Relocation and its opponents

Today PM Sharon toured the region of sand dunes known as Nitzanim that lies
between Ashdod and Ashkelon on the Israeli coast. He was there because the
day before he reportedly had an emotional meeting with a delegation of
settlers from Gush Katif in the Gaza strip. It has been suggested that they
be relocated as a community to Nitzanim to new villages that will be built
specially for them at that location. This seems like a good idea since it
will keep their community together and would make the disengagement easier
if they are relocated as a group. But, there are two major difficulties
with this plan.
The first is environmental. It seems that this region is the last
significant unspoilt region of sand dunes along the whole Israeli coast.
The long stretches of sand dunes that used to reach all the way from
Caesarea to Gaza are no more. Netanya, Tel Aviv, Rishon Letzion, Ashdod and
Ashkelon were built largely on the dunes. Very little of the original sand
dunes remain, maybe altogether ca. 15%, and Nitzanim is considered the last
viable region of this unique ecosystem. As such the environmentalists are
up in arms against this plan, they oppose it not on political grounds but on
ecological grounds. The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel
(SPNI or Adam teva v'din in Hebrew) are spearheading the opposition. Last
year SPNI was responsible for the passage of a National Law for the
protection of the coastline, that specifically includes the Nitzanim region.
However, they fear that this will be set aside by Sharon for political
expediency in pursuance of an agreement with the settlers.
The other opposition comes from those Gaza settlers who are adamant against
moving at all, and who intend to oppose the disengagement by all means.
This plan has definitely split the Gaza settler movement. The opponents of
such a plan are against it because of the very fact that it is so attractive
to many settlers, since moving a few tens of kilometers up the coast into
Israel proper in an environment similar to that where they currently live in
Gush Katif might undermine some of the vociferous opposition to the
disengagement.
Sharon must decide what to do about this plan, and certainly it will entail
significant cost to the Government. However, if he can persuade enough
settlers to sign up for such a group move, it would be a significant
political victory for him. So expect the environmental argument to be
overlooked, even if some of the remaining region is earmarked for
protection.
One reason why he is visiting the area now and making a decision about the
plan is that next week he will be visiting Pres. Bush in Crawford Texas.
Sharon hopes that Bush will agree to underwrite part of the cost of the
relocation. Secty, of State Rice has let it be known that the US will not
actually pay for the relocation of settlers, on the grounds that the US
doesn't recognize their legal status in Gaza in the first place. But, the
US will agree to develop regions within Israel where former settlers might
relocate. Previously two major regions have been mentioned, central Galilee
and northern Negev. Now that Nitzanim has come to the fore, it is likely
that Sharon will present a provisional plan to Bush involving the relocation
of settlers to these three regions. It has been speculated that the US will
be prepared to pay up to m$50 towards the cost of these relocations. Of
course, many settlers may decide to move individually and they will then be
compensated as private individuals for their losses. This will be
particularly costly for those who own farms, factories and industries in the
settlements.
It has been provisionally decided that the houses, farms and factories left
behind in Gaza will not be destroyed, but will be handed over to the PA
through some agreement that might be bankrolled either by an Arab fund or
thru the UN or EU. Vice Premier Peres is in the US right now discussing
options for this eventuality. However, synagogues and cemeteries will have
to be removed into Israel. Since the settlers have lived in some places for
ca. 30 years a whole community has developed and it will be a terrible thing
to transfer them, something that many Jews find too distasteful to
contemplate.
Minister of Defense Shaul Mohfaz has stated recently that under no
circumstances will the disengagement be carried out against a background of
Palestinian terrorist attacks. Since such attacks still take place on a
daily basis, for example an IDF solider was shot yesterday, it is difficult
to see how this could be accomplished. One way would be with the
cooperation of the PA, handing over areas to them in an agreed peaceful way.
Whether or not this could be accomplished remains to be seen.