisrael Beiteinu the last time to win seven seats.] If Sharon heads the Likud, the party will win 36 seats, Labor 24, Shinui 6, Shas 12, Arab parties 11, Meretz-Yahad 8, National Union 5, Yisrael Beiteinu 8, UTJ 6, and NRP 4. And if Sharon leads a new party and Bibi heads Likud, the new Sharon party would get 18 seats, Likud-Netanyahu 22, Labor 21, Shinui 6, Shas 11, Arab parties 11, Meretz-Yahad 8, National Union 6, Yisrael Beiteinu 7, UTJ 6, and NRP 4. However, Likud could find itself competing against a new party that unites all the existing right-wing factions. National Union and the NRP are conducting an in-depth poll whose results will decide whether the initiative will be carried out. According to the proposal, the parties on the united list will continue to act independently but will run for the Knesset as one list and their political activity will take place with one clear voice. (IMRA, 9/1/05; Globes, 9/1/05; Yedioth Ahronoth, 8/31/05; Ha'aretz, 9/6/05; & Ma'ariv, 8/30-31/05)

Fine Old Cannibals: With the failure of the struggle to stop settlement evacuation, leaders of the settlement movement have begun to devour their own, at least rhetorically. Daniella Weiss, the mayor of the settlement of Kedumim, told Arutz-7, "Of all the factors in the country that were in play, those who brought about the present failure were the Yesha [i.e., settler] leadership. The Yesha Council has not done an internal examination and I don't think they reached the proper conclusion from the failure." She charged that from the very beginning, the Yesha Council was more concerned about public opinion than preventing disengagement. Asked if it was ever possible for the settlers to actually win their fight, she replied, "It was possible. It was, I would even say, easily possible if the country had been brought to a halt, such that no single person would be able to continue to sit and drink coffee at a café without knowing that they would not be able to go home and arrive at the time they intended to get there and that tomorrow they might not be able to get to work." Women in Green founder Nadia Matar, seconded Weiss' criticism of the Yesha Council. "It was the espousal of statist fascism," Matar said, in her usual understated manner. "The insistence that 'the state and the army are above all'-even when the state and army are committing a crime against humanity-is what enabled the crime to take place."

Yesha Council Chair Bentzy Lieberman said that he has no intention of resigning, at least for now. Similarly, Shaul Goldstein, another council member and mayor of the settlement of Gush Etzion, dismissed the criticisms leveled again the council. "The whole accusation that we chose our pensions over the Land of Israel is false," he said. "How can you beat the army? You can only beat the IDF with violence-with serious violence-and that would destroy Israeli society." Goldstein also said that he doesn't understand why people expected the Yesha Council to take the initiative of organizing mass civil disobedience when groups like National Home seemed to be fully confident that they could organize such protests on their own. Nonetheless, a growing group of activists are meeting to discuss the creation of an alternative to the Yesha Council for leadership of the Land of Israel movement [and the struggle against establishing secure, rational borders for Israel.] Matar said, "We simply must provide an alternative leadership to the Yesha Council-because even if they all resign and new people take their place, the struggle can not be waged by people receiving their salaries from the government." (Arutz-7, 8/30/05)

The Secret Word Is.Hamas: Hamas is demanding that local Palestinian elections, due at the end of September and the beginning of December in hundreds of local authorities in the West Bank and Gaza, be postponed, in the wake of Palestinian Authority legislation that forces all Hamas candidates to be identified as such. Sami Abu Zohari, a Hamas spokesman, raised the demand at a local election supervision committee meeting. He said the law was not ready yet and that the elections could not be carried out as scheduled for technical reasons. Until now Hamas had demanded that the elections be carried out as soon as possible. His demand was rejected by most other committee members, and the elections are expected to be held on time. Hamas sources said they made the demand not because of a fear about the election results, but due to a series of changes that the Palestinian parliament introduced into the local elections law. Until now candidates ran as individuals, giving Hamas an advantage over Fatah. But the new law made the system partisan, forcing voters to cast ballots for a list instead of specific people. Hamas, which is fielding several candidates in the West Bank under other lists, will now have to register its members as Hamas members. This would expose them to Israeli arrest operations for being members of a terror organization [which they should have thought of before learning the secret handshake]. (Ha'aretz, 9/1/05)

Tell It To New Orleans: In an op-ed about some Gaza settlers' endless kvetching about how they are being treated, Sever Plocker wrote, "A significant number of Gaza evacuees are taking advantage of the Israeli establishment's guilt to portray themselves as uprooted refugees; they have turned the desire to 'uphold the community' into an excuse for obtaining irregular benefits. Brothers and sisters, calm down. Why have you set up the tents? Have you lost your minds? You are not, and never were, deprived. You are not refugees. Never in Israel's history has there been such a small group of citizens that has received such extensive economic benefits. Never have the authorities listened to citizens' complaints and critiques with the patience and understanding you are enjoying. True, you were forcibly banished from your homes under Prime Minster Ariel Sharon's decree, but you should start differentiating between your national and Zionist rage over the government's policy and your gratuitous anger toward civil servants; they are doing everything in their power to help you. A little proportion please. The fall of Communism in 1990 was followed by the immigration of 200,000 Jews from the collapsing Soviet Union to Israel. They arrived penniless; thousands upon thousands of frightened people who did not understand Hebrew. In just one year the Israeli population grew by 4%. The Gaza evacuees make up 0.1% of the population.

