This is my response as a left wing Israeli -
Brennan's response is totally correct, although I want to remind you all that the gaza strip was conquered through the 67 war, and Egypt didn't want it back, so we got stuck with it.
@Ramius75 (with spell check
):
1. So what is your view over this?? will it be more peaceful ?
I'm happy it happens, so is 60% of Israelis.
We could have done so with a peace agreement, but I guess we waited too long for a partner, and decided to do it unilateraly.
We get out of gaza, and have a wall over most of the west bank.
This will provide more security for us, and most of the PA territories will be theirs, delegitimizing terror, and getting the road to peace closer.
---
2. is this a positive step ??
Sure is, for both sides.
---
3. will the isreali troops return if suddenly there are new attacks ??
Well, it will not be sudden.. more like "expected".
The answer depends on how large the attacks and how the PA will handle it.
If it is beyond some gray line, the IAF (air-force) will attack targets.
ONLY if it will be total chaos will we have to periodically get ground troups in for short periods to get at some people..
But again, the current semi-legitimacy of attacking Israel will no longer exist.
Currently, Hamas does rule the Gaza strip (democratically!) like the hizbullah does in south lebanon.
Hamas and the PA are still in negotiations...
---
4. What does this mean to the palestinians ? I'm sure they are very happy atm, but what about the israelis ?
The PA will be able to move freely inside the gaza strip, and by the end of 2005 will have a normal border with Egypt to be able to travel outside.
The Israeli public is very divided on this (there were some minor fears of civil war..), and again, 60% support this action. The 40% that don't are very vocal about it..
The evacuated Israelis will be paid compensations if they leave until the 17th (and signed the nessecary papers) without resistance.
Of course most of the evacuated Israelis (settlers) are politically right-wing, some radical, and hate this move. Still, it has to be done.
---
5. Did ariel sharon made this decision due to foreign intervention ?? how much part did USA play in this ??
I think it was more of his decision.
He was always right-wing, supportive of settlements, and probably got their votes in the elections, but reality bites.
We need to have a clear-cut border, and only then discuss permanent peace and borders - when they have no "settlers" excuse for terror.
The US (A is a continent
) and the roadmap have perhaps helped in some degree, but I don't think it could really make him do such an action.
Maybe I didn't get something here...
