1. benjamin said:

Know this: disengagement is not ethnic cleansing, Ariel Sharon is not a dictator, and Eidelberg is advocating treason.

2. Tiburon said:

Au contraire, Benjamin: - "Disengagement" is Arab ethnic cleansing 'by proxy' (read: - Sharon); regards Arik: - 'If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...'; And, see you in court, but not that "Gang of Law" Court some folk call the Israeli Supreme Court.

To quote from Eidelberg's most recent article posted above: -

"Let us have some fresh air. Enough of this waving the flag of democracy to justify the behavior of the Sharon government. I challenge anyone to debate with me in public on whether the government of Israel exemplifies a democracy — be it theory or in practice!"

(by the way, Benjamin - we may have some issues, but now that you've posted here reference to some of your writings on Leftist anti-semitism - I can say - you're doing some cool and important work)

3. BobW said:

Shalom Benjamin,

If disengagement is not "ethnic cleansing", please list the Arab population relocations so as to refute the ethnic cleansing charge.

If Prof Eidelberg is "advocating treason", have you reported this to the authorities? do you hold file copies of what you reported regarding this grave charge?

Kol tuv,
BobW

4. Joseph Alexander Norland said:

In item #5, Eidelberg says:

"it is counterproductive to say you will not resort to violence—which does not mean that I advocate armed resistance. I only recommend silence on this issue."

I wish to express total opposition to this position on principle grounds. Violence should not be greeted with silence - violence must be denounced outright, as I am doing here unequivocally. I call upon other IsraPundit readers to do the same. Lord help me (and all other atheists), that I have to be on the same side as Benjamin on any issue.

In addition, and quite apart from the grounds of principle, which are principal, the use of violence against this expulsion and resettlment is also futile, as the Israeli Army will win any violent battle.

5. Tiburon said:

As often the case, Joseph - you are the voice of precise "reason" on this site, and of moral principle. Please accept that I DESPERATELY want to agree with you, and would - save for one critical caveat: -

If there was even a token balance in the Israeli Media regards these issues, just one or two substantive Nationalist Right outlets for information, through Radio, Television, and Print - I would protest PE's position. But in a Land where every single 'right of center' voice has been banned, purged, or co-opted (some say in 'preparation' for selling the Expulsion to the, as Tamar often points out, largely 'ill-informed' Israeli Public), "silence" on this issue is the only tool to hand. As PE argues forcibly in "Civil Disobedience - Article 2" above, civil disobedience in the classic 'Gandhi' model will NOT work in Israel, and further successful campaigns of civil disobedience, such as over racial issues in the US, have had the 'threat of violence' in the background.

G-d Forbid, G-d Forbid, - that it should come to this. But with opposition to the oligarchy and it's agenda reduced to 'door-to-door' and grassroots, only - up against the weight of Israeli Leftist TV, Radio and all major newspapers - I truly don't believe we have a choice. NOT to in any way "promote" violent resistance, but to, through "silence", send a message to the 'dictatorial forces' that have run roughshod over democracy in their relentless 'plan' - that they better think long and hard where this all COULD (again, G-d Forbid), go. The horror of this 'policy by fiat' is that it truly MIGHT lead to IDF unit against IDF unit. It's not totally unimaginable.

With open press, and free debate, both in a vastly reformed Knesset and in a politically diverse Media - it would be incumbent on ALL sides on this issue to repeat the refrain, as a mantra - Whatever the outcome NO VIOLENCE, EVER!

It's a 'delicate' line we tread here - and for me all my nature and training and inclination would agree with you: - "violence must be denounced outright" - but here, at this 'apocalyptic' moment, if you'll forgive the term, I feel we have no choice.

"Silence" on the issue.

6. Omri said:

Tiburon:

I understand what you're advocating to be a tactical maneuver - force those implementing disengagement to calculate the possibility of a civil war in their costs and benefits. Force them to consider that they might have to face massive violence if they go through with their plans and then, if they still go through with their plans - then resist only in legitimate ways.

The problem is this strategy NEVER works. "We're so clever and are in control of ourselves - we can turn the incitement on and off; we can turn the violence on and off" is a tiger that opponents of disengagement won't be able to get off of. All it takes is a young member of Gush Katif hearing the implied message in PE's position: "I'm not saying violence is OK, but resistance is most the most important goal" and convincing himself that now is the time for armed resistance. The implications would be nothing short disastrous: a permanent weakening of the Jewish state much worse than what disengagement would do, an opening for Israel's enemies for outright attack, and a sense in the international world that Israel doesn't have its house in order and that they can therefore be pushed around.

Your observation that sensible right-of-center voices have been purged from Israel merely makes this strategy of silence more dangerous, because once the boulder of violent resistance starts rolling there's no way to hold it back because there's no way to keep everyone on the same page - all it takes is a couple of hotheads who think they have a mandate to, G-d forbid, attack an Israeli soldier. And the point is that they're more inclined to think that they have this mandate because there are no sensible right-of-center media outlets explaining to them the right way to resist disengagement - there is no subtlty, there is no way nuance, and above all there is no reliable way to issue information once violence begins. That there is no way to reorient those opposing disengagement once, G-d forbid, violence begins - no way to disseminate calls for moderation in the middle of, G-d forbid, the sparks of a civil war - makes it all the more incumbent that we do everything possible to avoid going down that path before it starts.

If Israel's media is truly dominated by the Left, then a call for violence also spells the end of the settler movement. Do you believe for a second that Hamas would fail to take advantage of a Jewish civil war? Do you believe for a second that, after a schoolbus or cafe is bombed, that those on the right who started the war would not be blamed? The demonization that would occur following such an incident would make how the right was portrayed following the murder of Rabin, alav hashalom, seem like good press!

