Compensation now?

Should Israel entice settlers to leave homes by rewarding compensation now?
Alon Pinkas, Zalman Shoval

No other way - Alon Pinkas A Palestinian state may or may not be established. A final-status agreement may be reached in the next five years, but it is more likely that such agreement will not be reached. Israel and the Palestinian Authority may be able to finalize a series of robust and viable interim agreements, but it is also possible that the status quo will prevail. It is also possible that in 5-7 years an international mandate will be running Judea, Samaria and Gaza, but perhaps the world will prefer to avoid the endless and useless dealings with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.   All these scenarios are possible. Yet there are elements that are not subjected to or stem from the above: Security (the separation fence) and demography (more Palestinians.) These two fundamentals cannot be subjected to political manipulation from the Left or Right.   At times, it's amazing to see how the political discourse in Israel in all matters pertaining to the "future of the territories" still hinges on dry slogans from the Left and Right. After all, in the face of all the hollow slogans regarding the "banishment of Jews from the land of their forefathers," the empty declarations regarding "transferring Israelis," the irrelevant statements regarding the importance of the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar a vis-à-vis a threatening "eastern front," the cult of "advanced diplomatic process" and the repeated claim that "once a Palestinian State is established, we'll have peace" – we have reality.   The facts on the ground are as follows: Within 2-3 years, more than 70,000 Israeli settlers in 74 communities will find themselves east of the separation fence (once it's completed based on the existing route.) A total of 12,000 apartments and homes will lose (and in fact, most of them already lost) their value and will never be sold. Thousands of Israelis will discover that their relatives hesitate to visit them and gradually stop crossing the fence, going through checkpoints, and risking travel on roads that are only partially secured. These thousands of people will also discover that their jobs are at risk.   Many (although not the majority) residents in these communities recognize the facts and seek something simple: State assistance in securing alternate housing based on the value of their apartment or home, and financial compensation. This is a fair, decent, and most of all responsible demand.   The "One Home" movement does not aim to determine in advance the nature and structure of a diplomatic agreement. Moreover, the movement includes members subscribing to completely different views regarding the likelihood and validity of any kind of diplomatic agreement with the Palestinian Authority in its current format.   The movement does not call for the evacuation of settlements and certainly not for an IDF withdrawal from the area of a settlement that will be evacuated based on the wishes of its residents. "One Home" presents a snapshot of reality and brings to the public's attention an absurd situation a moment before it's too late.   Our offer is about copying the model of the Gaza evacuation not in diplomatic or security terms, but rather, in humane and economic terms. A person who wishes to leave his home would be able to do so without giving up on the financial value of his assets.   The settlers who moved beyond the Green Line in order to boost their standard of living and quality of life recognize the fact that not much "quality" has been left, and its level is rapidly deteriorating: Based on a comprehensive survey conducted by the movement in March, more than 60 percent of (Jewish) Israeli residents support an agreement.   Yet the most interesting figure is the confidence or realization of more than 70 percent of the public that sooner or later, Israel will evacuate most of the territory not included in the three large settlement blocs.   A year, or three, or five will pass and it will happen, because it's a basic demographic, diplomatic, and security necessity for Israel.   Alon Pinkas is the former consul general in New York and among the founders of "One Home"

Say no to transfer – Zalman Shoval As we know, Israel does not suffer a shortage of various associations and non-profit organizations. Some of them aim to serve important and worthy purposes, but there are others whose main objective is to promote dubious political interests.   It is hard to decide how exactly we should characterize a recently established body, called "One Home," which aims to "bring 80,000 Judea and Samaria residents who live east of the separation fence back into the Green Line." Based on a Ynet report, in exchange for this settlers would be offered proper compensation that would enable them to deal with the move.   In other words, this is a case of transfer with financial enticement (one wonders whether this movement has a similar proposal for the Palestinians who reside west of the separation fence…)   Members of this movement claim that they are apolitical, yet if the promotion of moves such as banishing Jews from their homes isn't political, it is hard to say what is. The leaders of "One Home" claim, as if they are concerned for the residents' welfare, that in the future Jewish settlers will be exposed to Palestinian terror (why terror – aren't we talking about peace prevailing?) and will "lose the basic ability to continue to manage a normal life."   We won't deal here with the anti-moral and anti-Zionist aspects of these proposals and explanations – I will leave that for an ideological debate. However, pragmatic examination would lead us to the unavoidable conclusion that we are talking about dangerous ideas.   First, in terms of a purely security-minded point of view, at least some of those 74 Jewish communities play an important security role. Moreover, even Ariel Sharon declared at the time that the "separation fence" is not a political border, and therefore it is odd that "One Home" rushes to evacuate whatever is east of the fence.   In addition, the mere reference to Palestinian terrorism shows that even those who promote the initiative realize that the reason terrorist activity in Judea and Samaria is relatively limited is related to the presence of the IDF and other security arms there – yet paradoxically, drafters of the initiative actually believe that we should put an end to this Israeli security presence in the "West Bank."   In the diplomatic sphere, the initiative implies that Israel has despaired from genuine mutual negotiations with the Palestinians, and that therefore, as a state we must accept all the conditions set forth by the other side in full, more or less. In this aspect, the initiative unsurprisingly fits in with the "principles" proposed by the current Israeli government to Mahmoud Abbas ahead of the international conference in November.   Even if we were basing our moves on an opening position accepted by most previous Israeli governments that in the framework of genuine peace, as opposed to the current virtual exercise, Israel would have to compromise, and even make "painful" compromises, we were not talking about unilateral concessions.   The disappointment over the "disengagement" from Gaza, even if it was based on considerations seen as rational by the planners, should put an end to the idea of repeating this exercise at this time. However, the delusional ideas of the campaign leaders are exactly that: A blatant unilateral concession.   By merely raising such ideas, not to mention entrenching them by law, Israel loses the ability to one of these days engage in true negotiations for peace. Place yourself in Abbas' shoes. He will certainly say to himself: "Not only are they offering me more than what they offered Yasser Arafat, and not only are they giving me the green light to establish a Palestinian state without having to formally and fully renounce the 'right of return,' the stupid Jews are even willing to pay money so they are left with fewer bargaining chips that would have forced me too to agree to painful compromises."   Zalman Shoval is the former Israeli ambassador to Washington and member of the Israeli delegation to the Madrid Conference