10 Differences

... Let us now turn the clock from 1982 to the 2005 lightning bolt process of the Sharon government, which has suddenly adopted the position of the Israel Communist Party, in favor of "territory before peace."

Let us look at the ten fundamental differences between the two situations:

1. 1982 involved ceding land to an Arab state making peace, while 2005 involved ceding land to a PLO promising continued warfare with Israel.
2. Yamit and its surrounding agricultural settlements were of little significance to to the economy of the state or people of Israel. Katif provides $62 million of agricultural exports for Israel, along with hundreds of teachers for the communities of the Western Negev.
3. Yamit and its surrounding agricultural settlements held little strategic significance for Israel. However, Katif's location in five parts of Gaza was planned as a way of slowing the advance of any potential invasion from south, while allowing vital intelligence listening posts for continuing surveillance of Gaza and the sea. Meanwhile, all four hilltop settlements slated for abandonment in the Shomron are places from where the PLO can attack anywhere on the coastal plain of Israel
4. Compensation being offered is much smaller. The Florsheim Institute of Social Research has shared with its research with the Knesset to show that the government offers less than one tenth of what was offered to the people in Yamit.
5. The Israeli government cannot show that there is any peace treaty or any inkling of a peace arrangement with the PLO, despite the fact that the brochure issued on May 1st, 2005 by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicates that "disengagement will lead to peace".
6. While people in Yamit and its surrounding agricultural settlements were there for an average of 5 years, most of the families in Katif have lived there for as long as 25-30 years.
7. Yamit residents were never demonized by the Israeli gov't media outlets. For the past year, the Israeli government-owned-and-operated TV and Radio media has consistently portrayed the residents who oppose their eviction as unreasonable fanatics and worse.
8. Yamit residents had three years to plan their future from the time of the signing of the April 1, 1979 Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty on the White House lawn until its implementation on April 30th 1982, when the settlements in the Sinai were uprooted. In contrast, the Katif/Shomron communities have to plan their future from the day of Knesset ratification of the compensation bill in February 2005 until August, 2005, when the law evicted them from their homes and farms, or face the prospect of criminal prosecution.
9. While Israeli Israel government officials maintained a continuing dialogue with the people of Yamit, Israeli cabinet officials have for the most part refused to speak with them. The Secretary of Kadim in Shomron shows that all letters to Israeli cabinet officials to ask them why they were demolishing their community of 21 years went unanswered. Residents of Ganim who decided to leave were denied requests to meet with cabinet members and say that they were treated like criminals throughout the process. Katif residents only heard about the details of their abandonment from radio and internet reports, while cabinet members would not answer requests to meet with them. And when Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz did come to the Katif community center, I witnessed his refusal to answer any questions.
10. While the June 6th, 2004 provision in the Israel government decision clearly states that no homes or assets from Jewish communities would be ceded to anyone "involved in terrorist activity," the government of Israel simply eliminated this clause from its June 23rd, 2004 agreement with the World Bank, and the Israeli Foreign Ministry brochure of May 1st, 2005 simply eliminated the clause. Such an omission allows PLO warlord Muhammad Dahlan, fingered by Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in the Wall Street Journal of June 2nd, 2002 as the man responsible for the campaign of cold-blooded murder against the citizens of Israel, to be the man whom Israel is nurturing to take over assets of abandoned Jewish properties. This, despite the fact that Olmert stated in that article that Dahlan should be executed by Israel for his crimes that included murdering Israeli schoolteachers and costing Israeli children their legs in a deliberate terrorist attack on a school bus. Imagine what would have happened if, while consoling the people of Yamit, we would have broken the news to them that the Islamic Brotherhood of Egypt would be taking control of their homes and property. Nobody sees the analogy as we plunge headlong into the so-called "Road Map."