by Hillel Fendel, Gush Katif
Attorney Yitzchak Meron heads a group of lawyers representing - free of charge - the Gush Katif residents in their negotiations with the government over the terms of their uprooting. Just a few days ago, he sent them his eighth report on the status of the negotiations. The bottom line: the residents should not sign anything, the proposal is far from ready, and unity is their best weapon.
The background, of course, is that the government has decided that it will soon begin the process of removing all 9,000-plus Jewish residents of Gaza, along Israel's southern coast, and the northern Shomron, 30 miles northeast of Tel Aviv. The date has been set for mid-August, immediately after the fast of Tisha B’Av. Though many military and diplomatic experts oppose the plan, the major obstacle facing the government right now is that it simply has no place to relocate the displaced persons to.
At present, the most realistic proposal is to build new communities in the coastal Nitzanim area, north of Ashkelon. Meron’s report lists several advantages, followed by even more disadvantages, which, he says, outweigh the pluses.
Among the advantages of the proposal, Meron wrote, are: “It enables the continued existence of the communities in an organic and unified manner. The importance of this is obvious, as professionals say that the best solution for people who are uprooted from their homes is to preserve the communal unity.”
Communal associations and public institutions, and possibly even shopping centers and schools, could likely be relocated in toto, preserving the social fabric of the town, as well as many jobs.
On the other hand, Meron writes, the government is offering to build only 3-4 new communities for the 21 Gaza towns that are to be uprooted. Granted that several of them have under 30 families, but most of them have over 50 families - including Nisanit with over 300, and N’vei Dekalim with over 500 - and some of them would have to be merged under one umbrella. Meron wrote that the residents’ representatives are demanding that some 10 communities be built.
Meron noted several other disadvantages, chief among them being the uncertainty whether the plan will ever be actualized. “It cannot be known if the final plan will be approved by the planning commissions, and if so, when,” he wrote. “This is a long and complex process that could take many years, and is liable to involve appeals to the Supreme Court from Ashkelon and environmental groups. In fact, there is no certainty that the solution would ever be actualized.” This could cause a particularly acute situation if the residents are moved to temporary dwellings in trailer homes.
The government has offered to give the Nitzanim plan a permanent status by putting it into legislation, Meron wrote, “but this is not a strong enough guarantee. Laws have been overturned in the past by the Supreme Court - as we ourselves are trying to do with this Evacuation/Compensation Law. We asked that the government provide a financial guarantee, but they refused - proving that the government itself is unwilling to take upon itself the results of a possible failure in actualizing the program.”
The Nitzanim project “involves a temporary solution of caravans or rented apartments spread out over several locations, such as Nitzan, Shafir and possibly also Yad Binyamin, and possibly also hundreds of apartments in Ashkelon and environs. Some kibbutzim will be expanded (chiefly for the non-religious). Establishing temporary sites will harm the communal structure, and will cause a grave situation of ‘double uprooting’ - with all the suffering for the families that this will involve.”
The temporary caravan sites are liable to become a sort of “refugee camp,” the Meron report states. “This is especially acute if and for as long as the permanent solution is delayed, which could be for a number of years.”
Given the above, the demand is for the government to move the residents only to permanent homes in the permanent communities. If this is not possible, then the temporary housing must be erected on the permanent site, which will rush up the construction and will increase the likelihood of building the permanent community quickly. It will also maintain the unity and cohesion of the residents in their communal framework and will prevent their dispersion to various temporary sites.
Meron noted that the government is currently not willing to make any changes in the relevant law, despite the many inherent injustices that have been noted.
“In short,” Meron concludes, “the plan is not yet ready. It is very important for the residents to continue to act with unity and dedication, and to insist on the necessary minimum. This clearly requires iron patience, which we hope everyone is equipped with, because if not, it could lead to hardships or worse for [your neighbors]. Everything depends on the staying power of the residents individually and communally - something that so far has been shown to be outstanding.”
Knesset Member Tzvi Hendel, a resident of Ganei Tal, distributed the report to his neighbors, and added, “Our face-to-face meetings in over 200,000 homes throughout the country, and the recent and continuing visits of myriads of people here, have begun showing fruit. Public support for Sharon’s disengagement plan has dropped from 65% to 52%, and people are beginning to see that this is not an Evacuation/Compensation Law, but rather an Expulsion/Robbery Law. They are realizing that we are a united group of people with values, and that we are not after money. We’re on the right track. We cannot overstate the importance of our unity at this time…”
“These recent developments, including negative comments by the Supreme Court Justices about the plan, have put the government under pressure, and therefore, it has renewed its psychological warfare and wild attacks against us in the media. Let us all strengthen each other. I still believe that, with G-d’s help, if we remain united, we can win!”
Hendel added that he “was happy to hear that not only Rachel Hendel [the writer’s wife - ed.] ordered saplings and the like for next year’s planting season in her nursery, but that more and more farmers in the region have done the same [even at the risk of facing monetary fines from the customers if the orders are not fulfilled -ed.]. This is the only realistic course that I can see on the horizon.”
“I thank G-d with all my heart that I and my family have merited to live and grow here in Gush Katif together with all of you.”
The Gush Katif Residents’ Committee also disseminated a letter to the residents over the past few days. It explained that the meetings with the government are for the purpose of calming the fears and concerns of those residents who are particularly worried about the future. The letter emphasizes that these efforts are only an “insurance policy,” but that their main objective is to remain in their homes and to defeat the Disengagement Plan. In the spirit of the call for unity echoed by MK Hendel and Atty. Meron, the letter also stipulates that it has been resolved that no one other than the Meron group of lawyers should meet with the government on these issues.
