Is pullout from Gaza enough?

It has been a positive development, but limited in terms of potential benefit. The geographical re-configuration of Israeli settlements in occupied territory has not altered the demographic landscape. Reports indicate that the population of Jewish settlements in the West Bank has grown this year by more than the 9,000 settlers evacuated from Gaza and certain adjoining territory. Thousands of Israelis have streamed into larger West Bank settlements since the start of the year, increasing the number of people with Jewish faith living on occupied land to 246,000.

Consequently, there is a lot of soul-searching going on right now in Palestine. Views are also being expressed that the Gaza pullout is a development that will not necessarily bring peace and stability in the West Bank. There is very little sympathy for the Jewish settlers who have been forced to leave. There is satisfaction that they have gone. However, at the same time there is anxiety as to whether such evacuation will provide fresh economic opportunities for a depressed Palestinian economy.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

On the other side, Sharon's decision has been received with concern by the extreme right wing and the ultra-orthodox representatives in the Israeli Knesset. Yossi Alpher, an Israeli analyst who participated in the failed Camp David peace negotiations five years ago, has gone on record and suggested that Sharon has exposed Israeli weakness, which will encourage the continuity of the cycle of violence. His opinion is also reflected in the recent decision of former Prime Minister B. Netanyahu (who resigned from Sharon's cabinet) to contest for the leadership of Sharon's Likud party. Such open confrontation has fuelled unease among different political and religious complexions within Israel.

The situation as it exists today, appears to be more like a snail climbing a greased pole, slipping down every alternate minute, thereby losing its gain of the previous minute.

In the meantime, President Bush has gone on record and praised the 'courageous and painful step' undertaken by Israel. He has also demanded that the Palestinian Authority should now prove that they can govern in a peaceful way.

It is difficult to understand such expectations on the part of USA. This is a scenario which has been made more complex by Israel's decision, immediately after the Gaza pullout, to expand other settlements in the West Bank. This is a provocative choice. This measure has also deflated international optimism that the Gaza pullout would help revive the stagnant Middle East peace process. Palestinian anger in this regard has been reflected in the statement made by Ghassan al-Khatib, a member of the Palestinian cabinet. He has condemned this latest Israeli plan and argued that 'Israel's insistence on expanding settlements represents a declaration of war against the Palestinians and aims to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state by reinforcing and prolonging occupation.'

There are other factors that will also continue to cast shadows on future developments. Despite persistent efforts of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader has been unable to come to any understanding with Israel regarding certain significant elements. They include the opening of a sea port in Gaza, restoring unfettered links between Gaza and the West Bank and re-opening of the Gaza airport. Israel claims that such measures will have to be agreed upon and will depend largely on how the Palestinian Authority dismantles militant groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Israel, through their evacuation of settlers from illegally occupied territory has successfully carried out an excellent public relations exercise. Israel has ended its 38-year occupation of Gaza but continues to retain full control of its border crossings, air space and its territorial waters. Indirectly, the occupation continues, even in Gaza.

The Palestinian leadership finds itself in an unenviable position. They will now have to fight the Palestinian militants with both their hands tied behind their back. They will have to use their influence to create discipline and stop militant attacks on Israel or Israeli settlements in occupied territory. They will have to do this to achieve the carrot of further evacuation of occupied territory. In the meantime, they will also have to withstand criticism from militants that they are being denied economic opportunities and freedom of movement.

I believe that latent tension within Gaza is very high. Over-populated Gaza already has more than its share of headaches. Very little investment is going into the territory. Consequently, unemployment is on the rise. This is leading to frustration among the working age Palestinians. Infrastructure in Gaza has also been seriously affected during the last four years, thanks to aggressive Israeli policy.

The Quartet must understand that if the peace process is to move forward, sufficient funds must be placed at the disposal of the Palestinian Authority. There has to be a visible peace dividend. This will be the only way to contain militant tendencies and strengthen the hands of moderate Abbas.

The Palestinian leadership has got just a few months to prove their vision of peace ending armed struggle, bringing Israel to the negotiating table and moving towards a Palestinian state. Legislative elections in Palestine are set for 25 January 2006 and Hamas is gearing up for a strong showing. This scenario demands that Abbas wins swift political gains with Israel. Otherwise he will become a lame duck.

Israeli-Palestinian contacts, mediated by the US Special Envoy James Wolfensohn have yielded some advances on paper. This includes restoration of infrastructure and allowing Palestinian produce into Israel. They have to be translated into practice. Palestinians will also have to be reassured that Israel's border barrier is not directed towards further grabbing of Palestinian territory. These are fundamental factors that will determine whether peace will be ushered into the region.

Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief and Omar Sulaiman, head of the Egyptian intelligence services have just been to Palestine. They have tried to persuade militant groups to continue adhering to the truce agreement brokered recently in Cairo. Reports indicate that their views were given a proper hearing. They were however also informed that such a truce would be difficult to maintain if Israel persists in its targeted assassinations and unlawful use of lethal force against alleged Palestinian militants. This is an area where US should urge Israel to use restraint.

Another factor that probably needs to be addressed is creating confidence among the extreme right parties in Israel. They are worried that a final solution will mean being inundated by Palestinian Arabs. For the sake of peace, and as a confidence building measure, it might therefore be a good idea for the protagonists to consider territorial exchange and populated land swap between the heavily Arab populated Wadi area (including Umm el-Fahm) within Israel and the large Jewish settlement blocs east of the Green Line on the West Bank. This is a new development that merits serious attention and scrutiny. It might facilitate the process of peace among militant Israelis.

Bangladesh is totally committed to the realisation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinians and a just and lasting solution of their problem on the basis of UN Security Council resolutions and agreed points in the road-map. This, I believe, will facilitate the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace.

Mere partial withdrawal from a section of occupied territory, accompanied by creation of bigger settlements elsewhere is re-packaging occupation. As the pre-eminent power in the region, Israel has to continue being courageous and gradually evacuate their presence from occupied territory. They will have nothing to lose except perpetual conflict.

Israel should understand that there has already been significant fallout from their action in Gaza. Pakistan has now decided 'to engage with Israel' and talks at the level of their respective Foreign Ministers have been held in Istanbul, Turkey on 1 September, 2005. Pakistan is also tapping into the American Jewish lobby through the American Jewish Congress. This change in policy is officially being attributed by Pakistan to the Gaza pullout being 'a turning point' and an encouraging step towards the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state. These measures may also be construed as Pakistan's effort to repair its tarnished image and be seen as a moderate Islamic state. This is indeed an interesting exercise and Bangladesh may carefully monitor how things develop. They might need to prepare themselves also for possible future review of policy. It may be added here that Israel currently has full diplomatic relations with Mauritania, Egypt and Jordan and a handful of Muslim majority states including Turkey.

The Palestinian leadership also has to be reasonable and ensure cessation of militant attacks and violence. These is no other path but negotiation. Mutual compromise will have to be the order of the day.

Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador -- any response to mzamir@dhaka.net