|
|
|
Dear Debra V. Wilson,
Responding to an Op Ed that advocates further pressure on the Palestinians in the service of "changing their narative", Arye Pellman, former Deputy Head of Shin Bet and CIS deputy chairman, suggests an alternative approach...
Yours,
Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Amnon Reshef
Chairman
* * *
Unnecessary Bloodbath
Aryeh Pellman, former Deputy Head of the Shin Bet
Member of Commanders for Israel's Security
Published in Haaretz | August 10, 2019
Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, former head of research in Israel's Military Intelligence and CEO of the Strategic Affairs Ministry, tries to make the case for the importance of changing the Palestinian narrative and for unilaterally applying Israeli law to Jewish settlements in the West Bank. (Haaretz, July 31, 2019).
Without changing the Palestinian narrative that rejects Israel's existence, he argues, there can be no significant progress toward peace negotitations. Arguing with this interpretive statement is useless, as it ignores the unswerving position of the Palestinian Authority and its regional and global allies, that their goal is to bring about the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. It may very well be that Kuperwasser excels at mindreading, and that quote aficionados will find references to his approach in things said by one Palestinian or another. But as one who believes that what mighty Israel does is far more important than what the weak Palestinian Authority secretly dreams about, the flaw in his claim is that it is premised on the assertion that Israel is making an efforts to negotiate peace. For a decade now, this claim is not supported by evidence.
I maintain that before we try to change others' positions, we need to decide clearly and unequivocally what is in Israel's best interest. Once we make that determination, it is in our power to shape a reality that promotes the national objectives we have set ourselves, even if the conditions for its full realization do not exist yet.
What is our national objective? What is the vision of our members of cabinet and others in the coalition as reflected not only in public statements but in the many bills for partial or full annexation of the West Bank and its residents? Who and what exactly should the nations of the world, the Palestinians, and especially Israelis beilieve? Kuperwasser's arguments or decision makers' deeds? Even those presenting the Palestinian narrative as one that rejects an arrangement must face the challenge of mobilizing the support of the regional and international community in changing it (rather than rely solely on the Trump administration). Israel's actions, Knesset annexation initiatives, our leaders' statements, deprive such an effort of any credibility.
Kuperwasser further states that inflicting economic harm on the Palestinian Authority, the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem and a next step of applying Israeli law to settlements in the West Bank, all add up to an effective whip that will force the Palestinians to change their narrative. He is correct in one thing: Commanders for Israel Security (CIS) - whose close to 300 members are all former senior Israeli security officials - is united in its assessment that the application of Israeli law to West Bank territory will undermine Israel's security to an unprecedented degree. Not only are we not party to the artificial differentiation between "applying Israeli law" and "annexation", but following a comprehensive study of the issue - which was presented to decision makers, the defense establishment and is publicly available - we identified the chain reaction triggered by annexation legislation, which ends with a re-occupation of the entire area, with Israel managing and funding the needs of millions of Palestinians, all following a bloodbath.
We will be happy to see the Knesset avoiding dangerous annexation measures, or, should it fail to avoid them – to discover that Kuperwasser's optimism was justified, and that the "domino effect" we warn about will not materialize. But should Israel's security be jeopardized based on one's optimism? Should we gamble so for the sake of the odd objective of changing the Palestinian narrative? Whoever advocates such a measure must vouch to the people of Israel that a decision to annex will not result in bloodshed, and should he is proven wrong and our prediction materializes, he knows how to extract our country from forever controling the lives of millions of Palestinians.
Finally, Kuperwasser should have bothered to check the CIS's position before attributing to us support for dangerous unilateral concessions and dismantling of Jewish settlements. That is completely unfounded. The CIS "Security First" interim plan outlines measures for civil separation while retaining security control, and without dismantling even a single settlement until an arrangement is reached. The plan demonstrates what it takes to boost security cooperation with the Palestinian Authority, including creating territorial contiguity between Palestinian enclaves (Areas A and B)that are surrounded by Israeli-controlled territory (Area C), thus enabling the deployment of Palestinian police which is essential to contain terrorist organizations, mainly Hamas. In essence, these measures will upgrade security, increase stability, reduce friction between populations, and, over time, form the basis for a demilitarized Palestinian state.
Knesset advocates of "annexation now", both inside and outside the government, bear heavy responsibility for the very future of the Zionist enterprise, which is dear to them as it is to us. They better study the subject well before risking our future and the future of generations to come.
Aryeh Pellman is a former Deputy Head of the Shin Bet and is a member of Commanders for Israel's Security.
Link to the article in Haaretz (Hebrew).
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment