17-years after Israel ceded Gaza for prospective Palestinian State, I.D.F. ex-Surgeon General Arye Eldad takes stock, revises outlook

Israelis take cover in bomb shelter fearing Palestinian rocket launched
from Gaza at Kiryat Malachi Nov 15, '12 (Uriel Sinai, Getty Images)

This week in 2005, Israel withdrew all Jewish life (and its military defenders) from Gaza to enable Palestinian Muslims to demonstrate the peace and safety they would offer Israelis from a prospective Palestinian state. 

But 17-years later, how much safer has that left Jews living north of the now, closer, southern border with Gaza?

Israel evacuated 21 communities in Gush Katif, Gaza (and 4 in Northern Samaria) to evidence Palestinian intentions

Iran-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad launches 100's of rockets
at Israel over a week. 7 Aug '22 (Reuters:Mohammed Salem)

What peace for Jews have they demonstrated in all this time?

Since Israel's withdrawal of 8,000 Jewish civilians from Gush Katif, Gaza, Palestinians in Gaza have launched (among other acts of terrorist violence) infiltrations of Israeli territory in the form of rockets, mortars, and wildfire balloons in the following numbers:

2005: 574 mortar shells and 286 Qassam rockets were fired at Israel in 2005. These caused 6 deaths and 68 were injured.<br> 2006: 1,247 rockets and 28 mortars were fired at Israel at Israel from the Gaza Strip.<br> 2007: 2,807 rockets and mortars were fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip. 2008: 1,575 rockets and 1,528 mortars were fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip. 2009: 569 rockets and 289 mortars (a total of 858) were fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel. 2010: 150 rocket launches and 215 mortar launches at Israel. 2011: 680 rockets, mortars and Grad missiles were fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel. 2012: 2,221 rockets, 196 mortars, injuring 68 Israelis and killing 6 more. 2013: 52 rockets and 16 mortars were fired at Israel, the vast majority of which came from the Gaza Strip. (This was the fewest such attacks since 2001). 2014: 4,005 rockets, 31 mortars, injuring 60 Israelis and killing 8 more. 2015: 4,594 rockets and mortars launched toward Israel. In August Operation Protective Edge was ended which resulted in an unofficial cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. 2019: 843 rockets and 6 wildfires, injuring more than 100 Israeli civilians and killing 3 more. 2020: 169 rockets 2021: 146 rockets 2022: 1,100 rockets approximately in response to Operation Dawn. About 200 rockets failed and exploded in the Gaza Strip, even killing numerous Palestinians. Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel שיגור רקטות פלסטיניות לעבר ישראל<br> https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8_%D7%A8%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%A4%D7%9C%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%9C%D7%A2%D7%91%D7%A8_%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%9C

 

In August 2005, Israel publicly displayed to the world that its most recent 38-year presence in Gaza had come to an end. Natan Sharansky was the Diaspora Affairs and Jerusalem minister in Sharon’s government at the time, although on May 2, 2005, he resigned from the cabinet because of his fundamental disagreement with the viability of the Disengagement Plan. He has publicly shared the content of his resignation letter, the consequence of his disgust at the evacuation. Sharansky wrote that the Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan, “is a tragic mistake that will exacerbate the conflict with the Palestinians, increase terrorism, and dim the prospects of forging a genuine peace. The guiding principle behind the Disengagement Plan is based on the illusion that by leaving Gaza, we will leave the problems of Gaza behind us.”

- (Source: Jewish Home LA)

Former IDF Surgeon General, Dr. Aryeh Eldad today hosts a radio show and authors books

Former Knesset member Prof. Aryeh Eldad, M.D. 72, was once the Israel Defense Forces’ chief medical officer and later an Member of Knesset of the National Union Party and Otzma LeYisrael for 10 years. He is the son of author and columnist Israel Eldad (Scheib), a leader of the Lehi pre-state underground who is known as one of the greatest ideologists of the right.

