Unilateral Withdrawal from the West Bank Isn’t Worth the Risks

Led by the former head of IDF intelligence, Amos Yadlin, a group of distinguished retired Israeli generals and politicians have released a detailed plan for a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from parts of the West Bank. (Yadlin outlined an earlier version of this plan in Mosaic.) David M. Weinberg is not persuaded:

To its credit, the plan acknowledges a series of realities that are long overdue, beginning with the fact that there is no comprehensive peace deal to be had with the Palestinians any time soon, and it would be a mistake to attempt another frantic John Kerry-style effort to secure such a deal. . . . The plan also stipulates that Israel will retain near-permanent control of the Jordan Valley for security reasons, and indefinite freedom of IDF action against terrorism throughout the West Bank, in all areas, no matter what nice or nasty entity the Palestinians might develop there. . . .

But then Yadlin and his colleagues make a series of spurious and unsubstantiated arguments. First, that by ceding security control to the Palestinian Authority (PA) of some parts of [the West Bank], Israel’s security situation will improve. Second, that the granting of such unilateral goodies to the PA will encourage its moderation and not, rather, teach Palestinian leaders just to ratchet up their demands and outwait Israel—as they have adamantly done over the past 25 years. Third, that by doing so, Israel will gain more international legitimacy and Sunni Arab state cooperation. . . .

After the Israeli withdrawal outlined in the plan, how is Israel going to be able to prevent the fall of Judea and Samaria to Hamas or one of the other jihadist groups now swarming the Middle East? If [Israel] reserves the right to raid the territories regularly in order to root out Hamas cells (which Yadlin correctly insists on), how is that any different from the situation today? And if Israel keeps a significant troop presence on the hilltops and at key junctures, who will really consider this an end to the Israeli “occupation”? . . .

Nor will unilateral moves provide Israel with diplomatic breathing room, as the plan’s proponents claim. Withdrawing from one part of the territories won’t convince anyone that Israel has a right to keep other parts. On the contrary: a partial Israeli pullout will intensify the supposed illegitimacy of its remaining presence in the territories. Every Israeli retreat is taken as proof that the territories are all stolen property that must be returned to their rightful Palestinian owners. Unilateral withdrawals will bolster Palestinian maximalism, not engender Palestinian cooperation or moderation.

Read more at Israel Hayom

More about: Hamas, Israel & Zionism, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, West Bank

It’s Time for Haredi Jews to Become Part of Israel’s Story

Unless the Supreme Court grants an extension from a recent ruling, on Monday the Israeli government will be required to withhold state funds from all yeshivas whose students don’t enlist in the IDF. The issue of draft exemptions for Haredim was already becoming more contentious than ever last year; it grew even more urgent after the beginning of the war, as the army for the first time in decades found itself suffering from a manpower crunch. Yehoshua Pfeffer, a haredi rabbi and writer, argues that haredi opposition to army service has become entirely disconnected from its original rationale:

The old imperative of “those outside of full-time Torah study must go to the army” was all but forgotten. . . . The fact that we do not enlist, all of us, regardless of how deeply we might be immersed in the sea of Torah, brings the wrath of Israeli society upon us, gives a bad name to all of haredi society, and desecrates the Name of Heaven. It might still bring harsh decrees upon the yeshiva world. It is time for us to engage in damage limitation.

In Pfeffer’s analysis, today’s haredi leaders, by declaring that they will fight the draft tooth and nail, are violating the explicit teachings of the very rabbis who created and supported the exemptions. He finds the current attempts by haredi publications to justify the status quo not only unconvincing but insincere. At the heart of the matter, according to Pfeffer, is a lack of haredi identification with Israel as a whole, a lack of feeling that the Israeli story is also the haredi story:

Today, it is high time we changed our tune. The new response to the demand for enlistment needs to state, first and foremost to ourselves, that this is our story. On the one hand, it is crucial to maintain and even strengthen our isolation from secular values and culture. . . . On the other hand, this cultural isolationism must not create alienation from our shared story with our fellow brethren living in the Holy Land. Participation in the army is one crucial element of this belonging.

Read more at Tzarich Iyun

More about: Haredim, IDF, Israeli society