OLMERT: PULLING OUT OF GAZA WAS GOOD!

Photo: Dudi Vaaknin
Olmert at the commission Photo: Dudi Vaaknin

Olmert defends Disengagement

Speaking before state inquiry commission on treatment of Gaza pullout evacuees, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says 'I thought it then, and I still think it now – there was no other way'. Of talks with PA says 'If agreement not reached soon, we will have to evacuate voluntarily, sooner than many of us think'

Aviad Glickman
Published: 09.09.09, 11:00 / Israel News
Four years have passed since Israel left the Gaza Strip, and while some of the move's biggest supporters at the time are now kicking themselves, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert continues to defend the decision.

Speaking before the inquiry commission for treatment of the Gush Katif evacuees on Wednesday, the former prime minister said, "I thought it then and I still think it today – there was no other way".

PM vows to rehabilitate Gaza evacuees / Roni Sofer

As government marks fourth anniversary of disengagement, Netanyahu presents cabinet ministers with five-point plan for dealing with Gush Katif evictees, terror and negotiations with Palestinians

Regarding the timing of the Disengagement, Olmert said said, "There is never a right time or ideal time to make difficult decisions that come with basic disagreements.

"Those who firmly objected to the move would only have become more insistent that they had they power to postpone or delay it if the date was postponed. To the best of our judgment, changing the date would not have led to different results."

Retired Judge Eliyahu Matza, who heads the committee asked: "Was it not necessary from the get go to place the treatment of the evacuees as a national urgent task? Our concern is that the content hiding in these statements has not made its way to the executive ranks in the government mechanism, as some of them have approached it as a routine task."

Olmert said in response, "I think that is a one-sided description. The great majority of the evacuees did not want any litigation."

He continued to say that his predecessor, Ariel Sharon "brought about one of the most important achievement for the State of Israel's future, his timing was right, he should be commended for his courage and I am proud to have had the great privilege of working as his partner in this matter".

Olmert stressed that, even though he supported the pullout, it was not an easy move for him. "I live with emotional distress that has been haunting me for many years...There is no population that I felt closer to. I danced with them on the hills, this is the most wonderful population in the world, and I set off against their entire life's work."

According to Olmert, "All of Israel's governments have supported and encouraged the settlers…But in the world of diplomacy, a government at certain times reaches a different conclusion, which is vital and important."

Olmert rejected claims that a rise in terror in Gaza followed the Disengagement, meaning Israel's situation has not improved. "The State of Israel has no interest in being in any place in daily conflict with a population that is hostile to its presence there," he said.

He then compared the Disengagement to the Lebanon pullout, and mentioned Operation Cast Lead, which he led shortly before the elections.

Gaza evacuation

"We have proven that the security situation can be changed without having to be in the territory, but by working for short periods on outlined targets using the means of your choice. No one can claim that in the past six months the situation in southern Israel is similar to what it was then."

'Another pullout may be needed - soon'

Not only did Olmert defend the Disengagement, but he said he also sees similar measures taking place in the future. "If we reach a situation where we see the South African model in the State – meaning we support Lieberman, and the entire Land of Israel from the Jordan River to the sea –The State's days as a Jewish state are numbered.

"It is in our interest that this does not happen. The only way is to reach an agreement in the near future that includes heartbreaking concessions that we did not believe we would have to offer. If we do not reach such an agreement, we will have to make unilateral moves, which are more important that the security risks they entail."

"If we don't reach an agreement," he continued, "We may have to evacuate voluntarily. But we will be taking assumption that the world accepts the world view of a Jewish state being a positive thing for granted.

"We will have to face evacuation reality – be in as part of an agreement or unilaterally – sooner than many of us think."

Beyond the security aspects, Olmert also recognizes a political element in the struggle against the evacuation: "After the Disengagement there was a connection the likes of which I don't remember in all my years serving in politics. The extreme Right and the extreme Left joined forces to demand compensation for the evacuees.

"The Right out of cold and cynical political considerations, wanted the move to cost the government dearly to ensure it is not repeated. The Left – because they wanted an evacuation at any cost, no matter the price."