The answers are complicated by conflicting reports regarding Prime Minister Sharon. He was heard saying yesterday morning that the IDF would remain in Gaza for at least a number of weeks - but at least one government member, Finance Minister Silvan Shalom, said that Sharon told him yesterday at 11 AM that he planned to withdraw the forces before nightfall.
One possibility, therefore, is that from the beginning there were no plans to remain in Gaza for an extended period. Arutz-7\'s political commentator Shai Ben-Tekoa says that Israel\'s military advantage lies in its maneuverability: \"It should get in and out fast. Why remain in a Lebanon-style security zone and turn ourselves into sitting ducks?\" Similarly, military analyst Ze\'ev Schiff, apparently writing before news of the pullout became known, wrote in today\'s Ha\'aretz, \"The forces\' orders were to \'sterilize\' the area and make it difficult to operate mortars. They were given permission to stay in the area as long as operationally necessary... At the same time, it was clear to the troops they would be there only for a short time... In any case, there is no intention of setting up a security zone along the lines of the one in southern Lebanon.\"
However, others fear that the decision to withdraw may have been instigated by American pressure. Senior army officers told Ynet, \"It is obvious that Naveh is being made a scapegoat, in order to avoid having to tell the public that the decision was made because of American pressure.\" Yoram Ettinger, former Israeli liaison to Congress, implies that if this was in fact the case, it was a mistake:
\"The criticism leveled by the State Department spokesman was very low-key, and certainly not sharp. In previous cases, when the U.S. wished to transmit a sharp message to Israel, it knew how to do it - either by the President himself, or the Secretary of State, they threaten to cut foreign aid, and the like. None of these elements were present, because the Administration\'s approach simply does not jibe with a sharp condemnation of Israel\'s actions in Gaza...\" He noted that other Administration spokesmen and officials took a much milder tone on this matter, calling for the PLO to stop the violence together with a call for Israel to withdraw. \"In short, what the Americans did should not be interpreted as pressure,\" Ettinger concluded.
Short-term tensions do exist, however. To defuse this, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres spoke with Powell today, and told him, \"If we would have told you in advance that this was a limited-time operation, and that we have no intention of capturing PA-controlled areas, I assume that the unpleasantness and your announcement could have been avoided.\" Peres also spoke with the Foreign Ministers of Great Britain, Sweden, Norway, and Turkey. He had his own explanation of Brig.-Gen. Naveh\'s remarks of yesterday: \"He meant that the IDF and its officers are prepared to stay in the area as long as necessary, in accordance with government instructions.\"
Opposition head Yossi Sarid (Meretz) said that Sharon \"both blinked and zig-zagged with this withdrawal from Gaza - and this zig-zag was even greater than those of his predecessor Ehud Barak.\"