Dr. Eldad was the only member of parliament to call for non-violent civil disobedience as a tactic in the struggle against the government. Eldad even walked the few hundred kilometres between the now-evacuated community of Sa-Nur (in the northern West Bank) to Neve Dekalim (south Gaza Strip), in order to attract attention to the opposition of the Withdrawal plan. We recorded this phone interview with him from Israel in May. 

  JooTube: We're speaking with Professor Dr. Aryeh Eldad, former Knesset member from Israel and Chief of Staff of the medical services is that correct? Eldad: It's called the Surgeon General of the Medical Corps. JooTube: He's also a former Knesset member who resides in the Judea / Samaria territories. We had contact initially when you made an historic march from from the center of Israel to Gaza when the government was withdrawing the Gazan Settlements. Would you look back on that time - that was 2005 and what was the goal of the Israeli government - and how has that resulted now some 17 years on? ELDAD: Prime Minister Ariel Sharon wanted to have something, something very big - a spin that will take off his back - the attorney general and the media. He was facing a criminal lawsuit trial on bribes and such affairs. And his advisers told him that only a huge spin will change it. And the spin that the legal system and the media - that were mostly left-wing would be satisfied with - would be a remarkable withdrawal from some of the area of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza Strip. Just a year before that, he said publicly that leaving Gaza Strip will be just like withdrawing from Tel Aviv. But when his own political and private life were at stake, he changed his mind and he chose to to withdraw from Gaza to uproot the settlements. Of course he promised everyone that this would improve the security system in Israel - our defense situation and our international situation - how we are looked at by the international community. And I think the last item was really correct because most of the western world - Europe, the U.S. at the time, wanted Israel to leave all what they call the occupied-territories, what we called our homeland. But he was right that Pres. Bush at that time was satisfied with any withdrawal by Israel - even though he had a different plan - the Roadmap Plan - and sean had to put a lot of effort to convince Bush that unilateral withdrawal from Gaza is not contradicting the baseline of Bush's plan. But he he gained some points with the international community but very very short-term benefits. Because after a few weeks when all the promises about improvement of the military situation around Gaza were not fulfilled and they started shooting rockets from Gaza, the world forgot all the promises and accused Israel of putting siege on Gaza that we just had left. So, about 8,000 people in Gaza Strip and north Samaria were uprooted, became refugees in their own homeland. We needed to put more military forces around Gaza more than we had to invest in this area before that. And from the historic perspective of 17 years or so, Gaza became the largest terrorist territory in the Middle East. It's a terror base! They produce and get rockets that cover most of Israel right now and there's a kind of balance between Israel that is very strong and Gaza that is not very strong. But Hamas couldn't care less about the lives of the people who lived there so they are ready to send rockets into Israel even though they know that we may retaliate it will cost them in many areas and lives and buildings and infrastructures. But they see their weakness as a kind of benefit in this kind of conflict. So Ariel Sharon was badly mistaken by his move that wasn't for the sake of Israel but his own sake. JOOTUBE: Yes. So for those who are considering well if the issue is the occupation as the enemies of Israel the Left and Islamists would like to see Israel withdraw from from Judea and Samaria or to create a Palestinian State alongside which would involve moving the Jewish communities, how do you see that resulting? Would that be a positive for Israel ultimately in image or in practice? ELDAD: It will be catastrophic because <b>the demand of Israel to withdraw from Judea and Samaria is based on a misdiagnosis of the conflict</b>. A lot of people from outside (and many people in Israel) think that the conflict between the Israeli and the Arabs is <b>a territorial conflict</b>. And the way to solve the territorial conflict will be by partition by the vision of the land - we will have our part they will have their part it will be fine. But we can record about 50 different <b>attempts to divide the land of Israel</b> between Jews and Muslim, between Israelis and Arabs for the past hundred years and <b>they all failed</b>. And each attempt ended up in a worse bloodshed and there was a loss of lives both Jews and Arabs. And people really refuse to to see the situation