Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Uriyan (talk | contribs) at 21:27, 18 February 2002 (+ Israeli position). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ariel Sharon became the Prime Minister of Israel on February 17, 2001. He was born in 1928 in Kfar Malal.

For over 25 years he was a member of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), reaching the rank of Major-General before retiring. He is particularly known for his daring actions during the Yom Kippur War, when he took the initiative from the Egyptians by crossing the Suez Canal with his brigade.

He was a member of the Knesset 1973-1974, and then from 1977-present. He served as Minister of Agriculture (1977-1981), then as Defense Minister (1981-1983) in Menachem Begin's Likud government. He resigned from his post as Defense Minister amid allegations surrounding a massacre of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon by Lebanese factions allied with Israel (see below), and then served as a Minister without portfolio (1983-1984), Minister for Trade and Industry (1984-1990), and Minister for Housing Construction (1990-1992). Then he was Minister of National Infrastructure (1996-1998), and Foreign Minister (1998-1999). Upon the election of the Barak Labor government, he became leader of the Likud party. After the collapse of Barak's government, he was elected Prime Minister in February 2001.

Role in Lebanese Massacre

During the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, while Ariel Sharon was Defense Minister, a massacre of several hundred Palestinians occured in the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps in Beirut. The massacre was done by Lebanese factions aligned with Israel (known as the Phalanges, led by Bashir Gemayel). Israel claimed that Yasser Arafat's Fatah terrorists, who incessantly attacked Israeli civilians on Israel's northern border, were hiding inside the camps, a claim which many disagree with. Sharon reached agreement with these factions that the Israeli army would only surround these camps, while the factions' forces would enter the camps and treat the Fatah militants within.

Prior to Thursday September 16, 1982 all went by plan. Israeli troops surrounded the camps. However when the Planages went in, they began a great massacre, in retaliation for the killing of Bashir Gemayel, their leader, by a Muslim faction several days earlier. For the next 36 hours they went on uninterrupted. The Israeli military then ordered the Phalanges to leave the camps. Israel claims that the Israeli military was not aware that the massacre was occuring, and ordered the Phalangists to withdraw when they discovered it had happened. While Israel and most Western sources claim that about 300 Palestinian refugees were killed, the Arab side claims that the number could be almost ten times as high.

These events aroused a great degree of controversy in the Israeli public. The Israeli government appointed a commission, led by the former Supreme Justice Kahan, that investigated these events. Their report, which was finished in early 1983, stated that while there was no evidence Sharon knew about the Phalangists' plans (and was in no way associatated with the massacres), his ignoring of the hostility between Lebanese Christians and Muslims was outrageously negligent. The committee recommended Sharon's dismisal as the Minister of Defense.

This view of the things was also upheld by an American court, when Sharon won a libel case against the Time Magazine, which had published in 1987 a story that implied Sharon's direct responsibility for Sabra and Chatila. In early 2001, relatives of the victims of the massacre have begun proceedings in Belgium, seeking to have Ariel Sharon indicted on war crimes charges.

Commentary

Palestinian position

Ariel Sharon has followed a military solutions based policy of no negotiations under fire. He refuses to engage in political negotiations until there is a seven day period of absolute peace and quiet in all of Israel and the occupied territories. Many people and some governments (mainly the European Union members) feel that this is an unrealistic demand, that could never be fulfilled.

Palestinians claim that all of the current policies followed by the Sharon government so far have failed to bring about this prerequisite for peace. They claim that the policies carried out by his government - assassinations of leaders of Palestinian groups (some of whom being terrorists is disputed), blockades of whole areas (including towns and villages), the destruction of infrastucture belonging both to Palestinian Authority (including police and security buildings) and private civillians, continued house demolitions, Israeli Army incursions into Palestinian territory, the confinement of the nominal head of the Palestinian people in his headquarters that essentially amounts to a house arrest - have only created further difficuly in calming the situation down. Palestinians consider Sharon's advocacy of settlement building in the occupied territories as a further step away from peace.

Palestinians claim that the recent round of violence was started because of a visit made by Ariel Sharon and over a thousand of his bodyguards marching in sites of Arab East Jerusalem sacred both to Muslims and Jews. Some commentators have even gone so far as to accuse him of purposely starting this event, to prevent the further continuation of peace talks.

Furthermore, Palestinians claim that Sharon really lacks a political agenda. He is a general and war operations are at the limit of his expertise. To enforce their words, they quote an Israeli political analyst that claimed: "Sharon sees the many trees, but can never see the forest".

As an Israeli political analyst put it: "Sharon sees the many trees, but can never see the forest." The absence of a peace camp in Israel has played into Sharon's favour but lately the Israeli public is wondering why they elected a closed-minded general with no political vision as their prime minister? Sharon is an obstacle to peace for he is the new variable in the Middle East peace equation. Occupation is the cancer and until it is done away with there will be no peace.

Palestinians claim that Sharon works agressively against the Palestinians living in their own land, and that while his predecessors at least genuinely tried for peace and as such helped defuse tensions to a large extent, Sharon has pursued dirty politics and extreme aggression against the Palestinians.

Palestinians claim that Sharon's views are not representative of the majority of the Israeli public. As examples, they bring groups such as Peace Now, which has been calling for a return to negotiations ever since the beginning of the recent clashes, and a letter signed by several hundreds of Israeli reservists (a minor percentage of the Israeli reserve force) that refused to serve in the territories because of the danger that this created for Palestinian civilians.

Israeli Position

Recent polls indicate that Ariel Sharon enjoys a greet degree of confidence and trust on behalf of the Israeli public. They indicate that the majority of Israelis supports Sharon's policies, and considers them either adequate or even not extensive enough in the military sense. Israelis maintain, that their country has a pluralistic political tradition which allows for the functioning of the peace movements, although they have not been enjoying great popularity lately.

Secondly, as Ariel Sharon claims and most Israelis agree, terrorism is an absolute evil. The Palestinian leadership put itself into a subhuman level by deciding not to do anything to stop terrorism, and as Sharon claims, he will not negotiate until they adopt an opposite direction. Ariel Sharon has claimed that he would agree to a Palestinian state, however the Palestinians claims are illegitimated by their policy of violence and terrorism.

Finally, most Israelis feel that the recent conflict is a war; therefore the behavior of the Israeli side must be militaristic by definition. For example, most Israelis point at the fact that the targeted killings are aimed mainly at people who have openly embraced terrorism, would not step down from it, and would not be taken to jail by the Palestinian Authority; the only way to prevent them from carrying out acts of terrorism that they are planning is to kill them, or to arrest them (the latter is much more frequent).