Pushing the limits of protest

Protesters of the Gaza withdrawal claim to be waging a just battle for the sake of vital security and national interests, but the recent measures they have taken have actually undermined both.

Some of the tactics embraced by protesters of the Gaza withdrawal (i.e., hurling abusive and offensive language at IDF soldiers and intentionally overburdening the security establishment in an effort to limit its ability to effectively carry out disengagement) are not only highly divisive and morally reprehensible, but worse, they put Israeli lives at risk.

Maintaining a Jewish settler presence among a hostile population of more than one million Palestinians is not only untenable; it puts an unnecessary burden on the Israeli military establishment and offers no solution to the security and political challenges facing Israel.

Any honest analysis of the current crisis situation cannot ignore the fact that holding onto Israeli settlements in Gaza until now has not diminished to any extent the will of organizations like Hamas and Islamic Jihad to carry out their unrelenting anti-Semitic terror campaigns.

Call for insubordination - danger to society

Should terror continue after the disengagement - and it likely will - there is no reason to believe that Prime Minister Sharon will not make good on his promise to adopt a tougher military response to terror groups operating in Gaza and the West Bank.

Heavy handed military operations by Israel, unimpeded by a civilian presence in Gaza, will surely take a toll on the terror infrastructure that has managed to thus far withstand the critical and morally justifiable measures taken by Israeli security forces.

While opponents of disengagement have every right to operate within the democratic framework of acceptable protest, their leadership has a moral responsibility to prevent any behavior that can lead to civil war or that threatens Israeli security.

First and foremost, protest leaders must unequivocally speak out against the prospect of soldiers refusing to carry out military orders. The precedent set by such action poses a danger to all of Israeli society since the IDF is the single most important body for carrying out security-related policies and its success is contingent upon unequivocal loyalty and discipline.

Holocaust comparisons highly offensive

Anti-disengagement leaders should also immediately abandon and prohibit the use of language which unwarrantedly puts Israeli soldiers on par with Nazis collaborators. Such comparisons are not only callous and highly offensive, they are also absurd.

There is no question that uprooting settlers from their homes will be a painful and traumatic process, but their relocation to other Israeli communities and the generous compensation packages they will receive from the government are hardly analogous to the fate of those Jews who were indiscriminately and inhumanely sent to death camps by the Nazis.

Furthermore, the use of Holocaust rhetoric in the context of disengagement diminishes the meaning and severity of the Holocaust and makes it more acceptable for other groups (including enemies of Israel) to exploit the Holocaust to advance their own particularistic agendas.

Just as Lieutenant-Commander Nisso Shacham has been publicly rebuked and dismissed from his post for making offensive remarks about the settlers, Yesha leaders must publicly denounce and discourage the use of Holocaust imagery in their campaign to halt disengagement.

Severe consequences  

And finally, the protest movement must reconsider its stated plan to stall the Gaza withdrawal by spreading the police, border patrol and army so thin that they will not be able to implement the disengagement.

This tactic poses a threat to the entire country because the more security forces it will take to restrain protesters committed to reaching the Gaza settlements and disrupting the disengagement, the less forces there will be to confront Palestinian terrorists who, in blatant violation of the so-called Palestinian ceasefire, are continuing their attacks on Israeli citizens.

While the State of Israel is currently struggling to maintain a balance between allowing legitimate protests to occur and assuming responsibility for public order and security, citizens and protesters who oppose the disengagement must use more discretion and prudence in expressing their opposition to the Gaza withdrawal. The consequences if they do not are severe.

Brett Schor, an oleh hadash from the United States, is the former Officer of Academic Affairs at the Embassy of Israel in Washington, DC. He is currently pursuing an MA in Israeli Society and Politics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.