"The immigration did not stop when the war in Iraq broke out; the country was attacked with missiles and hundreds of families lost their homes, and then another 20,000 Ethiopians came as well. This burden was placed on the shoulders of a country that was 5 million strong at the time. Today 7 million people live in Israel. The Gross National Product in 1990 was $50 billion, and in 2006 it will total some $120 billion. The absorption of hundreds of thousands of immigrants has challenged Israel in an unprecedented way. We withstood this challenge due to two basic principles: The first states that the country is not a kindergarten teacher, it is only in charge of the financing. The immigrants themselves will decide how to use the money granted to them; they will decide where to live and work. Those who decide to remain in a 'community' may do just that. This system is referred to as 'direct immigration.' The second principle was financial. An immigrant family received $15,000 worth of benefits a year, for a total of three years. That is what the country was able to offer the immigrants even after the American payments were guaranteed. Gaza evacuees receive benefits worth $450,000, and this sum should not be increased.

"A distinct financial boundary must be set to determine how much the tax payers spend on the relocation of 1,600 middle class families: NIS 3.5 billion (about $800 million), not one shekel more. Remember when late Finance Minister Yigal Horowitz said, 'Come down from the roof, you nuts!' Now you, too, former settlers, must come down from the roof, fold up your tent and start making it on your own. You do not need civil servants to lead you by the hand. You are rooted Israelis with hundreds of thousands of shekels in your bank accounts. So go to the bank, withdraw the money, and do it yourself. You wish to maintain your communal way of life? No problem, there are many vacant apartment buildings and towns in need of a unified group. Enough with the complaining. Israelis have a short fuse: Today they embrace you, tomorrow they will say: We are fed up with your corruption." (Ynetnews.com, 8/28/05)

Occupied Territories No Longer Have Security Significance, Says New Israeli Security Doctrine: A new Israeli national security doctrine being formulated says that there is no longer any security significance in Israel holding onto the West Bank and Golan Heights. The wording of the doctrine was assigned to a team headed by former minister Dan Meridor, which includes National Security Council Director Maj. Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland and his deputy Itamar Yaad, Professor Yehuda Ben Meir, former deputy chief of staff Maj. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, IAF officer Brig. Gen. Yohanan Locker, former Foreign Ministry Director General Yoav Biran, and former IDF Personnel Director Gideon Shefer. During lengthy discussions, the opinion was formulated that holding onto the territories occupied in the Six Day War has lost the security significance attributed to it, when the reigning security doctrine was that the territories are a "strategic rear," and due to Israel's small size, the aim should always be to transfer a war to enemy territory. Sources said that the significance of the territories has lessened mainly because the threat of war between armies, as used to be the case, has almost totally disappeared. Instead of this, long-distance threats have increased, such as Iranian missiles that could be armed with non-conventional weapons. In connection with such dangers, there is no defense significance in holding onto the territories.

In addition, the doctrine was formulated during the discussions that the danger of world terror to the safety of nations in general, and Israel in particular, has increased a great deal. Neither is there any point in holding onto the territories with regard to this threat. Members of the committee also pointed out that new technological means, which Israel possesses, allow defense against enemies and attacks from long distances several times the size of the West Bank and the Golan Heights. Further, over the years, the significance of the international community has increased a great deal, including its ability to enforce moves upon countries all over the world. The significance of this is that pressure on Israel to stop ruling over the occupied territories would increase. A source on the committee said, "It is clear that in the present reality, the territories have no security significance, and because of the security community, they could become a burden." (Ma'ariv, 9/2/05)