as <b>a misdiagnosis of the conflict</b> because this is not a territorial conflict. If it was a territorial conflict one of the many attempts to divide the land would bring peace. But if the conflict <b>is a religious war</b>, it's a Holy War, it's a clash of <b>opposing ideologies</b>, there's no chance that giving up more land would cure the disease - because <b>the disease comes from a different root</b>. And if it's really <b>the Muslims against the Jews on the land of Israel</b> - because forever and ever <b>the land of Israel will be a Waqf</b>-land - a land that was once ruled by the great Caliphate of the Muslims. And it's <b>an obligation for every Muslim to go on with the Holy War until it frees the land from the hands of the infidels - Christians or Jews or whatever. This is the real root of of the war!</b> So, giving up more lands might satisfy the eyes of the anti-Israelis / anti-Semites all over the world, but of course <b>it will NOT solve the problem in the Middle East!</b> JOOTUBE: Your approach to this is not purely ideological because you reside very close to these areas. How close are these areas to you geographically? ELDAD: Which areas? JOOTUBE: Oh I'm saying what they call the Judean Samaria known as the West Bank and the Arab communities close to the Jewish communities. So I say the Muslim communities. ELDAD: Well I live in what I call today in Samaria or the West Bank I live in which is about 15 minutes away from Jerusalem and it's the heartland of Israel and I'm familiar with the problem even before what they called the occupation because they think the occupation started in 1967 with the Six Day War and they forget that the P.L.O. the Palestinian Liberation Organization was established in 1964 - three years before the Six Day War of '67 - so what occupation did they speak about at that time? They spoke about the very fact that Israel was created on what they think is an Arab land so the Six Day War was just an event on the map of history and it didn't start any occupation of course. JOOTUBE: Yes, so that was historically developed. The P.L.O. was developed in connection with the KGB or international purposes wasn't it? ELDAD: Maybe I didn't see any proof of that. I know that Soviet Russia supported the Palestinian issue from, not from the very beginning, but from the early '50s in 1947 the Foreign Minister of Soviet Russia - group we voted for the Partition of the land creation a Jewish State but later they adopted a position that supported all the Arab states and the Palestinians they sent them huge amounts of weapons and munitions for many years in the '50s in the '60s. It changed a little bit when Soviet Russia collapsed and there was no more Communist regime but the involvement of Russia in Syria, for example right now, shows that they still have deep interest in the Middle East and they will play with this interest either for or against the Palestinians, either for or against Israel. It's a matter of interest, not of justice or anything else. JOOTUBE: What do you think of the Democrat administration in Washington authorizing Russia to be the negotiator for Iran's nuclear future without America, without Israel at the table or even without America at the table? And then now the way things that things are falling apart . . . what do you make of of the Biden Democrat administration's approach towards Iran nuclearizing, vis-a-vis Israel? ELDAD: It's not only Biden administration it was except for for the years of Pres. Trump that was very clear about it most all of American president in the past 20 or 30 years that, let's say 20 years, that ignored Iran's efforts to reach nuclear weapon and they thought that impeachment will convince Iran to to stop this production or to reduce it. It again reflects a deep misunderstanding of the motivation of Iran. If Biden thinks that Iranians are as rationalist as the western leadership it's true but their rationale is different - their logic is different from ours. They wouldn't mind sacrificing millions of their own citizens in a war that will be ordered for them and we show this in the time of Iran-Iraq war thirty years ago. Biden thinks that if he will sign an agreement with Iran he will be able to to stop or reduce the nuclear production in Iran the European knows the truth but they could kill us they hope that they will not suffer from an Iranian nuclear bomb and if Israel will be attacked they'll be very sad but not more than that we see we see how they really react in in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in this war. They sent them weapons they support them morally, but they they are not trying to stop Russia and they will not try to stop Iran. Once Biden left Afghanistan and doing his best to leave Iraq as well you can understand why the Iranian are quite sure that they are not in any danger to to be attacked by the us if they reach the threshold and pass over it and run to a nuclear