It was messy, but democratic.

Last night the Knesset voted by a decent majority: 67 to 45 with 7 abstentions, in favor of Ariel Sharon's plan to dismantle all Jewish settlements from Gaza, and a few small ones from the northern West Bank.

The basic elements of democracy are the existence of ample alternatives; wide access to the decision (i.e., voting rights), and freedom to criticize.

All of these traits are well established in Israel. It is one of the world's most democratic countries. If Arabs claim to be disadvantaged, they are no more so than minorities in numerous other democracies; and more than some minorities they have their own elected representatives to blame for their disadvantages. Instead of joining major parties and getting some of the goodies, most Arab politicians spend their time opposing everything, and end up with little for their constituency.

Back to last night:

The issue was one of the most difficult in a country that faces more difficult choices, more often, than most democracies. We have had several months of endless talk, demonstrations and counter-demonstrations about this proposal. No one can justly claim they have not had an opportunity to persuade their adversaries.

Sharon's plan is not all that great. It proposes to withdraw Jewish settlements without the agreement of the Palestinians. Some Palestinians are already claiming it is a victory for terror, and that they can get more by continuing the violence. The plan is also vicious in its discrimination against Jews. It would use state force to remove Jews from homes where some have lived for 30 years, without equivalent "ethnic cleansing" of Arabs to make our situation easier elsewhere. One has to understand the fury of those who oppose the plan.

However, Sharon's plan also has some attractive features. By withdrawing Jewish settlements, but not necessarily the Israeli military, the plan will remove easy targets for Palestinians with simple weapons. It will strengthen, rather than weaken Israel militarily. The withdrawal may also spur Palestinian realists to put their own house in order, and to approach Israel with reasonable offers for wider arrangements. The withdrawal will strengthen the case, at least with the Bush administration, that Israel can stand firm against extreme Palestinian demands (like the unlimited right of return for refugees and their descendents), and assure the holding of major settlements in the West Bank.

The conflict among the Jews is far from over. A substantial portion of Sharon's own party members in the Knesset voted against him. A cluster led by Benyamin Netanyahu in alliance with the National Religious Party is demanding a referendum on the plan. If they do not get the prime minister's agreement to a referendum within two weeks, they say, they will quit the government and do what they can to bring it down and force elections.

The prime minister seems firm in his opposition to a referendum. He sees it not necessary for a democratic decision: the Cabinet and Knesset are the forum for policymaking in Israel. To him, a referendum would only prolong the dispute, and provide a venue for intense opponents to heat up a difficult issue to the point of internal violence. And a referendum result in favor of dismantling Jewish settlements would not be accepted by the most intense of the opponents.

Several more votes in the Cabinet and Knesset are necessary to authorize finally the dismantling and its financing. And assuming all the votes go well, it will not be easy for the police and the army to remove those settlers who think they are doing God's work by resisting with all their power. To date, the authorities have not been able to remove permanently even tiny hilltop posts, settled by few if any individuals, against intense people who fight their removal and then keep coming back. Taking down established settlements with hundreds of families will be a much more severe test. We have heard from some rabbis that Jewish soldiers should refuse orders to remove Jewish settlers from the Land of Israel. Other rabbis have argued against such refusals, on the ground that it threatens the worst calamity of civil war.

The whole operation could be derailed by continued internal political opposition, major instances of violence, perhaps among Jews, or events as widely spaced as Lebanon, Syria, Iran, or a political change in the United States. It is possible to imagine a range of scenarios so endless as to make it pointless to invest in the detailed description of any one of them.

It is not a time for predictions.