[Cinnamon Girl]

Even within this article there seems to be a lot of confusion about who is calling the shots. But there is something seriously bizarre about Sharon's recent proposal, and there should be NO DOUBT that Hamas is and will continue to garner support for any moves by Israel to evacuate areas.

[Cicero]

Well, you never know for sure what the real story is, but this seems to put an end to the theory that Bush or the State Department is pressuring Sharon to knuckle under.

He seems to have gotten the same bug as other crazy politicians: wanting to leave a historic legacy behind him. Good old Realpolitik would be a better guide.

[adam_az]

You have to wonder if Sharon proposed it, knowing that the Americans would oppose it, and put the US into the position of defending the "occupation" to avoid interecine Palestinian fighting, whereas previously the US made statements that the 'settlements have to go.' The US supporting maintaining the settlements obviously eliminates US pressure on Israel to eliminate them. Sharon might have bet that the US doesn't really want the side effects of the policy it hoped to see implemented.

Or, it could have been a happy accident for him.

Your take? Arik is wiley, but is he this wiley?

[KantianBurke]

IMHO, Bush is getting worried that a nilateral pullout by Israel will cause the Israelis to say the hell with the peace process and bunker down. Which they SHOULD do but those "poor innocent" Palis won't get the state Bush deems them worthy of having. Hence the concern.

[yonif]

It does not matter if its Hamas or the Palestinian Authority in power. They both want the destruction of Israel. The fact the US objects to this is because such a move from Gaza will lead to the end of the roadmap to "peace" which the US does not want, as it supports a "2 state vision" where there is an Israel and a Palestine.

The US government naively thinks its can achieve this aim with the Palestinian Authority, even though its a terrorist regime.

I do not understand why the US keeps fumbling over the roadmap to terrorist statehood for the PLO Arabs....The US objection to leaving Gaza is vaild - but their reasoning behind why Israel should not leave Gaza is not.

Leaving Gaza, and following this "roadmap" to peace rewards terrorism.

Also, I don't think Israel will leave Gaza in the end, with or without US pressure. Internal matters will not allow it.

[af_vet_1981]

"Somebody is going to have to help the Palestinian Authority. They don't have the resources" to compete with Hamas," another official said.

Hokay, they don't want Israel to withdraw. Plan B then. Israel reclaims Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, expels Hamas and any terrorist supporters, and provides security, peace, and prosperity to the best of its ability for all faiths until the Mashiach sits on the throne of David.

[SJackson]

The only way evacuating Gaza, and it shouldn’t be all of it, makes any sense is if Sharon is going to complete the eastern wall and force a separation unilaterally, regardless of what the US or the Saudis think. Anything else is a major victory for terror.

That could well be what’s happening. Sharon may well be building his legacy. He’s had a long career but it’s nearing it’s end. I’m sure he’d love to be the one who secured defacto borders, even if not agreeable to everyone, for Israel rather than truce lines.

As to the “Palestinians”, Hamas runs Gaza anyway. They’ll get what they wished for and the world, a “state” free of Jews. They can trade with the Arab world and settle their disputes amongst themselves.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

But there is something seriously bizarre about Sharon's recent proposal...

Sounds like somebody has something on him. Maybe those bribery allegations are true (or can be made to look extremely convincing) and somebody pro-Hamas has the goods to ruin him politically.

As for the U.S. stance, the Bush administration's varying positions on the PA and Hamas are also bizarre. The Bush administration always whines when Israel knocks off a known terrorist, pouting that "this isn't helping the peace process." I'm glad that Bush has finally decided to get tough on Palestinian terrorism, but why the 180 now?

[monkeyshine]

Sharon may just be bluffing. I have thought a lot about this, and the truth is that neither the US, Egypt or Jordan or even the UN want an Israeli pullout. By announcing the pullout Sharon is forcing these countries to go as far as coming out IN FAVOR of Israeli occupation and, by inference, settlement!

Even if these countries don't go that far, they will still be forced to change their tune quite a bit. This will alleviate the international pressure on Israel, and also cause the media to turn the heat down quite a bit, since it will have become obvious that after all these years of haranguing Israel to withdraw from "arab land", nobody really wants them to.

And the reason they don't want them to is manyfold, but Egypt and Jordan don't want the security problem, and the immigration problem, and/or the exodus problem if/when the Palestinian civil war starts. The USA doesn't want to have to deal with the financial/social/military problems involving a decrepit "Palestine" or a "sharia Palestine" in the absense of Israeli oversight, in the middle of a civil war. The UN doesn't want Israel to leave them with the mess.

[SunkenCiv]

This is a good idea. If implemented, it removes the 3500 or so Israelis from Gaza and removes a pretext for the terrorists. It also shows that the US "road map" is and has been B.S.

If not implemented, withdrawal from Gaza shows the US' "road map" is more important to the US than is the security of Israel. The US has already opposed the fence, which has the support of Sharon's predecessor and opponent, Barak. Both steps are methods by which Israel will be made more secure.

Right now, the Arab states are in an uproar about the fence. In particular, that terrorist state, Saudi Arabia opposes the fence as "racist". In the meanwhile, Syria sees the current crisis as its best time to pursue some sort of agreement with Israel.

Time is of the essence because Israel is dealing with its terrorism problems in an effective way (it would be more effective to move the Arabs out of the restored Israel and into Gaza, but wait and see on that one) and soon will not care about an agreement with Syria. More to the point, Israel obviously doesn't care what the US thinks in its approach.

Syria was humiliated three times in wars with Israel, not even counting their pullback in the face of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon (which Syria still occupies). In 1973 -- the Yom Kippur War, or October War, which some regard as some sort of turning point in Israeli invincibility -- the Syrians launched a 1400+ tank assault under an envelope of SAMs and with virtually complete surprise. A further advantage was the simultaneous assault by Egypt. Israel still held off Syria with a skeletal force, and within three days had brought its reserves to bear, and destroyed 1100+ Syrian tanks. Israel's counterattack was also within visual distance of Damascus.

In the past, the Syrians refused to sit down and talk without the prior condition that Israel hand back the Golan Hts. That's obviously just stupidity, since the Golan is the only thing the Syrians need to talk about. So screw 'em. The last time they had the Golan Hts they used them to shell Israel. They can't be trusted now, any more than they could in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s.

Sharon's move may further splinter the PLO, but the PLO has always been a collection of street thugs. Getting rid of it should be a top priority in GWB's War on Terror. It ain't.

[A]s you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death. Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some. After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful.

Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the percentage equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint. -- Dennis Miller