How Green is My (Jordan) Valley?

Dore Gold has written an article for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs entitled, "After the Hamas Victory: "The Increasing Importance of Israel’s Strategic Barrier in the Jordan Valley". At the beginning of the article, he provides a summary of his main points:

o The massive electoral victory of Hamas in the Palestinian parliamentary elections has created an entirely new strategic reality for Israel which vastly increases the importance of the Jordan Valley (a desert zone almost devoid of population) for Israel’s security in the near term.

o With Hamas dominating the Palestinian Authority, Jordan could find itself sandwiched between the pro-Iranian forces in Iraq and a pro-Iranian Palestinian Authority. In addition, should Israel face a new round of armed Palestinian violence, its ability to isolate the Hamas regime from external reinforcement will be a key security requirement.

o The Iraq war has had a number of unintended side effects which could destabilize Israel’s eastern front. In the summer of 2005, bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, requested that Al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi extend his Sunni insurgency to the secular states neighboring Iraq, meaning Syria and Jordan, and prepare for the “clash with Israel.” Former IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. (res.) Moshe Yaalon warned at the recent Herzliya Conference that Israel might face the threat of mujahideen from the Iraq war seeking to infiltrate into Israel.

o Control of the Jordan Valley enables Israel to deal with any likely eventuality to the east. Should Israel withdraw from the Jordan Valley to the line of the security fence, it would not be able to stop the flow of insurgents and equipment into the West Bank to the terrain dominating Ben-Gurion Airport and other vital parts of Israel’s national infrastructure along its coastal plain.

o While some have misinterpreted Sharon’s ultimate map of withdrawal in the West Bank, asserting that he planned to pull back to the line of the security fence or even to the line that President Clinton had proposed in 2000, all evidence indicates that Sharon was determined to retain the Jordan Valley and many other vital areas beyond the security fence.

On that last point--that Sharon intended to keep control of the Jordan Valley--back in December Reuters was reporting that Sharon did indeed plan on retaining control:

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said on Thursday Israel intended to keep control of the Jordan Valley in the occupied West Bank, signaling its insistence on retaining settlements there under any future peace deal.

Speaking to reporters in Tel Aviv, Sharon called the Jordan Valley, where Israel has built a string of small settlements, part of the Jewish state's "security zone." Palestinians say a continued Israeli presence there would deny them a viable state.

Sharon has made clear following a Gaza withdrawal in September that Israel plans to keep large West Bank settlement blocs, but has said that some isolated enclaves would have to be removed under any future peace agreement.

That's all well and good, but around the same time, when Kadimah announced their platform, Arutz Sheva had an article with the following:

"They also did not mention [retaining] the Jordan Valley yesterday," Huberman said. "I listened carefully for that. Not to mention that the partition fence is on the Jordan River, east of the Jordan Valley, and that there is a tremendous border crossing terminal near Mecholah. All this does not bode well for keeping the Jordan Valley under Israeli sovereignty."

"This is not just theoretical," the long-time Arutz-7 commentator and Land of Israel author said. "By looking at the fence/wall being built, we see that Sharon's party has essentially adopted the left-wing position that the fence will be a political one, not just a defensive one, that it will be Israel's final border, and that all the Jewish communities on its other side will be destroyed."

But Olmert is also talking about the Jordan Valley. Boker Tov, Boulder quotes an article:

Olmert vows Israel to retain major settlements

Interim Prime Minister Ehud Olmert defined on Tuesday the major settlement blocs he wants Israel to retain in a final peace deal with the Palestinians.

He cited the two biggest Jewish settlements, Maale Adumim and Ariel, as well as the Gush Etzion bloc south of Jerusalem and said Israel could not give up the strategically important Jordan Valley to the east.

He also indicated that some West Bank territory would have to be given up as settlements were consolidated.

So Olmert will not only hold onto the Jerusalem Vally, but also Maale Adumim, Ariel and the Gush Etzion bloc. But unfortunately vows and promises don't mean very much these days--Palestinian Arabs do not take seriously lines drawn in the sand by the Israeli Government and Israelis have already seen what campaign promises are worth.

I don't know how clear Olmert is being in defining the settlements he intends to hold on to. Getting back to that Arutz Sheva article:

The blocs in question are three: The Shomron city of Ariel and environs, the city of Maaleh Adumim just east of Jerusalem, and Gush Etzion, between Jerusalem and Hevron. Huberman said that each of them presents a problem:

"Take Ariel, for instance. We're no longer talking about a bloc, but just the city of Ariel with a little addition to the west. The communities of Emanuel, Yakir, Revavah and the like no longer seem to be under consideration. Or take Gush Etzion; the fence/wall as currently planned and built divides it in two parts, such that it's not clear whether there is any real intention to retain the communities of Nokdim, Tekoa, and El-David - which are on the 'wrong' side - or to abandon them. The same in Maaleh Adumim; it is not clear if the 'bloc' there includes Kfar Adumim, Mishor Adumim and Alon, or just the city itself.

"But even if we assume that Sharon wants to keep the maximum area in all these cases, it still means that Israel will retain no more than 10% of Judea and Samaria. This means that when Ariel Sharon says he wants to keep settlement blocs, it means he wants to give away 90% of the area. This is practically the same as Yossi Beilin's and Labor's plans, not including Jerusalem [which the latter agree to divide].

"And if we assume that in all of the above cases, Sharon plans to keep only the minimal areas for Israel, then it means that he is agreeing to a Palestinian state on 93-94% of the land - which is not that different than what Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat in Camp David several years ago."

Boker Tov points out that when Olmert continues to talk about the Road Map:

No mention is made of the Palestinian obligations specified in the road map, to which the Palestinian Authority agreed, such as disarming and dismantling terrorist organizations. Like Hamas. Which won a majority in the Legislative Council election. Nor is there any mention of the gift of Gaza.

Apparently Olmert knows the Road Map so well, he can read it with his eyes closed.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Road Map.