S'ganit

From Wikibbyo

The S'ganit is the equivalent too the AZA S'gan she is responsible for programming as well as taking charge of the chapter/council/region/order when the N'siah is absent

, e2€˜of our patience, the siacifcre of our people, the steadfastness and the wise people of our nation.e2€™Still, all was not calm among Palestinians. Two Hamas militants were wounded as they carried an explosive device that blew up accidentally near the evacuated Kfar Darom settlemente2€a6Ah, well. Even when Ariel Sharon hands them a great e2€œvictorye2€?, some Palestinians cane2€™t stop blowing themselves up long enough to celebrate it. Ie2€™ve never subscribed to the notion that this or that people e2€œdeservee2€? a state a weird and decadent post-modern concept of nationality and sovereignty, even if it werene2€™t so erratically applied (how about the Kurds then?). The United States doesne2€™t exist because the colonists e2€œdeservede2€? a state, but because they went out and fought for one. The same with the Irish Republic. By contrast the world deemed Palestinians e2€œdeservinge2€? of a state ten, three, six, eight decades ago, and theye2€™ve absolutely no interest in getting it up and running. Any honest visitor to the Palestinian Authority is struck by the complete absence of any enthusiasm for nation-building e2€“ compared with comparable pre-independence trips to, say, Slovenia, Slovakia, or East Timor. Invited to choose between nation-building or Jew-killing, the Palestinians prioritise Jew-killing e2€“ every time.So now Ariel Sharon has given them Gaza. On the face of it, this has a certain logic: The Zionist enterprise foundered in this unpromising territory. No more than a few settlers ever showed any gusto for this particular turf and, with their offspring, in the end mustered no more than eight-and-a-half thousand Jews among one-and-a-half million Arabs.Nonetheless, the Israelis could have held it without much difficulty for many years to come. Instead, in the short term, Gaza will decay even further into a terrorist squat fought over by Hamas and Islamic Jihad. And, in the long run, its strategic value e2€“ as the most appealing location from which to launch the more ambitious Islamist rocketry e2€“ will likely turn it into a latterday Taliban Afghanistan: jihad central masquerading as a political jurisdiction.So why would Sharon enable such a move? If you talk to the more deluded disciples of the New York Times school of foreign policy analysis, theye2€™ll tell you the Israelis have been forced into this by the pressure of world opinion and are doing it as a good-faith gesture to the Palestinians, to the broader Middle East and to the bien pensants of the European Union and the United Nations. I doubt the Israeli Prime Minister could even peddle that one with a straight face at an international conference. He knows the government of the Palestinian Authority is not a e2€œpartner for peacee2€?, merely a sewer of corruption whose only political opposition is even more deranged and violent. And he knows the international community only have one response to Israeli concessions and thate2€™s to demand more, even as theye2€™re still flaying Israel for having the impertinence to withdraw from Gaza e2€œunilaterallye2€?.A couple of years ago, I had a conversation with a British cabinet minister who was denouncing Sharon for the usual reasons e2€“ his e2€œintractabilitye2€? and so forth. I replied blithely that, au contraire, I thought hee2€™d dismantle the settlements and withdraw from Gaza. The New Labour bigwig was stunned, and, thinking it over, so was I. After all, Sharon had won the 2003 elections in part because he opposed a pull-out from Gaza. I didne2€™t quite know why I said what Ie2€™d said, and I didne2€™t really have a rationale for it.But, with the benefit of hindsight, maybe that was the point that Sharon has come to understand, as Bush did after September 11th, that the glorification of e2€œstabilitye2€? invariably favours the bad guys. Under cover of e2€œstabilitye2€?, the situation always deteriorates. The worlde2€™s embrace of the Palestinian e2€œcausee2€? is now almost complete: Blow up a nightclub in Bali full of Aussie tourists and Scandinavian backpackers and within ten minutes someone will have identified the e2€œroot causee2€? as the lack of a Palestinian state. The current intifada has in essence been funded by European taxpayers e2€“ and the EUe2€™s auditors done2€™t seem to care. The withdrawal from Gaza was celebrated with promotional materials bearing the slogan e2€œToday Gaza, tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusaleme2€?, which doesne2€™t sound awfully like a e2€œtwo-state solutione2€? but was nevertheless paid for by the United Nations Development Programme, whose logo appeared just underneath the slogan.Taking their cue from the Palestinians themselves, these various forces have little interest in a Palestinian state itself, only in using the lack of one as a means to undermine Israel and its legitimacy e2€“ which in Europe theye2€™ve done very effectively. A continuation of the status quo e2€“ whereby the Palestinians are preserved in perpetuity as e2€œdeservinge2€? a state without ever having to earn one e2€“ would only see further remorseless deterioration for Israel in the world. In that sense, any change in the situation would be for the better e2€“ especially a change that makes Gaza not Israele2€™s problem but everybodye2€™s problem.Thus, the Egyptians have just deployed their own troops to the strip to replace the evacuated Israeli Defence Force. Why would they do this now the Zionist oppressor has fled and Arab lands are rightfully back in Arab hands? Well, for a very obvious reason: an Islamist squat in Gaza is a far greater threat to the Mubarak regime than it is to Israel. With the Jews out of the way, the Egyptian government can no longer avoid seeing Gaza for what it is. This is one way of re-engaging Arab nations in the grubby reality of Palestinian e2€œnationalisme2€?.It was my National Review colleague David Frum who came up with the clearest assessment to date of the Israeli strategy: e2€œCould it be that Sharon is calling the bluff of Western governments and the Arab states? By creating the very Palestinian state that those governments and those states pretend to want but actually dread Sharon is forcing them to end their pretense and acknowledge the truth.e2€?The Frum thesis sounds right to me. In Britain since July 7th, political figures have twisted themselves into pretzels trying to explain how suicide bombers in London are somehow different from suicide bombers in Tel Aviv e2€“ unwilling, even as the double-deckers are exploding across Bloomsbury, to abandon their fetishization of the Palestinian cause, and unable to see that in an ever moreIslamified continent the Europeans are the new Jews. Maybe an Islamist statelet on the Mediterranean will concentrate even European minds.This then is the audacious gamble of the Gaza withdrawal: the best way to demonstrate that the Palestinians are undeserving of a state is to force one upon them. Ite2€™s a dangerous move, but in a tough neighborhood there arene2€™t any other kinds.The Irish Times, August 22nd 2005