Undermining U.S. Interests 

by Yoram Ettinger
August 3, 2005
New York Sun 
Opinion
http://www.nysun.com/article/18000

The impact of Israel's "disengagement" (retreat) from terrorist 
strongholds in Gaza and Samaria would not be limited to Israel.  
"Disengagement" would undermine vital American interests in 
the Middle East and beyond.  
  
"Disengagement" would be inconsistent with America's 
non-compromising war on Islamic terrorism. Retreat by Israel, 
the role model of countering-terrorism, would reward and energize 
regional and global terrorism, including anti-US terror lords.  
"Disengagement" would bolster the Palestinian Authority (PA), 
which has been the most sustained pro-Saddam, pro-Bin Laden, 
pro-Iran, pro-Russia, pro-North Korea and pro-China regime in 
the Middle East.  "Disengagement" would transfer control of 
Gaza air and sea ports to the PA.  They could become a platform 
for Iranian, Russian, Chinese, North Korean intelligence and 
military personnel and equipment, at the expense of US posture 
in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean. "Disengagement" would 
upgrade the position of the PLO, which has been the most lethal 
threat to the pro-US feeble Hashemite regime in Jordan. 
"Disengagement" would re-engage the military forces of Egypt and 
Israel in a terror-ridden area.  It would lead - inadvertently or 
intentionally - to diplomatic and possibly military confrontations, 
exacerbating regional instability, and sucking the US into an 
unnecessary conflict between two of its allies.  

"Disengagement" and American interests constitute an oxymoron, 
as evidences also by recent precedents.  The July 2000 Israeli 
"disengagement" from South Lebanon has propelled Hizballah 
from a small local terrorist group to a prominent regional terrorist 
organization, haunting American GIs in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
The 1994-1998 series of "disengagements" from 85% of Gaza 
and 40% of the Judea and Samaria have created the largest 
terrorist base in the world, controlled by the PLO, the role model 
of hijacking, hate education and international terrorism.  
It has caused the Hashemites to be sleepless in Amman, and 
it has provided a platform and a tailwind to Middle East terrorists, 
including Palestinians fighting the US in Afghanistan and Iraq.  

The time to examine the impact of Israel's "disengagement" on 
vital US interests is before - and not following - its dire 
consequences befall upon American GIs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

President Bush has elucidated his opposition to the concept of 
"disengagement" (retreat) in his June 28, 2005 speech at Fort 
Bragg : "Terrorists believe [that] they can force us to retreat.  
They are mistaken… There is only one course of action against 
them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home…"  
President Bush has presented a world view, which professes a 
comprehensive, devastating offensive on the terrorists' own ground.  
He aims to obliterate the political, financial and operational 
infrastructure, while refusing to negotiate, appease or retreat.

Bush has concluded the proper lessons from a series of American 
"disengagements", which emboldened Islamic terrorism.  In 1979, 
the US "disengaged" from Iran following the embassy takeover 
by terrorists.  In 1983, the US "disengaged" from Lebanon 
following the murder of 300 Americans by PLO and Syria-assisted 
Hizballah terrorists.  In 1993, America "disengaged" from Somali, 
in reaction to the lynching of American Marines by Moslem 
terrorists.  These "disengagements" fueled anti-US terrorism, 
which intensified in 1993, 1995/6, 1998, 2000 and 2001 with the 
first attempt on the Twin Towers, the terror attacks on American 
GIs in Saudi Arabia, the explosions in the American embassies 
in Kenya and Tanzania, the murder of 17 sailors on the USS 
Cole in Aden and the terror blitz of 9/11.

President Bush is determined to avoid errors committed by 
former presidents, who preferred "disengagement" from - rather 
than head on military engagement with - terror regimes.  
They confined counter-terror to limited operations, and promoted 
negotiation and ceasefire with terrorist regimes.  
Their "disengagement" from a decisive battle against terrorism, 
facilitated the engagement of terrorists with America's mainland.  

Since 1993 the Palestinian Authority (PLO) has benefited from 
a sequence of US-encouraged Israeli "disengagements".  
Since 1993, the US has been plagued by an unprecedented wave 
of Islamic terrorism, which has been energized by Israel's retreats 
in face of Palestinian terrorists.  Would the US encourage Israel 
to persist in "disengagements" (retreats), thus learning from history 
by repeating - rather than by avoiding - costly errors?
----------
Ambassador Ettinger (ret.) is a former minister at Israel's 
embassy in Washington, and a former consul general of 
Israel in Houston.