engaging the disengagement

honestly, i don't know what to think. for months i agreed with the likes of Naomi Chazan, who I heard speak in October '04, and other members of the faltering israeli left, who have warned against the disengagement, both for its unilateral nature and for fear that leaders would view it as a substitute for rather than precursor to bilateral talks with the palestinians. however, honestly, this seems to be a huge step. i haven't been reading much of what the left opposition to the disengagement is saying, besides stressing that it not be the end-game solution. maybe they're saying it's all a big publicity stunt and that the palestinians aren't actually getting much.

i suppose we'll see what happens when it's over. as i write, haaretz is reporting that 16 of 21 gaza settlements have already been evacuated and it's only day 4. will there be civil war? will missiles be launched over the green line now as the right insinuates, proving that gaza alone might not even be sufficient as a first step? i don't know.

what i do know is that this is really going to continue wreaking havoc on israel internally. i wish i was taking the class i took on israeli society (with tamir sorek) right now. when i took that class, it was just a dead-end depressing time, in the middle of the second intifada (2003), when more people were being killed by the day and it seemed clear that the geneva initiative wasn't taking hold beyond the fringe. but now it would be really interestign to discuss these issues, because a main focus of the course was on the internal splits between religious and secular and between elite and poverty-stricken, and the intrsection of those divides.

even though it came from ariel sharon, for whom i would never have expected to have anything but fightin words, it seems like it might be the spark to light the internal struggle which was going to have to happen sooner or later. clearly, such a struggle would not be pleasant for anyone involved, but what i could never understand about the people who kept saying, well, we can't give land back, because they don't deserve it right now, or we can't do this, or we can't do that: did they honestly see the current situation as sustainable, as somethign that could continue the way it's been for the past 5 yrs (or the past 38 years) for much longer?

Yair Sheleg writes in Haaretz:

In recent years, there was an unofficial status quo between the religious right and the liberal left: On the one hand, the liberal left railed against the settlements, but never dared to evacuate them (including in the context of the Oslo agreements) out of an understanding that this was the apple of the right's eye, and out of a sense of what the consequences could be. On the other hand, the religious right railed against the control the liberals have over the legal system, the media, academia - in fact all the systems that create public opinion - but in actual fact did not wage an all-out war to change the situation, both because it was preoccupied with struggles over the territories as well as out of an understanding that these institutions were the apple of the liberals' eye.

He writes of a "deal that fell through," and seems to imply that the religious right will no longer hold up its end of the "deal," now that it has been betrayed. I agree with Sheleg's assessment of the way in which the disengagement represents a huge twist in Israeli politics and a huge departure from the corrupt and undemocratic status quo deals of the coalitions. But I'm not quite sure if the religious will be able to force their agenda in other matters as revenge, as Sheleg claims. And who's to say this might not lead to more honest brokering between the factions; more of a recognition of who actually represents the will of the majority and who doesn't...
TO BE CONTINUED (maybe)

8.19 update:

wow. it gets better and better.

Condoleeza Rice is actually towing the line of the Israeli left, "empathizing with Israel," while reminding her that the Gaza pullout is not enough, urging withdrawal from more of the West Bank and decreased travel restrictions on Palestinians.