The greatest danger is not disengagement - it is, G-d forbid, civil war in the Jewish state. Armed conflict between Jews will take generations to heal. Regardless of where one falls on disengagement, this nudge nudge wink wink rhetoric about violent resistance is staggeringly dangerous.

7. Tiburon said:

Omri, thank you for your considered response. I wish I had a better understanding of the forces at play here, because your presentation of the terrible possibilities seems all too plausible, especially your points that WITHOUT a moderating 'nationalist right' voice, with national exposure (radio, TV, etc.), there would be few ways to reach the, what? - surely 25% of the public that is dead set against this precipitate policy.

I wish the Professor was here to weigh in with his understanding of the actual logical dynamics, as they might unfold, even in extremity. Being that he's not, I could only refer back to his recently posted articles on Civil Disobedience (article #2 for instance) and THAT dynamic, especially his analysis of the ultimate success of MLK's 'fully non-violent' movement. It seems that it worked in no small part due the implicit threat of Malcom X, the Panthers, etc...and having lived through that time I can't disagree...

Look, Omri. This is ONE of 10 points of strategy that PE has put forward. This debate that's developing here on this thread brings home to me the utter insanity of PeresproxySharon's totally illegal Expulsion agenda. While after considered debate, long debate on all sides of the issue, in open forum - perhaps a clear majority of JEWS (not Arab Israelis, etc...)(and by majority, Omri, I mean MINIMUM 66%/two thirds - CAN it be less when we are talking of the borders of the Holy Land for All Future Generations?) might find this policy acceptable, however contrary it may be for Torah Law - Nothing of this nature has taken place as yet.

I know and respect 'nationalist right' soldiers who have fought both clandestine and overt battles in 'Aza, and who would vote to 'disengage'. But to a man (this albeit a ridiculously small 'survey'), they admit that if the GOI was consistent and strong in it's Jewish positions and pride, and had a policy to effectively and thouroughly terminate the rat's nest of terror there, that they'd reconsider.

So to me, the issue is really, are we in the end going to 'pull back from the brink'? Surely the 'fanatic Left' is also capable of violence in this matter, should they be worked into a frenzy by ill-considered reportage by Israeli MSM, and they do not have the strictures of the religious right to brake their passions. Where are the cries from the 'centrists' and 'left' in Israel, to allow this debate to unfold with democratic dignity? About the potential for violence by the IDF or the border mishtarah, or special units thereof - they too are "silent", save when they are fulminating about the 'extreme right threat'.

To me, and forgive me - as I realize I'm rambling here (the whole issue is deeply disturbing to me, as is the too real prospect of Civil War, G-d Forbid - with or without "violence" (such as a large minority of the population, and international Jewish support, - refusing to recognize any longer the authority of the GOI, for taxes, defence, etc...and a vast schism opening in Israeli society - Judea and Israel redux...which would also be a horrible 'opening' for the Arabs to attack, G-d Forbid)....To me, and I do NOT wish to be sanguine - this IS a battle for the heart and soul of Israel, this 'disengagement'...it's effectively already started, the 'Civil War'. That we are forced to acquiece to this disasterous scheme, essentially by fiat - as the only alternative to break up of the State - is a choice I must decline. I'm not willing to play that game.

And while my opinion matters little in reality, I find it inconceivable to envision religious nationalist youth 'targeting' IDF soldiers. I CAN envision sophisticated strategies of obstruction - roads torn up, sabotage of vehicles, interference with the Expulsion force's communications - which carry their own dangerous complement of 'miscalculations' and exposure to Muslim Arab predation during the operation. But Jew on Jew 'violence', beyond 'fisticuffs'? Nope, never.

I have no conclusion here. The other nine points are to me unassailable, and I don't think we should lose sight of them, also G-d Forbid. WHERE are the Zionist organization voices and rabbis and leaders, in the Diaspora?? Do they imagine this doesn't 'concern them'? Regards this I am appalled. Near, (G-d Forbid), despair.

A NEW ISRAEL! It's bloody well TIME!

8. Tiburon said:

Omri - a small addendum: - I just noticed you said: - "Armed conflict between Jews will take generations to heal"... On this I gotta agree. I for one am still quite exercised about the Altalena, Joel Brand, etc....and I wasn't even here yet, though my folks were.
So, perhaps we're all 'still healing', it does seem so.

9. BobW said:

Gaza is a symbol and also a symptom of the REAL overall problem. Israel does not have a modern representative parliamentary government. Recall that Jewish Gaza was evacuated during the Israeli War of Independence. To not evacuate would have been wrong, illegal and counterproductive.

The current Gaza confrontation plans still do not address the basic problem.

The Yesha Council - institutionally speaking - individually, I doubt it - has already established that human chains and other publicity stunts do not reform socialist govetrnments.

Most of Israel's territorial issues and demarcated frontiers are already decided.

What we are witnessing here is nothing less than the reinfected M/V Altelena. It was Yigal Allon who shot at Altelena with a cannon. It was the Alexandroni Brigade that fired on the Irgun. I mention this because much of the discussion at IsraPundit attaches violence to the "Settler" movement.

Agian, the Labor government Ben Gurion established still rules the country. It is a form of government than cannot meat Jewish needs and wants. It does attract Arab workers.

A political battle must be waged - not resisting arrest. Resisting arrest is another publicity stunt.

Kol tuv,
BobW