THE WELFARE OF THE ISRAELI PUBLIC FIRST
(Commentary by Ze'ev Schiff, "Ha'aretz", Feb 27, 1996, p.B1)
Hesitation and indecisiveness over how to respond to terrorist acts committed by suicide attackers have characterized the statements of almost all official spokesmen since Sunday's two attacks. The answers were sometimes mumbled and even contradictory. Are Arafat and the Palestinian entity genuinely assisting in the war against terror, or are they doing this matter-of-factly? And within the framework of this war, is the closure on the Palestinian population a correct move, or will it ultimately cause damage? Should the implementation of the agreement between Israel and the PLO be halted until the murderous terror ceases, or not?
All the experts say that the Palestinian entity is fighting terrorism in its own way, but all agree that this is insufficient, and that Arafat has refrained from provoking a real confrontation with HAMAS. Although he hastened to condemn the terrorist attacks and to share in the grief of Israel and of the bereaved families Arafat has also glorified and extolled bus attacker Yihye Ayash (the "Engineer"), declaring a three-day period of mourning for the person behind the murder of so many Israelis, and transforming him into a national hero. Given this contradiction in Arafat's messages, it is clear that he cannot prevent public demonstrations in which HAMAS members portray the bombing of bus #5 on Tel Aviv's Dizengoff Street as a courageous deed. The problem is that we are also engaged, albeit indirectly, in this contradiction, having permitted PNC members such as Leila Khaled to enter the territories even though they supposedly continue to support terrorist activity against Israel.
In responding to terrorism, there are two clearly defined avenues reprisal and punishment, or defense. Punishment is, for example, not withdrawing from Hebron, and delaying the departure until terror ceases, or preventing the movement of merchandise and raw materials to and from the territories. Such measures would constitute a clear violation of the accord. This course of action must not be taken as long as the Palestinian entity does not take a stand supporting HAMAS terrorism. It must also be remembered that the terror's success is also a failure for Israel, not only the Palestinian entity.
The situation is different when talking about a defensive posture, including active defense against those dispatching and aiding the suicide attackers. One example is the closure. I know of no better defensive mechanism, even though such a closure is not hermetic. Even Jerusalem, virtually an open door, can be closed more effectively. A major factor against the closure is that it distresses the Palestinian population to the point of becoming bitter and offering support for the extremists.
Indeed, the closure does cause economic distress. American economists say that, in 1995, the Gaza Strip's GNP fell by about 5%, primarily as a result of the closure. There are also reports indicating that the Palestinians have responded in the other direction as well; there are Palestinians who have said that the population is suffering due to the lack of consideration on the part of the fundamentalist organizations saying that if the decision has been made to pursue peace, then this should be done wholeheartedly and not sabotaged, and, therefore, caution should be exercised in supporting these groups. Naturally, there are Israeli experts saying that the Palestinian population must be made aware of the price implicit in their support for HAMAS and Islamic Jihad. This is part of the Palestinian entity's maturity process, and it must decide on its plan of action.
In this situation, we must give priority to the welfare of the Israeli public, and not that of the Palestinian public. In choosing between Palestinian economic distress and the continuation of fatal attacks against Israelis, we must first look after ourselves. Palestinian economic distress may be liable to harm the peace process, but it is clear that more funerals of Israeli terrorist victims will most certainly destroy both the peace process and Arafat's regime.