Observation: Why Migron Residents Should Accept Offer From Netanyahu
Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 23 January 2012

You have every right to be furious and frustrated.

As you see the situation, the whole mess at Migron is the result of
“lawfare” on the part of Peace Now with no individual Arab actually
identified as even owning the land in question. Land that was barren before
there was Jewish construction. A situation in which what is seen as the
decision of a biased court system could have been offset by actions by
others (e.g. legislation).

Now there is an offer on the table that provides for remaining at Migron
until a substitute location is constructed. This would mean the first new
legally sanctioned community since Oslo. And while the offer stipulates
that Migron at its current location would be evacuated when construction was
finished, no one can predict what the conditions and circumstances will be
that many years down the line. The lawyers working for Migron will have
years to battle the legal status of the current location and legislation now
held up because of Migron could no doubt be passed by that time.

Again. The anger and frustration is well understood.

But a very cold decision has to be made: accept an offer that, if nothing
else, postpones the threat of the evacuation of the location by years or
enter into a battle with PM Netanyahu.

Can Migron win such a battle?

Some claim that the national camp could have prevented the destruction of
Gush Katif if it had been willing to exert more force.

I would argue that it is naïve to think that anything – including something
close to a civil war – would have stopped Ariel Sharon when he decided, with
the support of the media and the judiciary, to defy both the mandate he
received in the elections and the clear instruction of the Likud referendum
(that he had promised to honor) and retreated from Gaza.

Yes. Sometimes you lose.

The whole nation lost when Sharon retreated from Gaza.

And the cost of that loss may end up being greater than any of us can yet
imagine.

But that doesn’t mean that a change in tactics could have stopped the
retreat.

For all its importance and significance, Migron is hardly the “last stand”
for the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria

If the offer is accepted, the only precedent it may end up setting is that
communities should be shifted rather than destroyed. But that’s hardly a
precedent since this has already happened before.

As for the overall response to Binyamin Netanyahu:

It is a delicate balancing act.

On the one hand, it serves PM Netanyahu’s interests to face criticism. The
absence of protest would only invite more pressure for Israeli concessions.

On the other hand, exaggerated protest can erode national unity and be very
destructive.

Simply put, there is the danger that the audience takes the exaggerations at
face value and concludes that it has no place in the “game”.

Please don’t get me wrong.

I would be the last one to claim that Binyamin Netanyahu hasn’t made
mistakes.

But that’s not the point.

Again: The question begins and ends with your assessment of the final
outcome if the proposal is not accepted.

The outcome could very well be a bloody evacuation that sets the tone for
future operations, undermines unity towards and within our vital security
forces, and brings about the collapse of the Netanyahu coalition followed by
the rise to power of a “Left Center” coalition bolstered from the outside by
Arab parties.

And with all the tremendous respect and admiration for those encouraging you
to stand firm: please don’t neglect the possibility that they are also
playing out a role.

It most certainly is a hard and frustrating choice.

If nothing else, take the cynical view: accepting the offer postpones the
problem for years.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il