There were two panels for the evening: one on the Yesha Council with regards to the disengagement, and one on lobbying in Israel and influence on the decision-making process. HIGHLIGHTS of the evening’s heated debate were as follows:
On Disengagement:
-“Noone’s interested anymore” said Col (Ret.) Moti Yogev, Reserve Deputy Commander of the Gaza Division, about the disengagement. That, according to him, is the sad truth of the “national crime” that was committed. It took five years to build a zoo in Jerusalem, he said, and only a few months to plan and one week to execute the disengagement. He later compared the ‘crime’ of the disengagement to the biblical story where Joseph’s brothers had sold him.
On the Yesha Council:
Amit Ararat, from the settlement of Mizpe Yericho, asserted that the Yesha Council did not want to win in their struggle. He claimed that they were thirsty for media exposure, and that instead of continuing to fight, they gave in and abandoned the struggle. He went on to say that the Yesha Council did not truly believe that their efforts would succeed, and further stated that the Yesha Council "played a political role in the cynical halls of the Knesset."
One of the founders and leaders of Peace Now, Tzali Reshef, started out by saying that he does not support anything that the Yesha Council has ever done. He then noted that their struggle was impressively implemented. The Yesha Council, he said, was determined, while Israeli establishments were weak. To him, the settlements were "national suicide" to begin with and stated that he was against them from the start.
"We were caught with our pants down" exclaimed former spokesman for the Yesha Council, Yehoshua Mor-Yosef. Yehoshua Mor-Yosef spoke about some of the less-legitimate means in which the settlements were established, leading to the fact that many of them were approved only after they were already developed.
On Lobbying:
Behira Bardugo, lobbyist and former media advisor to Shimon Peres, called the Yesha Council “the best lobby in the country” despite how things turned out. She pointed out two reasons that might have brought to this end. The Yesha Council did not consider the possibility that the Labor and Likud parties would unite for a common cause, merely because of the rivalry between them. Also, the Yesha Council did not agree to negotiate about settlements, for example, about the possibility of evacuating several of them in order to ensure that others would remain in place. This was out-of-the-question for them at the time, but in retrospect, such a negotiation might have been precisely what they should have done.
On Democracy:
IDI researcher Yair Sheleg, author of The Political and Social Ramifications of Evacuating Settlements in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, spoke of the national ethos, as opposed to a democratic ethos, which in his opinion was what led the struggle and what had stopped the violence. He continued to say that a national ethos also has democratic significance.
A Word from the Author:
Anat Roth began her study by setting out to see how the Yesha Council has such a large amount of influence. Roth does not see the disengagement as the Council's failure. She pointed out that they influenced the entire process and brought Prime Minister Sharon's motives to question.
There isn't just one way in which to exert influence, she said, there are always other considerations such as circumstances and interests, whether public or private. The Yesha Council's main attribute, which motivated their struggle throughout the twenty months prior to the disengagement in which she studied them, was their belief. Other methods included transmitting one unified message to the public at all times, the flexibility of the organization, and the fact that they talked about what they did (as opposed to just talking). Moreover, they made use of their knowledge of the country's political configuration. They knew what key figures to influence, and placed people from their organization in a variety of key positions.
With the many voices heard throughout the evening, the one point everyone actually did agree on was the merit of Anat Roth’s paper: The Secret of its Strength: The Yesha Council and its Campaign Against the Security Fence and the Disengagement Plan