Fernand Braudel Center, Binghamton University
List of previous commentaries in English and translations in
other languages
Commentary No. 177, Jan. 15, 2006
"Sharon's Illusion"
When Ariel Sharon suffered his stroke, most Western commentators mused that
the world would never know his exact plans for bringing peace to
Israel/Palestine, and that no one else might be able to resolve the issue as he
was about to do. This seems to me quite absurd. I know his plans, as he
scarcely hid them. And these plans would not have resolved the issue, since
they were based on a fundamental illusion.
National security is the obsession of most Jewish Israelis. As well it might
be, since the basic security of the state of Israel is quite precarious and has
been for a long time. Ariel Sharon was all his life someone who wished to
obtain full sovereignty for Israel
over the entire territory of what had been the British Mandate, and in some
areas (Golan) beyond it. He wanted this territory to constitute a Jewish state,
with a clear Jewish majority of the population.
In these views, he was in the direct line of Vladimir Jabotinsky
and his Revisionist movement within Zionism. Jabotinsky,
let us remember, had formed his party in protest against the British exclusion
of Trans-Jordan (today's Jordan) from the Mandate. The Revisionists (of which
today's Likud party is the descendant) always had the
most expansionist vision of the territory
of Israel. The
Revisionists were also always insistent on the necessity for a militarily
strong (and when they thought necessary aggressive) Israel, the policy of an "iron
wall."
Sharon was
also a brilliant soldier. He played an increasingly important role in
successive Arab-Israeli wars, and a notoriously repellent role in the invasion
of Lebanon
in 1982, for which the Israelis themselves eventually formally sanctioned him.
As a minister in various governments, he was a leader in pushing new
settlements in the occupied territories after 1973, with the intent of creating
faits accomplis
that would be very difficult to undo in any future peace negotiations.
So what gave him his current reputation as a peacemaker? Two things: One is Sharon's dose of realism.
He came to realize that the full implementation of his program aroused too much
opposition even in the U.S.
government to be feasible. And he came to fear the impending demographic
"catastrophe" - an Arab majority in Israel as a result of differential
birth rates. And on the other side (that of centrist Israelis
and pro-Israeli Westerners) the increasingly widely-held belief that only a
notorious hawk would be politically able to make the necessary concessions to
obtain a settlement. The examples of DeGaulle
and Algerian independence, and Nixon's meeting Mao Zedong were regularly cited.
What was Sharon's
plan? He planned to evacuate those parts of the occupied territories that were
densely populated by Arabs and thinly populated by Jews. Gaza
was the first step, and various scattered zones of the West
Bank would have been next. He planned simultaneously to
incorporate zones that today have high Jewish settlement. This included East
Jerusalem of course, but also three settlement blocs in the West
Bank around which the wall is presently being built. He then
planned to say to the Palestinians that you may set up a state in the remaining
areas, provided that you have no serious military apparatus and provided that
you recognize Israel and the permanence of these new boundaries. And since he
knew that no Palestinian leaders would accept such terms, he intended to do
this unilaterally, without consulting them.
What was the illusion? He believed first of all that the Palestinians would
have no choice but to live with this unilaterally-imposed reality. How he could
think that is beyond me, since the most "moderate" of Palestinian
leaders have already made it quite clear that this would be absolutely
unacceptable. And of course the Palestinians are already about to vote in less
"moderate" leaders. He believed second of all that time was on Israel's side.
How he could think that is also beyond me. The Israelis have been losing
international legitimacy steadily since 1973 at least. Arrogant unilateralism
isn't working for George W. Bush. There's no hope it would work for Israel. Indeed,
Sharon's plan would speed up the delegitimization of Israel,
just as Bush's invasion of Iraq
has speeded up the decline of American power.
Abba Eban, Israel's famed diplomat, is
supposed to have said, "the Arabs never miss an
opportunity to miss an opportunity." Could this not be said even more
forcefully of Israeli leadership over the past 50 years? Sharon
may have been the last gasp of illusionary politics for Israel. Peace
is always a political, not a military, arrangement.
by Immanuel Wallerstein
[Copyright by Immanuel Wallerstein, distributed by
Agence Global. For rights and permissions, including
translations and posting to non-commercial sites, and contact:
rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.336.286.6606. Permission is
granted to download, forward electronically, or e-mail to others, provided the
essay remains intact and the copyright note is displayed. To contact author,
write: immanuel.wallerstein@yale.edu.
These commentaries, published twice monthly, are intended to be reflections on
the contemporary world scene, as seen from the perspective not of the immediate
headlines but of the long term.]
Email this Commentary to a
colleague
______________________________________________
Go to Fernand Braudel Center Homepage