The disengagement from Gaza, from the Israeli point of view, had
the attributes of a defining event. Defining events provide the
potential for change, but not the change itself. The potential is
there in at least four important respects:
1. Democracy prevailed. Unlike other countries in the
20th century under threat of fascism (e.g. Mussolini's march on
Rome, Franco's Spain, the Weimar Republic etc.) where the army
either passively or actively supported the forces of evil, the
Israel Defense Forces (IDF), police and other security forces
behaved in an exemplary fashion. They unequivocally obeyed the
democratically elected civil institutions. It was not Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon they followed but the legitimate decisions of
the government, Knesset and courts. Furthermore, the dignified and
sensitive manner in which the army and police conducted themselves,
can, and should in the future, be presented as a realistic
alternative model when it comes to dealing with Palestinian
protestors inside Israel proper or in the occupied
territories.
2. The right took a severe beating, not a death blow
but painful nonetheless, on both the political and religious
levels. Politically, they were clearly shown the limits of their
power. They failed to even get close to achieving their stated
objective of mobilizing a critical mass of Israelis to block the
withdrawal. Life within Israel went on as normal. All of Peace
Now's predictions on the basis of our earlier surveys as to the
level and ferocity of opposition to be expected were validated. The
settlers themselves, despite highly emotional hysteria, refrained
from violence. The only real problem was the outcast
ultra-religious criminal youngsters who infiltrated the area. The
settlers' leadership, for the first time in 35 years, is not
dictating the national agenda anymore. On the spiritual level, the
extremist rabbis failed "to deliver the goods." They predicted that
"it was not to be," a divine miracle would occur at any moment and
prevent withdrawal. Well, it did happen; there was no miracle. The
Almighty was apparently busy that day or looked the other way. The
long-term impact of this remains to be seen.
3. The Palestinians became a partner. Although
unilateral, the withdrawal was coordinated all the way. The
Palestinians succeeded in imposing discipline in their ranks,
demonstrated pragmatism and sent out the right signals. Given a
positive alternative, when their interests are at stake, they don't
shoot, Hamas, included.
4. Finally, a vitally important lesson has been learned:
settlements can be removed. It is not impossible. This is a
very important precedent. It can be done without the threat of
civil war or the break-up of Israeli society.
What follows is specific data concerning the aftermath, an
integration of the results of surveys carried out following the
disengagement by the Steinmetz Center for Peace Research at Tel
Aviv University, the Dachaf Institute headed by Mina Zemach and our
own survey data at Peace Now. There is a great degree of
inter-study reliability between those surveys.
Majority Rejects a Continuation of Unilateralism
The prevalent view among the Jewish public is that the
disengagement from Gaza is not the end of the story. 71.5% believe
that it is only a first step toward an extensive evacuation of West
Bank settlements that will be carried out in the context of an
agreement with the Palestinians. But at the same time, only a small
relative majority (47.8%) support an evacuation of this kind,
whether in the framework of an agreement with the Palestinians or
in a unilateral fashion, with the clear preference given for an
evacuation that is part of an agreement. 41.8% said they would not
support a far-reaching evacuation in the West Bank under any
conditions.
A comparison with a similar question presented last April reveals
that the rate of supporters of a unilateral disengagement declined
by half (from 26.2% to 13.5%), while there was an increase by
similar rates of those who support an evacuation only in the
context of an agreement (from 27.5% to 34.3%) and of those who
oppose one under any circumstances (from 37.1% to 41.8%).
These findings indicate that after the unilateral disengagement and
the evacuation of the Gaza settlements, the Jewish public generally
rejects applying the unilateral disengagement idea to the West
Bank. The majority is divided into two camps: supporters of an
evacuation in the context of an agreement and opponents of an
evacuation under any circumstances, with a small advantage for the
supporters.
Palestinian Authority Actions Will Impact Israeli Public
Opinion
It is important to emphasize that these results reflect the views
of the Jewish public a short time after the evacuation of the Gaza
settlements, when the difficult images of the evacuation were still
fresh, helping to strengthen the emotional component of the views.
To this should be added the widespread pessimistic assessments of
what was expected from the Palestinians after the IDF had completed
the disengagement from Gaza. A decisive majority of 67.1% believed
a situation of chaos would prevail, with violent struggles between
various organizations. Only 16.4% thought the Palestinian Authority
(PA) would succeed at consolidating its rule in Gaza and
maintaining law and order. Furthermore, a similar majority, 68.4%,
believed there was high or very high chances that after the
withdrawal of IDF forces, the attacks on Israel from this area
would intensify.
Seeking a link between the assessments about what could be
expected, and the degree of support or opposition to evacuating
West Bank settlements, reveals that among those who view the
chances of future attacks from Gaza as low, about 70% support an
evacuation and 20% oppose it, while among those who think such
chances are considerable, 40% support an evacuation and 51% oppose
it. Similarly, the rates of support and opposition to an evacuation
among those who believe the PA will be able to establish its rule
in Gaza come to 70% and 23%, respectively, while for those who
expect it will not succeed, the corresponding rates are 42% and
50%.
Emotional Fatigue or Hope for the Future
Given the background of the difficult struggles that were waged
before and during the evacuation of the Gaza settlements, it may be
of interest to see how the public views the behavior of three of
the main actors that were involved in these struggles - the
settlers' leadership, the settlers themselves, and the security
forces. Regarding the settlers' leadership, a higher proportion of
the public views the degree of responsibility they displayed as low
or very low, 34.5%. 28.2% thought that the settlers' leadership
demonstrated very high or high level of responsibility. The
settlers themselves received a higher rate of positive than
negative assessments. Thus, 49.1% think the settlers' level of
violence was low or very low, whereas only 20.6% viewed their
behavior as very violent or violent. However, the most positive
evaluations went to the security forces: 77.3% say they showed a
great or very great extent of consideration during the evacuation,
compared to 9.1% who saw their degree of consideration as low or
very low. These figures indicate that even among those who opposed
the unilateral disengagement, about 41% of the total Jewish public,
there were many who had a positive view of the security forces'
behavior in implementing it.
Finally, I would add that following the disengagement the Israeli
public was in a state of emotional fatigue. Or perhaps in a wait
and see mood. This is dangerous since the process cannot be put on
hold. Either there will be progress, or we will be facing another
disastrous round of violence, losing the present window of
opportunity. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians need to be
shown evidence that there is real prospect for hope. In this regard
Abu Mazen's' statement that now is the time for the "big Jihad"
meaning, the challenge of economic development, is very helpful, if
it will be followed by deeds. Our challenge is to find the means to
transmit hope to our respective civil societies by reinforcing each
other's demands for positive actions.