WASHINGTON, June 10 (UPI) -- Despite dissention in Israel's ruling Likud Party and rumors of its possible splintering, Zalman Shoval, former Israeli ambassador to the United States, does not predict its members breaking away over Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan.
Shoval spoke from a Likud perspective on Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan at a Washington Institute for Near East Policy Luncheon Wednesday.
According to the plan, Israel intends to evacuate the 7,500 Israeli settlers living in Gaza amid 1.3 million Palestinians and to dismantle four northern West Bank settlements by October 2005. The plan was passed by a cabinet vote of 14 to seven on June 6. This revised plan, Shoval said, is substantively the same as the original plan agreed to with President George W. Bush.
According to Shoval, the withdrawal will occur in stages starting in March 2005 and will be completed by October of that year. Israel's National Security Council met Wednesday and created an exact timetable as to when the settlements will be evacuated.
Shoval stressed that there is "no formal sequencing or formal conditionality, but Palestinians should not view this as a blank check."
"Unilateral disengagement can the pave way to formal agreement in the future," Shoval said, adding that it is important for Palestinians to know that the withdrawal was not brought about by increased terror.
But to many this is exactly the message that is coming across.
Morton Klein, President of the Zionist Organization of America, said that pulling out of Gaza is a sign that the "terrorists" have won.
"It seems to me that Sharon's proposal to unilaterally give land to Palestinians and throw Jews out of their homes in fact reinforces Arafat's terror campaign and shows (that) terrorist campaigns work," said Klein.
"The only choice (is) to give land away for nothing?" he continued. "It seems to me if you have to make unilateral decisions because you have no partner ... you don't decide to give land to terrorist regime but take land back (to) send a message."
In his talk, Shoval maintained that although the withdrawal should be "viewed soberly," the plan is "the only game in town."
He said that although the current situation could lead to early elections, he does not see Likud splitting.
"In spite of sour taste and acrimony, (the) Likud Party will not split on this issue. It could split in future but not on Gaza," Shoval said, adding that if the argument were over Jerusalem it would be "a different story."
"Likud members of Knesset want to be Likud members," he said, commenting that Minister Without Portfolio, Uzi Landau one of the most vociferous dissenters, is "blue blood Likud" who wants to "change policy, not party."
Klein said however, "I'm told eight to 10 of them (Likud) and growing are thinking of showing a unified stand against Sharon."
He added that "Sharon is now implementing a Labor/Meretz platform, not a Likud platform."
Regarding long-term political damage to Sharon caused by the withdrawal of coalition partners from the cabinet, Shoval said, "Right now he is damaged. I think (that is) one of main reasons he decided a week ago to reject compromise proposals floating around."
Shoval pointed out one addition in the "revised disengagement plan" in which all houses within the evacuated settlements will be destroyed while public facilities would remain standing. No new construction will take place as of June 13, and settlers who move in after that will not be compensated for loss of property.
Calling this amendment "Prozac" for disgruntled Israelis, Shoval described how some Israelis would feel a "sort of visceral, emotional revulsion to see a Hamas or Palestinian flag in the houses left by these settlers."
Ziad Asali, President of America Task Force on Palestine, said that the destruction of houses in the evacuated settlements would be a "prescription of endless hatred on the other side."
Commenting on the unilateral withdrawal as a whole, Asali said: "Palestinian people should be given the right to vote and elect their own representatives even under occupation -- that would give them legitimate partnership. It is not up to Israel to decide who is (an) equal partner or not.
"I see something embryonic, very tentative that could be in the withdrawal," he continued, but destroying houses is "no way to start anything on a positive note."
Agreeing, Professor Steven Spiegel of UCLA called the addition to the withdrawal plan "most unfortunate."
The issue of houses, he said, "should be able to be negotiated since Israel is not withdrawing till next year. There have not been any consistent efforts to explore what Abu Ala (Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia) could produce in order for Israel to have an effective withdrawal."
He added that if Palestinians could not be trusted even with the houses in the settlements, then there would not be a successful withdrawal.
