To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

Withdrawal from Gaza

A Smart Move or a Strategic Blunder?

They say: In 2005, Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians. Israel gave up every inch of the land, uprooting thousands of settlers from their homes and fields and relinquishing strategically vital territory like the Philadelphi Corridor. Rather than getting peace in return for this concession, Israel got more terror: Hamas control of Gaza, Qassams raining down on southern Israel, and the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. The Gaza experience proves that "land for peace" doesn't work.

We say: The withdrawal from Gaza was, obviously, a difficult experience with a very painful - and still unfolding - aftermath. In looking at the withdrawal, however, the real issue is not whether withdrawal from Gaza was a mistake. The real issue is whether the way Israel withdrew was the right one. And the answer is: no.

Even before the "disengagement" from Gaza took place, Peace Now warned that a unilateral withdrawal could not be a substitute for a negotiated agreement that included post-withdrawal arrangements and coordination mechanisms. Peace Now also warned that by refusing to negotiate (or to at least effectively coordinate) the withdrawal with the newly elected Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas - whose election platform centered on re-starting peace negotiations - Israel would undermine his credibility and deliver a public relations coup to Hamas.

But then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was adamantly opposed to a negotiated withdrawal - and this, mind you, was before Hamas took control of Gaza. While we are not at all happy to say "we told you so," the fact is that today Israel is forced to grapple with precisely the unintended consequences of which we warned in 2005.