|
|
||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Settlements and terror, Omri Sharon and
Yossi Sarid 1. Settlement activity - positive catalyzer This question drives much of what is happening here. After all, if time is on Arafat's side he has nothing to lose trying his luck with terror to wear down the Jewish State. How can Israel convince Arafat that time is not on his side? Declarations are just talk and an improved security force can be offset by improvements on the other side. But there is one area that tips the scales in Israel's favor. One area in which an Israeli gain can be seen as a permanent Palestinian loss. And that area is settlement activity. Every additional row of houses, every new neighborhood, every growing community takes another chip off of the pile that the Palestinians can hope to ultimately wrest from Israel's hands. That is why the settlement issue is so critical to the Palestinians. That is why settlement activity can serve as a catalyst for serious negotiations while a settlement freeze only encourages Arafat to continue with his ridiculous demands. 2. Now going to do everything? The admission that "we have not yet exhausted all the possibilities for stopping terror" stands in sharp contrast to previous claims made by the Prime Minister and in official IDF statements that "everything IS being done to stop terror." Sharon's admission is significant because detractors of the "let the IDF win" school have claimed that Sharon's failure to stop terror proves that it is in fact impossible to significantly limit terror via military means. Sharon's admission that "we have not yet exhausted all the possibilities for stopping terror" is essentially an admission that he has yet to put the "let the IDF win" concept to the test. 3. Sharon's son - family ties are not the issue The family relationship is irrelevant. The real issues apply to Omri Sharon, as they should to any individual recruited to act in this position: First: Does the person have any possible conflict of interest and if so, what measures can and are being taken to address this problem. Second: Is there any security-related problem with this individual? I can well appreciate Sharon's decision to appeal to the courts to allow him to use the services of his son. But for the sake of good government I would also expect him to address the above issues in a process that is subject to some form of reasonable oversight. Such a move would be an important step towards good government, as it would help to introduce standards that should be applied to ALL individuals called upon to act on behalf of the prime minister. 4. Sarid - enemy of peace That's right. He did not tell him that he should immediately stop the violence. Stop the terror. Stop the killing. Again. Sarid encouraged Arafat to link an end to Palestinian violence to a settlement freeze. In the course of the meeting, Egyptian President Mubarak announced a cease-fire. And while it was a misunderstanding, the fact remains that before there was even a chance to clarify what Mubarak was talking about there was Arafat, sitting with Sarid, and Sarid encouraged Arafat to link an end to Palestinian violence to a settlement freeze. So there was no cease-fire. Is Sarid a "friend of peace" or an "enemy of peace"? Remember every time there is an act of terror:
Sarid did not tell Arafat that he should immediately stop the violence.
Instead, he encouraged Arafat to link an end to Palestinian violence to
a settlement freeze.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
© 2001 Koret Communications Ltd. All rights reserved. Terms of Use. |
