Monday, 13 January 2014

If Arik Had Been Healthy...



Poised for the past eight years since Arik Sharon's huge stroke - everyone is now scribbling eulogies and histories of the late prime minister.

The history of Ariel Sharon is indeed huge - his intimate involvement in every war and most political events since the foundation of the State - and his bold decisions and 'bulldozer' tactics make tremendous narrative and lively history.

While remaining respectful, I will speculate about what might have happened, had Ariel Sharon followed his doctor's advice, eaten healthier, lost weight, and (in all medical likelihood) not been the victim of a stroke on 4th January, 2006.

To refresh our memories, Sharon had completed the highly contentious "Disengagement" from Gaza in summer 2005, evacuating some 10,000 Israelis from their homes in Gush Katif and Northern Samaria.

The Disengagement caused a huge chasm within the Israeli public - with mass demonstrations and civil disobedience on a scale never previously experienced.

However, having set the legal (The Evacuation & Compensation Law) and military framework for evacuating settlements also in the West Bank, Sharon immediately sought a political combination which would support a larger unilateral withdrawal from the majority of the West Bank. Sharon was a political architect of the Separation/Security Fence, which was envisaged to become the national partition line.

Indeed in the same Cabinet Meeting in February 2005, which decided to implement the Gaza Disengagement, the plans for the Security Fence around the West Bank were also approved:

The Cabinet also approved the final route of Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank, initially constructed to keep out Palestinian attackers but increasingly seen as a blueprint for a final border between Israel and a future Palestinian state. (Fox News)

The Likud Party itself had largely not supported the Disengagement from Gaza, including voting down the policy in the party Conference of 2005, and so, following the Disengagement, in November 2005, Sharon dramatically dumped his own Likud party (which he had founded together with Menachem Begin in 1973) and established Kadima on 24th November 2005.

At the time of his stroke, Sharon was head of the new Kadima, running for national elections.

The Kadima platform was centered upon the "Road Map" and "Two State Solution"; at the establishment of Kadima Sharon had already broached the subject of withdrawing from more West Bank Settlements.

Whereas Ehud Olmert 'temporarily' replaced Sharon, in January 2006, due to Sharon's incapacitated state, and went on to win the 2006 National Election with 29 seats, to become Prime Minister - it is certainly reasonable to speculate that, if Sharon had been healthy, Sharon would have won that election for Kadima and become Prime Minister again, probably with an even larger party and coalition than Olmert managed (Olmert was not a popular politician, compared with Sharon).

As Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert continued to promote the Road Map and plans for withdrawals from Jewish settlements in the West Bank - right up until the last days of the 2nd Lebanon War, when Olmert dropped the idea from his immediate agenda.

I therefore speculate that Arik Sharon would have aggressively pursued either unilateral or agreed withdrawal from much of the West Bank during his 2006-2010 term as Prime Minister. This would have been on a much larger scale, forcefully evacuating and relocating up to 100,000 Israelis who live outside "settlement blocks".

There was another factor very much in Sharon's mind on that fateful 4th January 2006.

A few months earlier, on 26th July 2005, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz announced that Omri Sharon would be indicted for fraud, during the course of Ariel Sharon's 1999 Likud election campaign. Omri was charged on 28th August but was immune due to his status as an MK. Omri reached a plea bargain, agreeing to plead guilty to the charges, on 14th November 2005. The immunity was removed by the Kenesset and Omri resigned on the 3rd January, 2006 - the day before Sharon's stroke, to face his already agreed imprisonment (Omri was sentenced to 9 months, later reduced to 7 months).

There were further police investigations involving Ariel Sharon and his two sons Omri and Gilad, and reportedly involved a $3 million bribe.

According to Haaretz, "The $3 million that parachuted into Gilad and Omri Sharon's bank account toward the end of 2002 was transferred there in the context of a consultancy contract for development of kolkhozes (collective farms) in Russia. Gilad Sharon was brought into the campaign to make the wilderness bloom in Russia by Getex, a large Russian-based exporter of seeds (peas, millet, wheat) from Eastern Europe. Getex also has ties with Israeli firms involved in exporting wheat from Ukraine, for example. The company owns farms in Eastern Europe and is considered large and prominent in its field. It has its Vienna offices in the same building as Jurimex, which was behind the $1-million guarantee to the Yisrael Beiteinu party."

On 17 December, police announced that they had found evidence of a $3 million bribe paid to Sharon's sons. 

The prosecution office finally closed the file against Sharon and his two sons only in 2012 - due to Ariel Sharon's coma and therefore his being unfit to face trial.

So, looking backwards, yet through a crystal ball, I speculate that if Ariel Sharon had not had his stroke on 4th January 2006 he would have:

1. Won the national elections in 2006 as head of Kadima
2. Had a large Kadima faction (35 MKs) and strong coalition 
3. Re-drawn the Israeli/Palestinian border approximately along the route of the Security Fence
4. Pushed/bulldozered through large scale evacuations from West Bank Jewish towns
5. Done this either through negotiation with the Palestinians, or unilaterally (as with Gush Katif)
6. Meantime, Sharon and his two sons would have faced corruption charges and scandal (as Olmert did), for his alleged part in the Kern Affair - and may, like Omri (and Katzav!), have ended up disgraced and imprisoned.

In short - if Arik Sharon had not been tragically cut-short with the massive stroke on 4th January 2006, he would have continued to do what he always did. 

Make giant, dramatic and undoubtedly controversial impact on Israel's history.

2 comments:

  1. All true.
    But the "right" must be honest with itself - as long as Sharon was "doing good" for them, they chose to look away from the "left" allegations against Sharon. Allegations that in order to bulldoze his agenda, he did not obey orders from his superiors in the military, did not tell the truth to the prime minister he served under (Begin) etc.
    His reputation for controversial conduct was out there all along. The "right" ignored it as long as he was one of the "good guys".

    ReplyDelete
  2. This post has been included in Shiloh Musings: The Ten Commandments' Havel Havelim, Parshat Yitro

    Please visit it and the other posts, comment and share, thanks.

    ReplyDelete