Double strategy

There are two basic Israeli/Jewish views of the current status of the
conflict with the Palestinian Arabs. One extreme, the right, says that the
Arabs are only interested in destroying Israel and any apparent move by them
towards peace is a tactic, meant to improve their position, and so we should
not be tricked into it. Any concession, particularly the so-called
disengagement from Gaza, is a withdrawal under fire that will only encourage
them to continue terrorism.
The other extreme, the left, sees moderation on the other side, Palestinians
who really want to co-exist, who are tired of war and losing their sons etc.
and are ready for peace as long as our side (the stronger side) makes
concessions in land, that is less important than people. These Israelis see
the inevitability of eventual co-existence and a Palestinian state and are
eager to embrace that now (hence 'Peace Now').
In fact, the truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes, and there is
not one Arab or Palestinian position, there are many. There is little doubt
that there is a distinction between Pres. Abbas of the PA, who proclaims he
wants a peaceful solution via the Road Map, and the Islamist rejectionists,
who only want a continuation of the armed struggle against Israel. While
the current "calm" of low level (although continuing) violence can be said
to be a strategy for Abbas, it is only a tactic for the terrorist
organizations.
The question is how can Israel exploit this situation to both defeat the
aims of the terrorists while enhancing the aims of the moderates? There are
two answers to this question, a double-pronged response to the two distinct
trends. Israel must be prepared to use the IDF to defeat the former, while
making concessions to support the latter. In fact, this is what PM Sharon
is doing. The targeted attacks against the terrorists have caused them
enormous damage and has blunted their capability. Ideally Abbas would now
be doing this instead of Israel, but he has so far refused to take action.
On the other hand, in order to seize the initiative away from the
Palestinians and remove our dependency on their decisions, PM Sharon has
conceived the Gaza first Disengagement Plan. This is intended to accept a
reality, that in any foreseeable solution the Palestinians will not agree to
have Jewish settlements in Gaza, and by removing our settlers and armed
forces now we are reducing the friction (of daily shelling etc.) and showing
what a future settlement could bring the Palestinians. The threat of this
unilateral withdrawal has so undermined the strategy of the Palestinian
political class (Fatah) that they are scrambling to be involved in
coordination of the move. By voluntarily giving up part of the land that
few Israelis want to keep, Sharon has undermined the major criticism of
Israel, that the so-called "occupation" is the cause of the violence in the
first place.
However, make no mistake about it, Sharon does not intend to
withdraw/disengage from other more important and densely Jewish populated
areas of the West Bank. This is the price he is expecting the Palestinians
to pay for his readiness to accommodate them elsewhere. Of course, he does
not expect them to readily agree, but with the explicit support of Pres.
Bush for "modifications" in the borders to accomodate "current realities",
this is what Sharon intends.
At the same time it could be said that the Arab States are becoming more
moderate too. The fact that they are prepared to adopt a resolution at
their current Arab League conference in Algiers that would give recognition
to Israel in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from the territories looks good
at face value, and is certainly something that could never have occurred a
few years ago. But, why did King Abdullah of Jordan, who initially proposed
such a resolution, decide not to attend the meeting? Because the extremists
(Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, etc.) insisted in tying recognition to a full
withdrawal of Israel from ALL the territories, as well as the return of
refugees, etc. In other words acceptance by Israel of all Palestinian/Arab
demands. So in fact this is a step backward, because whereas last year the
Saudis presented this plan as take it or leave it, now all the Arab States
have tied recognition of Israel to the implementation of this plan, which
leaves no room for compromise and negotiation. Certainly this is something
that Israel cannot accept, and even the Palestinians would find it difficult
to be tied to what the other Arab States have decided for them. The US will
also see this as a trap, and hopefully will support Israel in ignoring it,
since it runs counter to their Road Map plan.
So we continue in a neverland of fluidity where each side makes moves that
cannot satisfy the other, but may lead towards a better situation. Israel
is turning over West Bank cities to PA security control, the calm persists,
at least for now, and most Israelis are holding their breath and waiting to
see. Anything could unbalance the precarious situation, but the overall
positive trend that cannot be readily perceived will continue.