w w w . h a a r e t z . c o m
Last update - 02:24 13/03/2006
Convergence with hope
 

By Haaretz Editorial
 

The goal of Acting Prime Minister Olmert's "convergence" plan is to separate Israel and the Palestinians. Olmert describes it in terms of Israel's interest: The plan is meant to reduce friction, which causes violence and necessitates major security outlays. Olmert also mentions the demographic threat. Within about 20 years, the Jews will become a minority between the sea and the Jordan River. Israel must maintain a solid Jewish majority, or its existence will be endangered.
 

For this reason, Olmert suggests converging into "thickened" settlement blocs. This means an evacuation of a significant portion of the existing settlements. The security fence will in effect become the boundary that will separate Israel and the Palestinians. Olmert is talking about a process that will take place during one term.
 

The Kadima candidate's comments are refreshingly innovative. Since 1967, a tradition of ambiguity and doublespeak has dominated the platforms of the two large parties. Now, for the first time, a leading candidate has called on the voter to support a concrete plan for withdrawal. Benjamin Netanyahu is right to say that Olmert has transformed the elections into a national referendum on the borders.
 

But if there is to be withdrawal, why not implement it through negotiations? To this Olmert responds that the Palestinians must decide whether they accept the road map or would prefer to be drawn into the axis of evil of Iran and Syria. This is where the plan's weak point is hidden.
 

One can, of course, argue that "Hamas is not a partner." That's what Israel said for many years about the Palestine Liberation Organization, until negotiations began. It is also possible to create a bad atmosphere, by halting the transfer of funds to the Palestinian Authority and relying on the radical declarations of Hamas' leaders regarding their unwillingness to concede the right of return. But one can also be impressed by other Hamas declarations - such as one about a cease-fire for 15 to 20 years in exchange for a total Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines - and that, of course, is only an opening position for negotiation. After all, it is clear that a withdrawal that takes place with the agreement of the opposite side is preferable to a unilateral pullout, which will not lead to the end of the conflict.
 

However, from the perspective of nearly 40 years of occupation, it is appropriate to look at the overall picture created by Olmert's plan - and it generates hope that Israel's initiation of a unilateral process will cause the Palestinians to recognize the major change that is under way here: Instead of the trend of expansion that has characterized Israel until recently, it is moving toward convergence. Instead of adding settlements and enlarging them, it is limiting the number of settlements as well as the area they cover. When this happens, the Palestinians will understand that Israel's line of thought has indeed changed. The line that began in the Gaza evacuation, continued in Amona and will keep going during evacuation of West Bank settlements will then be clear to them as well.
 

When this happens, the Palestinians will conclude that it is not worth it to let the Israelis set the border unilaterally, because then they will not be able to influence their own border. Thus, there is hope that beginning the process of unilateral convergence will serve as a catalyst that will lead both sides to negotiate a final-status agreement that is of benefit to them both.