Attorney Yitzchak Meron heads a group of lawyers representing - free of charge - the Gush Katif residents in their negotiations with the government over the terms of their uprooting. Just a few days ago, he sent them his eighth report on the status of the negotiations. The bottom line: the residents should not sign anything, the proposal is far from ready, and unity is their best weapon.
The background, of course, is that the government has decided that it will soon begin the process of removing all 9,000-plus Jewish residents of Gaza, along Israel's southern coast, and the northern Shomron, 30 miles northeast of Tel Aviv. The date has been set for mid-August, immediately after the fast of Tisha B’Av. Though many military and diplomatic experts oppose the plan, the major obstacle facing the government right now is that it simply has no place to relocate the displaced persons to.
At present, the most realistic proposal is to build new communities in the coastal Nitzanim area, north of Ashkelon. Meron’s report lists several advantages, followed by even more disadvantages, which, he says, outweigh the pluses.
Among the advantages of the proposal, Meron wrote, are: “It enables the continued existence of the communities in an organic and unified manner. The importance of this is obvious, as professionals say that the best solution for people who are uprooted from their homes is to preserve the communal unity.”
Communal associations and public institutions, and possibly even shopping centers and schools, could likely be relocated in toto, preserving the social fabric of the town, as well as many jobs.
On the other hand, Meron writes, the government is offering to build only 3-4 new communities for the 21 Gaza towns that are to be uprooted. Granted that several of them have under 30 families, but most of them have over 50 families - including Nisanit with over 300, and N’vei Dekalim with over 500 - and some of them would have to be merged under one umbrella. Meron wrote that the residents’ representatives are demanding that some 10 communities be built.
Meron noted several other disadvantages, chief among them being the uncertainty whether the plan will ever be actualized. “It cannot be known if the final plan will be approved by the planning commissions, and if so, when,” he wrote. “This is a long and complex process that could take many years, and is liable to involve appeals to the Supreme Court from Ashkelon and environmental groups. In fact, there is no certainty that the solution would ever be actualized.” This could cause a particularly acute situation if the residents are moved to temporary dwellings in trailer homes.
The government has offered to give the Nitzanim plan a permanent status by putting it into legislation, Meron wrote, “but this is not a strong enough guarantee. Laws have been overturned in the past by the Supreme Court - as we ourselves are trying to do with this Evacuation/Compensation Law. We asked that the government provide a financial guarantee, but they refused - proving that the government itself is unwilling to take upon itself the results of a possible failure in actualizing the program.”
The Nitzanim project “involves a temporary solution of caravans or rented apartments spread out over several locations, such as Nitzan, Shafir and possibly also Yad Binyamin, and possibly also hundreds of apartments in Ashkelon and environs. Some kibbutzim will be expanded (chiefly for the non-religious). Establishing temporary sites will harm the communal structure, and will cause a grave situation of ‘double uprooting’ - with all the suffering for the families that this will involve.”
The temporary caravan sites are liable to become a sort of “refugee camp,” the Meron report states. “This is especially acute if and for as long as the permanent solution is delayed, which could be for a number of years.”
Given the above, the demand is for the government to move the residents only to permanent homes in the permanent communities. If this is not possible, then the temporary housing must be erected on the permanent site, which will rush up the construction and will increase the likelihood of building the permanent community quickly. It will also maintain the unity and cohesion of the residents in their communal framework and will prevent their dispersion to various temporary sites.
Meron noted that the government is currently not willing to make any changes in the relevant law, despite the many inherent injustices that have been noted.
“In short,” Meron concludes, “the plan is not yet ready. It is very important for the residents to continue to act with unity and dedication, and to insist on the necessary minimum. This clearly requires iron patience, which we hope everyone is equipped with, because if not, it could lead to hardships or worse for [your neighbors]. Everything depends on the staying power of the residents individually and communally - something that so far has been shown to be outstanding.”
Knesset Member Tzvi Hendel, a resident of Ganei Tal, distributed the report to his neighbors, and added, “Our face-to-face meetings in over 200,000 homes throughout the country, and the recent and continuing visits of myriads of people here, have begun showing fruit. Public support for Sharon’s disengagement plan has dropped from 65% to 52%, and people are beginning to see that this is not an Evacuation/Compensation Law, but rather an Expulsion/Robbery Law. They are realizing that we are a united group of people with values, and that we are not after money. We’re on the right track. We cannot overstate the importance of our unity at this time…”
“These recent developments, including negative comments by the Supreme Court Justices about the plan, have put the government under pressure, and therefore, it has renewed its psychological warfare and wild attacks against us in the media. Let us all strengthen each other. I still believe that, with G-d’s help, if we remain united, we can win!”
Hendel added that he “was happy to hear that not only Rachel Hendel [the writer’s wife - ed.] ordered saplings and the like for next year’s planting season in her nursery, but that more and more farmers in the region have done the same [even at the risk of facing monetary fines from the customers if the orders are not fulfilled -ed.]. This is the only realistic course that I can see on the horizon.”
“I thank G-d with all my heart that I and my family have merited to live and grow here in Gush Katif together with all of you.”
The Gush Katif Residents’ Committee also disseminated a letter to the residents over the past few days. It explained that the meetings with the government are for the purpose of calming the fears and concerns of those residents who are particularly worried about the future. The letter emphasizes that these efforts are only an “insurance policy,” but that their main objective is to remain in their homes and to defeat the Disengagement Plan. In the spirit of the call for unity echoed by MK Hendel and Atty. Meron, the letter also stipulates that it has been resolved that no one other than the Meron group of lawyers should meet with the government on these issues.