bomb within a few months the only the only state in the world that will fight Iran will be Israel. JOOTUBE: Do you believe that the as some do that this administration in Washington is trying to set up Israel in other words to to to force Israel's hand into a preemptive attack against Iran which would from a diplomatic perspective in the in the same way that retaliatory attacks against Hamas have resulted in attacks against Jewish people in the diaspora that would also reflect against the the Jewish members of the diaspora because of whatever collateral damage against civilians occurs in It's a little far-fetched, I think. I'm not in this kind of theories I think I couldn't care less they don't want Israel to to be involved but they if if we if we have to to fight Iran they will not be very sad I don't think that they calculate that this will create pressures against Israel it's really it's the same kind of processes that passed the at the beginning U.S. the 20th century when they hesitated and didn't enter early enough to First World War and then Second World War and the lessons that they've learned from being involved in in wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan was very bitter I mean they didn't win this war. And once you have that experience with your ability to be involved in long-term military conflicts overseas- they are not running to do to be involved in a new one in against Iran. They think it will not be any good for the U.S.interest, I don't think that is Israel to be to be punished or damaged or crippled or destroyed but they don't want you to be the soldier or the policeman of the world. So if WE will have to fight Iran they'll not be very sad but they will send us more more critical items of ammunition and weapons if we run out of them but not more than that. What if (Based on the Obama influence during his eight years and now) what if the United States which does joint military exercises with Israel and has some familiarity with and influence with their decision makers what if they say don't preemptively attack the way that they have already said don't do anything without telling us first and don't do anything even if we tell you no and if Israel defies that I think that was clearly the situation with the Obama administration that such threats were faced before the Israeli government at the time before Netanyahu and Netanyahu wasn't brave enough to test it. Certainly Bennett or Lapid will not be brave enough if Biden will put such a threat in front of us. But I think this situation is a little different. I don't have proof for that just kind of gut feeling - that the anti-Israeli feeling of Obama was much worse than Biden's at the Israeli feeling.<br> JOOTUBE: Well that's to imply that Obama has a little influence in this administration anyway at the moment when it seems like Biden does not have a full influence based on his faculties. ELDAD: That might be - i'm not very familiar with what's going on behind the curtains in Washington. JOOTUBE: I see. So what do you see as the big picture here because in America - also from 2000 - we're now 21 years since the 9/11 attacks and it seems that recognition, an acknowledgement of Islamic imperialism - instead of becoming more well known and recognized, has become more taboo, what do you see as the connection between Islamic or Islamist imperialism from Iran for instance and the Palestinian cause? ELDAD: Well, there's no ideological connection. There's only a game of interests that does these two. The Iranians are Shiite the Palestinians are Sunnis. Iranians are ready to kill millions of Sunni all over the world but in certain moments in history they can find forces in order to to fight Israel. I don't think that the issue is ideological but tactical and political. And the fact that Iran is using proxies, like Hezbollah and Hamas, and others in Yemen for example, is the way that they wish to become an empire to put their influence all over the Middle East. Israel is disturbing them we are in the middle and therefore we became from a very good friend of Iran. I visited Iran in the early '70s in time of the Shah and with the Muslim regime he became an enemy and I think that the United States is far from understanding the meaning of the of Iranian effort and the Muslim efforts. I think Samuel Huntington in his "Clash of Civilizations" at the end of the 20th century understood it perfectly and he understood that the one of the possibilities of the next World War will be between Islam and the rest of the world. The United States is far from understanding it and even among those those experts and politicians who understand it - the political correctness forbids them from saying Islam is a terrorist religion, Islam borders are bleeding, Islam is irredenta - which H\untington was very clear to to say. JOOTUBE: Yeah, so the political correctness would be a nice way of putting it. But what about the officials