Why we should not destroy the houses - Bitterlemon, February 28th, 2005

Why we should not destroy the houses 

 by Ephraim Sneh
 

 Within half a year the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip will be a fact. The issue of the disposal of the settlers' assets must be dealt with very soon.

 There are two possibilities with regard to the settlers' dwellings: destroy, or leave in place untouched. Who is interested in destroying the settlements? First of all, Israel's enemies. The drama that the worlds' television viewers see over a period of weeks will feature an Israeli bulldozer "shaving" attractive homes just so they won't be used by the Palestinians. This, to put it mildly, will not improve Israel's image in the world.

 The extreme right in Israel, which opposes the departure from Gaza, is also interested in promoting the destruction of the houses, and not just to keep them from the Palestinians. The right wants to turn the withdrawal from Gaza into such a terrible national trauma that no Israeli will ever want to repeat it in the West Bank. The brutal destruction of private homes will heighten the trauma, based on the argument that otherwise the houses would be turned over to the families of terrorists who murdered and wounded settlers. This is the most powerful emotional vehicle that influenced the previous government to take the decision to destroy the settlers' homes.

 Emotions can hardly justify such heavy damage to Israel's international status. Still, this is not the only reason why Israel is better off leaving the houses untouched. Destruction of the houses will also bring about destruction of their surrounding infrastructure. It will be more difficult to develop and build up the area following the widespread destruction of some 1,500 homes. Israel has a justified interest in Gaza being built up and developed economically, thereby enhancing Gazans' lives and wellbeing. There is no better way to combat terrorism and religious extremism than economic development. Hence Israel must find every way to accelerate development in Gaza following the withdrawal.

 Still another reason is economic and ecological. In accordance with international law, Israel will be obliged to remove to its territory about one million cubic meters of building waste created by the destruction of the houses. This will cost around $18 million, and Israel will still have to dispose of huge quantities of waste--a difficult environmental challenge.

 The readiness of an Arab construction company, EMAAR, a world leader, to help the Palestinian people and set up a project for tourist dwellings in Gaza is good news for its residents. The company's undertaking, based on professional and commercial considerations, to integrate the settlers' abandoned homes in its project is good news for us Israelis, too. The Palestinian leadership has also expressed its desire that the existing infrastructure and assets in the settlements remain intact.

 The hothouses are another issue. The Gaza settlements today comprise 4,000 dunams (1,000 acres) of hothouses. If, instead of being destroyed, they are used after the withdrawal, many thousands of Palestinians will be able to work and support themselves. The settler compensation law passed by the Knesset two weeks ago awards the hothouse owners 66 percent of their value, or around $42 million. The settlers may still dismantle parts and accessories and use them in any way they wish.

 Obviously a hothouse that has been destroyed or, say, its irrigation system removed, will require a large investment in order to be restored to usable status. On the other hand, if an Arab or international firm can be located that will purchase the hothouses and operate them for the cultivation of vegetables, fruit and flowers, the problem will be solved constructively.

 The settlers will presumably prefer to be paid the full value of the hothouses and leave them intact and operational rather !  than removing only parts of them in return for 66 percent of their value. The full price of the hothouses could be transferred by the purchasing firm to the government of Israel, which in turn would pay the settlers. An alternative is to negotiate separately with each hothouse owner.

 It would be a great pity if we miss this opportunity to provide work for thousands of Gazans. As someone who is searching today for constructive solutions to these problems, and as an Israeli interested in the economic development of Gaza, I have learned that there are many technical problems that require rapid solutions before we can turn over the hothouses successfully. Accordingly we must waste no more time, and find a buyer for the hothouses.

6/13/2005