Are we better off than before?

Jerusalem Post ^ | 6-26-02 | MICHAEL FREUND

[SJackson]

MICHAEL FREUND

Ten years ago this week, on June 23, 1992, Yitzhak Rabin was elected prime minister of Israel, thanks in part to his promise to "take Gaza out of Tel Aviv."

Still reeling from the brutal terrorist murder of 15-year-old Helena Rapp of Bat Yam on May 24 of that year, the Israeli public voted for the ex-general, confident that he would restore their sense of personal security and bring about an end to Palestinian violence. The rest, of course, is history, as Rabin went on to sign the Oslo Accords, handing over large parts of Judea, Samaria and Gaza to Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, and allowing them to administer these areas in place of Israel.

In the decade that has elapsed, it is clear that Israel's strategic position and security situation have deteriorated sharply as a result, as the country now finds itself under a sustained terrorist assault. Indeed, to paraphrase former US president Ronald Reagan's famous 1980 question to Americans, "Are Israelis better off now than they were before Oslo?" it is evident that the answer is a resounding 'no.' But to fully grasp the extent of just how bad things have gotten, consider the following: In the past three weeks alone, 58 Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists. By contrast, in all of 1992, the year in which Rabin assumed power, the total number of Israelis killed in terror attacks was 39.

Or how about this sobering statistic: More Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists in the past 20 months (563) than in the previous 20 years (484), a period which included the first intifada. All told, according to Israel's Foreign Ministry, Palestinian terrorists have murdered 819 Israelis since the signing of the September 1993 Oslo Accords.

The fact that terror is worse far worse than it was before Oslo is primarily attributable to the agreement's creation of an armed Palestinian entity alongside Israel, one that has harbored, financed and supported attacks against the Jewish state since its inception. But rather than fight terror, Arafat decided to foment it instead.

Oslo, then, did not "take Gaza out of Tel Aviv." Just the opposite. It provided compelling proof of why Israel must assert complete control over that sandy strip of land.

For only by maintaining a permanent presence in the territories can Israel hope to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure that has sprouted in its midst. Sure, there was terrorism even while Israel was still in Gaza, but as the numbers demonstrate, it was nothing compared with what happened once we left.

OPERATION DEFENSIVE Shield provided still further evidence of the need for a prolonged Israeli stay in the Palestinian-controlled areas. Though a mere two months have passed since the IDF withdrew from cities such as Jenin, Tulkarm and Bethlehem, the terrorists have already succeeded in rebuilding their capability to launch attacks, as last week's suicide bombings in Jerusalem demonstrated.

Operation Defensive Shield failed because the shield was lowered so quickly. If Israel were to stick it out and stay in the areas, the terrorist networks would eventually be rooted out and eliminated. While a number of commentators have suggested that "there is no military solution" to terror, don't fall prey to their defeatism. There are plenty of examples of countries that succeeded in quashing terror, from Turkey's rout of the Kurdish PKK, to Peru's victory over the Tupac Amaru, to Germany's subduing of the Red Army Faction.

Terror can be defeated. It may not be quick, or easy, but it can be done. The Oslo process demonstrated the futility of making concessions to terror, for such an approach only whets the appetite of the terrorists still further. Once they see blood, they will seek to spill as much of it as possible to achieve their aims.

Opponents of a large Israeli counter-terror operation in the territories bemoan the fact that such a campaign will undermine whatever infinitesimal chance remains to achieve peace with the PA. But they would do well to recall what Rabin said in his inaugural speech to the Knesset after his 1992 election: "From our standpoint, security takes preference even over peace." And, though they would be loath to admit it, the fact is Oslo demonstrated that the key to Israel's security lies not in leaving Judea, Samaria and Gaza, but in staying there for good. The numbers, as they say, speak for themselves.

The writer served as deputy director of Communications and Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office from 1996 to 1999.