Israel may even be criticized by the international community for the disengagement, Bechor says
Photo: Ronny Sofer
Israel and Pavlov’s dog
Country must let go of its hold on Gaza to gain international recognition
When will the evacuation of the Jewish settlements in Gaza be considered a success? When will we be able to say that the enormous effort was worthwhile? Only when the international community acknowledges the fact that Israel is no longer responsible for the fate of Gaza’s Palestinians.
Without this recognition, the entire pullout may have been carried out in vain. This is why the Palestinians are doing everything in their power to prevent this acknowledgement, which would grant legitimacy to Israel’s act.
The best international recognition could have come from the U.N. Security Council, because at least as far as the Gaza Strip is concerned, Israel has realized the Council’s famous Resolution 242 (1967), which calls for the “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.”
Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak managed to obtain similar recognition with the withdrawal from Lebanon in the spring of 2000, when the U.N. confirmed that Israel had fully withdrawn from Lebanon in accordance with Security Council Resolution 425.
However, today the Palestinians claim that Israel’s decision to maintain its control over the entrance to Gaza by air, sea or land revokes any U.N. recognition regarding the Strip; therefore, it is doubtful that Israel will gain international legitimacy anytime soon. Even worse, Israel may even be criticized by the international community for the disengagement, which may claim that the problem has intensified, as Gaza has now been caged in and that Israel is, in fact, occupying the area by remote control.
This tend has already begun.
To nip this claim in the bud, Israel must grant the Palestinians full control over their crossings along the border with Egypt in Gaza. An Arab-Arab crossing point would tie Egypt to the Strip and exempt Israel of its responsibility for the Palestinians’ well-being.
The meaning of ‘disengagement’
It must be remembered that Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza emanates from a demographical problem and Israel’s unwillingness to be responsible for millions of disgruntled Palestinians. This consideration is becoming a strategic one, and even outweighs the dangers of Palestinian terror attacks from Gaza or the smuggling of weapons into the Strip.
As to the terror, does anyone really believe that the Palestinians would not be able to smuggle weapons into Gaza even if Israel maintains its control over the land passageways? And what is the significance of the withdrawal from the Philadelphi route if not open borders between Gaza and Egypt?
If the Palestinians will want to allow refugees or terrorists into Gaza, that is there business – so long as they refrain from attacking Israel. Israel must come to an agreement with the Egyptian authorities on this last point.
Thirty eight years later, and Israel’s automatic hold over the Gaza Strip has become an involuntary reflex, similar to that of Pavlov’s famous dog, who would link the ringing of a bell to a meal.
Israel must loosen its grip, as the situation has changed and we have left Gaza. This is the meaning of the word “disengagement,” and this is the opportunity to receive international recognition.
Israel currently maintains sea and airspace supervision over Gaza due to terror-related considerations, but as far as daily life goes, Gaza will eventually be connected by land to Egypt and to the entire Arab world.