in Washington today? Do you think that there has been a change relative to the tradition in the United States treating Israel as an ally - as Michael Oren wrote in his book called "Ally" during his time under the Democrat administration of Obama. That maybe there's a secret hate and embracing of the enemies of Israel within Washington and perhaps other EU capitals? ELDAD: (There) might be. I wouldn't be able to assess it from here. JOOTUBE: How about the solution that you see for - because it seems like this Iran deal - so we say the nuclear deal - even though it's on a temporary pause because of the Ukrainian situation - what do you see is the is the future for that? ELDAD: I think that sooner or later, Israel will have to attack. JOOTUBE: With support from outside? ELDAD: It would be nice but I don't expect it. JOOTUBE: The Abraham Accords, that where the Israeli Air Force has been training with other other air forces, Arab air forces as an example? Greece? ELDAD: The Abraham Accord is important for this - not only from the fact that some of the states that we have now agreement with have their own military capabilities but from the very fact that now we have bases that are much or we can not that we have them - but we will be able to use these bases and are very close to Iran and that improves our situation. Before that we we had to use air-fueling of our bombers and jet aircraft and now either to fly through Turkey, Azerbaijan or other routes. Now, we at least theoretically, have much closer bases and much safer routes to most of the nuclear sites in Iran by the benefits of Abraham Accord. JOOTUBE: Until this time people have been concerned that there was a hundred thousand rockets in Lebanon that are pointed at Israeli targets and that they would rain down rockets as Hezbollah has threatened. What would an attack from Israel - what would that mean for the potential damage to Israel now that they're providing more guided missiles the former Soviet Union is providing a weaponry that that could target Israeli vulnerable places with a much more specific specificity? ELDAD: It will mean severe damage to infrastructures and the death of thousands of Israelis. JOOTUBE: How about this government - the current Israeli government? Do you believe that they would undertake such a mission with knowledge that that it may be politically damaging for them? ELDAD: Right now they don't have the power to remove a P.L.O. flag from the Dome of the Rock - or to cross the street! I can't see them taking responsibility for a war against Iran - but they are a kind of very short-term government they will not survive very long. JOOTUBE: I see. Have you kept your hat in the in the ring, as they say, of politics - that you might be part of another coalition? ELDAD: No. JOOTUBE: No that you're not politically active anymore? ELDAD: No, I am not. JOOTUBE: What are you putting your attention and energy towards these days? ELDAD: I have a daily radio show. I write a weekly column at one of the papers in Israel. I write books. JOOTUBE: Is there an English website that people can follow you and subscribe to your advisement? ELDAD: No, only Hebrew. I only have interest in Israel. I'm not trying to educate American Jewry because I actually almost gave up on them. I think those who support Israel from far away and not make aliyah and do not make aliyah and don't come here - they will help us in time of war but I'm not trying to convince them or to send my words over. I'm trying to concentrate on Israelis here and now to convince them what is the right thing and what is the right way to to act here. JOOTUBE: It's certainly much more important especially when you don't have confidence in this government. Do you see a viable solution for the Palestinian nationalist movement which has support obviously from both the Muslim world and the Europeans? ELDAD: I can't see any peace in the near future. Although not in in the next hundred years or so. If the real roots of the war are religious and it's a holy war or ideological war, we will not have peace with the Palestinians. We may reach a long-term arrangements with them that will reduce bloodshed and friction. I think for the long-term, recognition of Jordan as a Palestinian State may stabilize the region. But it will not solve the conflict and it will not solve the problem and we will have to to fight for our existence for any future that i can foresee. JOOTUBE: I thank you so much for this opportunity to share your thoughts and your experience.

Ariel Sharon’s political dreams were far from reality. The withdrawal from Gaza did not bring peace with the Palestinians, nor support from world powers. It did not bring harmony to the region of any kind. Israel is not, and has never been a stronger nation as a result of the evacuation. Moreover, the event permanently shamed Sharon’s otherwise meaningful political career, which was the opposite of what Sharon anticipated.