According to Haaretz, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has probably suffered irreversible brain damage that would preclude his ever resuming office, Sharon’s doctors acknowledged Thursday night. There’s llittle more depressing than those three words with the initials i. b. d.
Meanwhile, the NYT has an editorial tomorrow that is suprisingly (and hearteningly) generous to Sharon, a man toward whom they were often unkind. It concludes:
It is possible that Kadima, with Mr. Sharon’s deputy, Ehud Olmert, likely to be at the helm, can cast itself as a new centrist alternative to Labor and Likud. But Mr. Olmert, while a respected politician who helped formulate the Sharon doctrine of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, has neither the stature nor the popularity of Ariel Sharon. So while Mr. Sharon would probably have been able to carry Israel on the back of his own charisma and appeal, Mr. Olmert is likely to have to rely instead on the appeal of Kadima’s vision.
That vision cannot be one that relies solely on unilateral separation. For a centrist way to work, there has to be a vision that also encompasses the steps necessary to eventually end the seemingly never-ending conflict with the Palestinians, including a complete enough withdrawal from the West Bank to give the Palestinians a workable state. It would secure Mr. Sharon’s place in history if the centrist party he founded somehow managed to turn his vision of separation into one of a just and lasting peace.
I’m rooting for Olmert and Kadima and the legacy of Sharon. I can’t see how it’s possible not to.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
8 Comments
1. David Thomson:ìThat vision cannot be one that relies solely on unilateral separation. For a centrist way to work, there has to be a vision that also encompasses the steps necessary to eventually end the seemingly never-ending conflict with the Palestiniansî
For heavenís sake, when will his sentimental nonsense cease? There is only one way to bring about peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians: the Israelis must either kill or jail the Arab ìtrue believerî nihilists. There is no possibility of a workable compromise until this is accomplished. The moderate Palestinians can do nothing while they are intimidated by the crazies within their midst. Israel must do them a favor and eradicate the nihilists. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?
Jan 5, 2006 - 9:47 pm 2. rickl:David Thomson:
Agreed. Wars are won by destroying the enemy’s will to resist, not by negotiation.
Jan 5, 2006 - 11:22 pm 3. Steven E. Ehrbar:Singapore manages to be a successful state on land 12% of the size of the West Bank, while hosting a population larger than that of the West bank and Gaza Strip combined. So Israel can keep 88% of the West Bank and, with Gaza, the Palestinians will already have half-again more land than Singapore, which would seem to fill the new York Times’s requirement.
Of course, if the standard for enough land for a workable state is that whatever state is created on the land has to work, Israel may well cede to the Palestinians the entire surface of the Earth, and perhaps that of all the other terrestrial bodies in the Solar Syatem, without it being enough.
Jan 6, 2006 - 2:55 am 4. David Thomson:ìDavid Thomson:
Agreed. Wars are won by destroying the enemy’s will to resist, not by negotiation.î
Agreed. Negotiations are meaningful only when both sides seek a win-win solution. The Islamic nihilists hate Jews. Itís as simple as that. These thugs must be either killed or jail. There is no other realistic option. I am losing my patience with well meaning fools who seem unable to think and follow a logical argument. On top of that, they often have the nerve to describe someone like me as hotheaded. No, my position is the rational and calmly thought out one.
How is a moderate Palestinian often perceived by those around him? He is considered to be a Zionist traitor. Such people are forced into silence and political impotence. Signing agreements with them is an utter waste of time. They are incapable, regardless of their possible good intentions, of delivering the goods.
Jan 6, 2006 - 5:54 am 5. Gahrie:I’m just hoping Netanyahu doesn’t come back into power. But Sharon’s death will leave a huge void, which could give Bibi his chance.
Jan 6, 2006 - 6:22 am 6. dougf:As unfortunate as Sharon’s passing is at this critical time, what is even more unfortunate is that his sense of ‘timing’ appears to have failed him at precisely the wrong moment.
In December when he suffered the first stroke, I suggested that what he should do IMMEDIATELY was explain to the Israeli people who would succeed him, how Kadima would be organised and what it would attempt to do with or without Ariel Sharon.
In 15 minutes of Nation-Wide air-time, he could have ensured that his policies and vision would survive his death,and that the natural implosion of Israeli Politics might have been prevented for a decent period. What he might have said would have mattered; what Olmert says now— Not So Much.
At the last, he forgot he was a General, and needed a plan that could survive a catastrophic strike at HQ, and allow the remaining Army to fight on.
Frankly, the future was pretty much set anyway, but his failure to secure his position when he could have done so, is a serious tactical and strategic error. It would have been better had he tried harder to break the mold of Israeli Politics which is hopelessly dysfunctional.
No matter who is PM —
A. Gaza will continue to devolve into anarchy.
B. Hamas will eventually destroy Fatah, but not win decisely enough to prevent ongoing violence.
C. The Wall WILL be Completed, and harsh counter-measures will be pursued against any attacks on Israeli targets. Some BUT not many West Bank Settlements will be desolved, but only to improve the defenses of the others.
D. There will be no Peace, nor will there arise another ‘Partner in Peace’ among the Palestinians.
These things would have happened anyway, and Sharon planned for each and every one of them. His program was not aimed at a ‘peace’ treaty. It was aimed to protect Israelis as the Palestinians devolved into an evermore violent morass.
In planning for ‘objective’ Israeli reality he succeeded; in planning for his own ‘objective’ reality —– he failed.
Jan 6, 2006 - 8:50 am 7. Buddy Larsen:If Kadima platform survives this event (and word is, it will, having lots of new talent), then it will have been brilliant of AS to NOT have encouraged a personality-cult. Allows the platform to be the focus.
Jan 6, 2006 - 9:12 am 8. Anthony (Los Angeles):Roger,
For a centrist way to work, there has to be a vision that also encompasses the steps necessary to eventually end the seemingly never-ending conflict with the Palestinians, including a complete enough withdrawal from the West Bank to give the Palestinians a workable state.
We’re already seeing the bitter fruits of that pipe-dream in Gaza; Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders would only lead to the same thing in the West Bank. Sharansky is right: years of PLO misrule since Oslo have created a society incapable of governing itself or living at peace with its neighbors. Look how they educate their children!
Israel should withdraw only far enough to provide defensible borders and dismantle those settlements that are too hard to defend, as in Gaza. (I wonder if Sharon was a student of Emperor Aurelian?) Until Palestinian society can work the bile out of its system, there is no way they should have their own state.
Jan 6, 2006 - 9:13 am