White House Wilts On Settlements: Washington has rescinded its demand that Israel and the U.S. jointly mark the boundaries of West Bank settlements, according to U.S. and Israeli officials. Neither side reportedly has an interest in marking the boundaries: for Israel, it would be an uncomfortable concession; for the U.S., it would legitimize the existing settlements. U.S. officials said they are now making due with warning Israel to refrain from expanding West Bank settlements [as if that will help]. The Road Map calls for a freeze on all settlement activity, including "natural growth." In 2003, Israel pledged to limit construction to the "present construction line," in order to meet the U.S. demand not to take over land to be part of the future Palestinian state. Work on this project stopped after it became clear that Israel was moving ahead with disengagement. Now that the pullout is over, Washington is returning to its demand to dismantle the illegal outposts. But it has backed off its demand to mark settlement boundaries, and may also show understanding of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's political position, and expect at most only a symbolic dismantling of a few outposts before elections. In related news, just two days after the New York Times reported on the Bush Administration's efforts to urge U.S. allies to refrain from pressing Israel to make new concessions to the Palestinians, Israeli officials announced that Israel has authorized construction of 117 new settler homes in the settlement of Ariel and approved preliminary plans for another 3,000 housing units there. Defense Ministry officials confirmed the plan received initial approval, although actual construction would need further authorization. The Israeli Peace Now movement said the Ariel construction plan is a death knell for the Road Map. (Ha'aretz, 8/30 & 9/6/05; AP, 9/6/05; & New York Times, 9/4/05)

Settlers Checking Out Of Hebron Market? Israeli security officials are discussing the possible evacuation of 15 Jewish settler families who live in the Hebron wholesale market. About four years ago, after the outbreak of the Intifada, Palestinian shop owners were removed from the wholesale market compound in Hebron because of security considerations. There had been violent clashes between Palestinians and settlers living in the Jewish settlement in the city, and IDF officers claimed that it was impossible to guarantee the safety of the Jews as long as the Palestinian market was active and full of people. The murder of the infant Shalhevet Pas by a Palestinian terrorist took place near this market. Following the evacuation of Palestinian peddlers from the market, a number of Jewish settler families arrived and seized the abandoned buildings and nearby yard. The settlers say that the buildings are on land owned by Jews. The IDF did not hurry to evacuate the settlers from the compound, perhaps fearing that this would lead to serious clashes and an explicit decision was still needed from the Defense Minister.

About three years ago, the Arab shop owners in Hebron and Israeli activists petitioned the High Court of Justice with a request to re-open the market. The state responded by saying that there were plans to evacuate the compound, but State Attorney's Office representatives did not set a firm date. About four weeks ago, OC Central Command officials held a special discussion about the matter of evacuating the settlers. As far as is known, the evacuation of the compound is part of the wide scale changes the IDF wants to carry out in the area, prior to re-opening the marketplace. "There is a decision in principle by the defense minister to evacuate them," said a Defense Ministry official. "Chief of State Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz said that the compound would be evacuated by December, and IDF commanders in the sector have already informed the settlers that there are such general plans. The evacuation will take place as part of the opening of the Palestinian market and out of a need to separate the Jews from the Arabs, simply because they do not get along with one another." (Ma'ariv, 8/29/05)

State Comptroller Slams Civil Administration: The Israeli State Comptroller devoted a large section of a report that was released last week on the Civil Administration (CA) in the West Bank, focusing on an array of issues. The report noted that between January and November 2004, there were a total of 540 illegal Israeli building sites in the West Bank, and the CA only saw to demolitions of 93 of these sites (17%). Illegal Israeli outposts in the West Bank usually comprise a guard tower, fences, antennas or mobile homes, the State Comptroller noted. While the CA issued orders to halt work or demolish the structures at many of the sites, most of the orders were not enforced. The report numbered an additional 403 illegal Palestinian building sites, with CA crews enforcing the law in 165 sites (41%). The State Comptroller found that the CA failed to deal with illegal buildings even after details had been submitted to the Defense Ministry. "The Defense Ministry and the Civil Administration have been inefficient in their dealings with the illegal buildings, squatting on government-owned land, or evacuating illegal outposts," the report said. The report also focused on the illegal construction of roads by Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. The Comptroller noted that in 2004, Israelis were responsible for illegally laying 17 roads in the West Bank, constituting a total of 13 kilometers. Most of the roads were built on government-owned land. During the same period, no illegal roads were built by Palestinians. (Jerusalem Post, 8/31/05)

Air Of Danger: Long-range Katyusha-style rockets caused the recent explosions along the Israel-Lebanon border, the Daily Star reported, confirming for the first time that the Iranian-made rockets are deployed in Lebanon. The unprecedented use of the Iranian 240-millimeter rocket, known as the Fajr 3, is a major development in the simmering border conflict. Previous isolated firings over the past 18 months involved 107-millimeter Katyusha rockets. These short-range weapons travel eight kilometers, carry a 1.3-kilogram warhead, and weigh around 18 kilograms, making them man-portable, meaning they can be fired from a simple stand of crossed sticks or against a rock. But the Iranian 240-millimeter Katyusha is over 5 meters long, weighs over 400 kilograms, carries a 45-kilogram warhead, and has a range of 43 kilometers, placing the coastal city of Haifa and a large tract of northern Israel within range. Due to their size, these rockets either had to have been fired from the back of a specially adapted truck or from a permanent artillery position. (Daily Star, 8/27/05)