The Miracle of Olmert's Convergence Plan

by Haggai Huberman, Israeli journalist and author (written for the religious zionist periodical - Matzav Haruach), translated by Hillel Fendel.

It has not received much press, but the government made history this month when it made a series of decisions with historic significance for Judea and Samaria. Leading the way was Minister of Finance Betzalel Smotrich (Religious Zionism party), who also serves as Minster in the Ministry of Defense. Israel's mini-security Cabinet voted to fundamentally change how lands in Yesha are bought and administered, greatly fortifying the settlement enterprise.

The new changes include:

·         The removal of confidentiality requirements regarding land registry records in Yesha, thus increasing transparency and facilitating Jewish redemption of land

·         The repeal of the Jordanian law prohibiting the sale of real estate to Jews. [Nearly six decades after liberating Yesha, Israel has still never annexed the area, thus leaving some Jordanian laws in effect by default.] This allows Jews to purchase land in Judea and Samaria just as they do in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

·         An upgrade to the holy Tomb of Rachel site in a Bethlehem enclave, which will now have its own municipal administration, providing basic services.

·         Hebron: Building permits in the Jewish community and the Cave of the Patriarchs are now under the auspices of Israel's Civil Administration, instead of the Arab Hebron Municipality. Full municipal powers have now been granted to the Jewish Hebron Administration, which is now able to address residents' needs without having to depend on not-necessarily cooperative PA mechanisms.

At the same time, Israel has up-shifted gears in its war for the overall preservation of the Land of Israel throughout Judea and Samaria. Supervisory and enforcement activity will be applied in Areas A and B (under full and partial PA control, respectively) regarding pollution, water, and archaeological-sites infractions. 

The reason these decisions are so dramatic is because they erase, once and for all, the "vision" that reigned here precisely 20 years ago, when it appeared that the Jewish presence in Yesha was to be curtailed, condensed, and cut down to unsustainable proportions.  

Gloom in 2006

What happened 20 years ago was that Ehud Olmert was elected Prime Minister, shortly after – and on the coattails of – Ariel Sharon's ill-fated Disengagement plan. Just as Sharon withdrew unilaterally from all of Gaza, ultimately leading to several short wars and the Oct. 7^th massacre, Olmert was ready to do nearly the same in Judea and Samaria.

He called his plan the "Convergence," according to which Israel was to dismantle and withdraw from at least 60 Jewish communities, and retain no more than some 7% of Yesha. Like the Disengagement, this plan was also to be implemented unilaterally if agreement with the PA was not reached.

Following the elections of March 2006, the left-wing camp became (seemingly) firmly ensconced in power. The government was led by Olmert's Kadima party (originally founded by Sharon after the Likud largely withdrew its support for the Disengagement), and included Labor, Shas, and the seven seats - a fluke achievement - of the Pensioners' party Gil. The Gaza border was quiet, and the Disengagement was perceived at the time as a wise and safe move.

On May 4^th of that year, Olmert presented to the Knesset his new government, with guidelines stating clearly that "the area of Israel with new borders to be determined by the government, will require the reduction of Israeli settlement areas in Judea and Samaria." That is, the democratically elected prime minister of Israel promised to destroy dozens of Jewish communities, with or without an Arab partner for the move.

On June 14^th, Olmert – a former and long-time Likudnik – announced in Paris after meeting with President Chirac: "The Convergence plan is inevitable. I am determined to continue my path of separating permanently from the Palestinians, to attain safe borders that will be recognized by the international community."

The atmosphere in Yesha at the time was dismal, and many residents feared the worst. Some even began making secret inquiries and preparations regarding the compensation that they assumed would soon be offered them in exchange for their homes.

This was indeed Olmert's plan – but apparently, the Creator of the world had other idea. Just 11 days after his Paris declaration, events took their first sharp turn in a very different direction: Gilad Shalit was abducted from his tank on the Gaza border – and all of a sudden, the Disengagement didn't look like such a bright idea anymore.

