" Regional and international developments after the disengagement"
Prof. dr. Dan Schueftan,
National Security Studies Center, Haifa University.
Brussels, 17 October 2005
Summary; this is not an official record of proceedings and specific remarks are not necessarily attributable.
Prof. Dr. Dan Schueftan is a leading Israeli expert on the Middle East. As Israelian observer and actor, he explained the origins and rationale of the new political option of Israel, “the disengagement” and the regional and international aspects of this strategy.
Schueftan argued that we have to understand that the unilateral decision of Israel to withdraw is created in a global reality. There are three events relevant to the Middle East: the collapse of the USSR, the attacks of 9/11 and the American realisation of the fact that “the quality of life is in danger by terrorism and radicalism is the cause of terrorism”. Finally, the Arab world is aware of its weakness. The ability to meet the challenges of the 21st century is considered by Arab mainstream as very gloomy. In this situation, “Israel could afford another strategy, one that doesn’t wait for Arab answers to Israel’s concessions”, said Schueftan. “We cannot wait for Arabs until they allow us to have self-determination!”
Between the 1980s and the turn of the century, both alternative paradigms collapsed in Israel. In the ‘80s mainstream Israeli’s left the paradigm of Greater Israel and in the ‘90s the Oslo peace process as a viable option. The new policy is disengagement supported by the overwhelming majority of Israeli’s. Occupying weakens Israel. It will do what it sees fit.
Prof. Schueftan explained the reason for
the new strategy. Israel withdraws not in return for peace. There is no real
partner for negotiations. Palestinians put forward impossible conditions and
they stick to terrorism as national strategy. Furthermore, the Arab world is
weak, the US supports Israel and the EU cannot prevent what Israel is doing.
He pointed out that Israel has proven
that “it has broken terrorism”. “We expect it to continue, but we can reduce it
to a level with which we can live”, he said.
Israel did not depart from the road map. The road map is unrealistic, not only because it is led by Europeans, but also because a precondition to real negotiations is that Palestinians stop not only the immediate actions of terrorism, but also dismantle the terrorist organizations. Officially Israel doesn’t depart from this because it doesn’t want to bring the United States to a point where it will have to justify its support of the Israeli disengagement to the Europeans when the Israelis are saying that the European-led road map is no longer valid. So, officially, the road map is still there, but it is unrealistic.
The broad mainstream came to be convinced that Israel is stronger without Gaza. Israel will continue to withdraw. The timetable is set to 2007-2008. After the elections, they want to unilaterally determine the borders. Prof. Schueftan felt that one day, the Palestinians will be willing to negotiate with the precondition that terrorism is an option you eliminate. “If they want to negotiate, no problem”, he reiterated. But in his view, there will be a continuation of unilateral decisions in the next decade, such as the repartition of Jeruzalem.
Egypt and Jordan understands that Israel has no choice. The US does not put pressure on Israel. Israel doesn’t undermine regional or global reality, a very important issue for the US.
During the question and answer session, prof. Schueftan expressed his concern about the fact to be obliged to reoccupy Gaza. This would be bad for Israel and for the Israeli-Egyptian relations. He mentioned that Israel made a major mistake in the negotiations with the Egyptians by agreeing that Egyptian army soldiers replace Egyptian policemen in the Philadelfi Corridor that separates Sinai from the Gaza Strip. In the first days after the IDF evacuation, the Egyptian troops did not prevent a massive flow of people and apparently weapons to and from the Gaza Strip. An Egyptian-Palestinian checkpoint with European people in it would be a possible and better solution.
Concerning the Palestinians, the speaker made a clear point that we don’t know anything about the Palestinian people because of our European media who is telling fascinating stories that has nothing to do with reality. The problem is not having a cohesive Palestinian society. The society is disintegrating because of domestic concern. There are more Palestinians killed inside the country by other Palestinians than in conflict with Israel. Prof. Schueftan said that "in this situation, Israel hasn’t a permanent partner for a permanent settlement". He emphasised that he really would like to have it different.
More information on:
-Israel –
Ministry of Foreign Affairs: The Disengagement Plan - General Outline
(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Office).
- Dr. Dan Schueftan: National Security Studies Center, Haifa University: his cv: http://ica.hevra.haifa.ac.il/teamco/nssc/data.asp?link=staff&lang=en
- Roundtable with D. Schueftan. Roundtable: Disengagement , The Yale Israel Journal,
n° 5, Winter 2005.
http://www.yaleisraeljournal.com/wintr2005/roundtable.php
The Yale Israel Journal
- Dr. Dan Schueftan, Future Borders & Demography, Interview. Broadcast April 8th
2005 on IsraCast.com:
http://www.isracast.com/Transcripts/100405a_trans.htm
IsraCast.com
- Dr. Dan Schueftan, Yasser Arafat & Mahmoud Abbas (Abu-Mazen).
Interview. Broadcast November 12, 2004 on IsraCast.com:
http://www.isracast.com/transcripts/121104a_trans.htm
IsraCast.Com
- Gershon Baskin with Sharon Rosenberg, The New Walls and Fences – Consequences for Israel and Palestine, Working paper N° 9 of the CEPS Middle East & Euro-Med project, June 2003: download the paper for free (http://shop.ceps.be/BookDetail.php?item_id=1037)
-Featuring Dan Schueftan. PeaceWatch #298: Special Forum Report:
The Separation Option: An Alternative to the Peace Process - Featuring Dan
Schueftan. December 1, 2000:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=1989
The Washington Institute