|
|
||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Solving the Abu Sneneh puzzle Here is the problem: As it stands, the Palestinians control the strategic Abu Sneneh neighborhood. Palestinian snipers positioned there can, at any time, shoot down at the Jewish community of Hebron. On the one hand, Sharon "absolutely" rules out the possibility of evacuating the Jewish community in Hebron, terming Hebron the location of "the deepest roots any people have" - the 4,000 year link embodied in the Tomb of the Patriarchs located in Hebron. Sharon also promises that the first stage of his administration's "campaign" vis-à-vis the Palestinians is "to restore security and create the conditions for negotiations." The obvious military solution to this security challenge is to retake the strategic hill. Something that we were assured by Hebron Accord supporters would be child's play. But Sharon's interview makes clear that such a move is not in the cards. "Every step here is irreversible," Sharon explains, "because if we have to hit a terrorist and for that specific purpose we have to enter Area A [under full Palestinian control], that is possible. But to take back sections of Area A that were transferred to the Palestinian Authority is impossible." What then is the solution? How can Israel remove the existential threat to the Jewish Community of Hebron that Abu Sneneh represents without permanently taking it back? Last night the IDF showed the answer to this problem when they bulldozed a row of buildings on the western edges of Khan Yunis that had been used by the Palestinians for attacks against Israeli targets. The IDF does not have to retake Abu Sneneh. Instead it can level it. This would not take a month. It would not take a week. In fact, when one considers the huge bulldozers that the IDF has, it might not take even a day to clear Abu Sneneh. To clear Abu Sneneh so that Palestinian snipers would have no cover if they tried to shoot from the then empty hill. And with orders to shoot anyone who appears on the hill with a rifle, Israel could easily insure that Abu Sneneh remains a "weapons free area". Will Israel be criticized? Absolutely. But probably not much more than we are already criticized when we take considerably smaller actions. This, by the way, is one of the important lessons that Israeli policy makers have yet to learn: hitting six targets or sixty targets gets the same 23 seconds on the evening news in America and the same comment from the State Department spokesman. So when you take an action make it significant, not piecemeal. Bold action? Certainly. But if Sharon is serious about delivering security to the Jews of Hebron then he has to be willing to take bold action. Anything short of permanently removing the Palestinian snipers from Abu Sneneh means giving the Palestinians the option to, at any time of their choosing, renew the siege on the Jews of Hebron. And that constant threat is the very opposite of the security that Sharon promises. 2. Why the apology? The IDF investigated the incident and based on the testimony of eye witnesses to the incident concluded that the soldiers did EXACTLY what they were supposed to do under the circumstances. Yet instead of praising the soldiers, Sharon, under American pressure, apologized for the action. Israeli media reports since then have frequently not even mentioned that this was an incident of Israelis RETURNING FIRE. This was a serious blunder that sends the wrong message to the army and to the world. Instead of mumbling an apology, Sharon should have invited the soldiers involved in the incident to meet him. The message should be clear: we put the lives
of our men above diplomatic niceties. And if someone tries to kill our
men we don't care who they are. No one enjoys immunity.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
© 2001 Koret Communications Ltd. All rights reserved. Terms of Use. |