Still, Olmert didn't back down, and vowed yet again to continue along his Convergence path. However, just two days later, on July 12, two reserves soldiers – Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev – were kidnapped and ultimately found to have been murdered by Hizbullah terrorists while patrolling Israel's border with Lebanon. At least five other soldiers were killed in that operation. With this, the logic of the unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon of six years earlier – the brainchild of then-PM Ehud Barak – was also called into question.

Quite abruptly, Israel now found itself fighting two wars: the Second Lebanon War, and Operation Summer Rains following the kidnapping of Shalit. Withdrawals from Israeli-held territory, especially without an agreement with the enemy, no longer appeared very wise. On September 4, Olmert was forced to concede, telling the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee:

"Convergence No Longer on the Table"

"What I thought a few months ago regarding the Palestinians, is not correct at present. Our order of priorities, including what to do about the Palestinian problem, is different than it was in the past. At this point, the Convergence is not one of our priorities, as it was two months ago."

A year later, Olmert and the PA's Mahmoud Abbas, hosted by then-President George W. Bush, began trying to negotiate some kind of withdrawal from Yesha in Annapolis, Maryland. Olmert actually offered the PA some 94% of Judea and Samaria – but thankfully, Abbas rejected even this, and the conference ended with no agreement. The diplomats and negotiators packed up and went home, the plans for the abandonment of the Jewish homeland became a form of science fiction, and the Jews of Yesha – and many other Israelis whose lives would have been endangered had the PA been handed control – breathed a loud sigh of relief.

Back in Time

I ask the reader to go back in time to the month of Adar 5766/February 2006, when families in Yesha were quietly consulting with lawyers about receiving compensation. Now, imagine that someone told you then that 20 years hence, the government would not only obviate the need for compensation for the demolition of communities and homes, but would also enable the private purchase of land for the purpose of building communities. How would we have regarded such a “prophet”?

Thankfully, in this month of Adar, once again, things have happily turned upside down. Happy Purim!

Is the Gaza War Being Fought Morally?

Question: “They say that more than 70,000 people have been killed in Gaza, and that 90% of the homes have been destroyed. Is that moral? Are all the residents of Gaza Hamas-supporting murderers?

Answer: This isn’t accurate. We can divide the population into four groups..

A. The fighting circle – Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists, tens of thousands of people. They absolutely must be eliminated.

B. The assisting circle – people who hide weapons in their homes, provide intelligence, and also those who handed out sweets and celebrated on the day of the massacre. This is a very large part of the population.

C. The captive / silent circle – people who oppose Hamas or simply want to live, but are living under a murderous terrorist regime. If they speak out against Hamas in Gaza, they are sentenced to death. That is why it is hard to hear their voices.

D. The children’s circle – they are mainly subjected to murderous indoctrination, but at this stage it is impossible to decide that a small child deserves death.

In summary, it is impossible to decide that everyone there is a murderer.

Question: “Why didn’t the opposition leave there, like in Germany?”

Answer: In Germany too there were Germans who could not stand the Nazi regime, but they had no power to resist or to leave — and the same is true in Gaza. The exit through Egypt is also closed. In addition, they are poor and cannot afford the high cost of leaving.

Question: “So, did we do something immoral?”

Answer: No. After all, they attacked us. We had no choice. We are defending ourselves. Our army is the Israel Defense Forces.

Question: "Maybe we should have fought more carefully?"

Answer: My answer has three parts:

A. The enemy is extremely cruel and murderous, and if we show restraint toward them, it will open the door for them to commit terrible acts again.

B. It is impossible to risk soldiers’ lives in order not to risk civilians. Of course, we prefer not to endanger civilians, and we truly did everything possible, but if we have to choose between the lives of enemy civilians and the lives of our soldiers, morality favors the lives of the soldiers.

C. They used the civilian population as a shield. They positioned themselves in hospitals,schools, and children’s bedrooms. They are responsible for those who were killed. They are the immoral ones.

Question: "If that’s the case, should we still be happy about those who were killed there?"

Answer: We should be glad about the killers and their helpers, but regarding innocent people and children, we should not be glad. We would prefer that nothing happened to them. We do not go to war out of a desire to kill, but to eradicate evil, and thank God, we are very successful.

Answers by Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, published by Machon Meir.