Ariel Sharon

[Rouge47]

JERUSALEM, Jan. 9 - Prime Minister Ariel Sharon began breathing on his own and showed some movement in his limbs this morning as doctors began bringing him out of a medically induced coma five days after he suffered a massive stroke.
[From www.NYTimes.com]

Gee, I wonder what will happen to the confliction if he dies? Will it rise or fall?

PJ

[wil]

And here I was looking for a prayer of wellbeing for both the man, the position and the peoples in conflict....wrong thread...

[Rouge47]

Actually I do pray for him, because if he does die then I believe that the confliction will rise. So I pray that he lives as long as he can just to keep the nation above pressure for a little while longer.

PJ

[Pathless]

What do people know of Ariel Sharon? The man, his politics, his position in the Israeli/Palestinian confilict? Do you believe he is a man of peace, as George Bush has taken flack for stating, or is he more of a nationalist Israeli hawk? I'm asking because I am not very well-informed on the Israel/Palestine conflict or Sharon himself. Interested in people's opinions and input.

From what I understand, Sharon has likely suffered permanent brain damage and won't be returning to his leadership role.

[I, Brian]

My modern history is pretty fuzzy, but the impression left is that Sharon was pretty much a tough Arab-spitting military hardliner. There's a nagging thought that he also went against orders to occupy the Gaza strip under Isreali authority in the '67 war.

Ariel Sharon appears to have been pretty much despised by the Palestinians - it was his visit near the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem that sparked the second Interfada - which appears to help helped his grass-roots support.

However, as a politician, he seems to have begun with a mandate simply to protect Israel - but probable US pressure seems to have spun that mandate into protecting Israel, while offering concessions to the Palestinians.

Considering his prior history as a commander in the infamous 1967 war, and Palestinian hatred of him, Sharon seems to have walked a remarkably delicate line rather well - one in which he was at much at odds with his own government than against Palestinians. He does seem to have contributed positively to the peace process, albeit it with converse complicating actions elsewhere (ie, the land barrier).

Considering his somewhat fearsome reputation before entering power, he doesn't seem to have been as bad overall as could have been feared, and seems to have proved a rather flexible statesman.

Simply my own opinion.

[lucius]

Yes - Sharon is seen negatively by palestinians, and understandably considering his record. But in his favour he has softened somewhat since becoming Prime Minister - or has he? Some see the moves on ending the Gaza settlements as pure political manouvering. Once, Sharon was champion of the settlers.

In the event that he is now gone from politics, I fear a resurgence of the right in Isralel. One major reason for Sharon's popularity was that the Israeli public saw him as a safe pair of hands where Israel's security is concerned - they were right in that. The danger is that no moderate or cednterist politician will emerge - Sharon is really not replaceable perhaps, so we may get a right wing government after the coming elections. Which would spell bad news for the peace process.

[I, Brian]

The settlers issue was a pretty impressive move - that was an outstanding concern, and I'm not sure many Israeli prime miniters would have been able to pull that one off, even if they wanted to.

[lucius]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

The settlers issue was a pretty impressive move - that was an outstanding concern, and I'm not sure many Israeli prime miniters would have been able to pull that one off, even if they wanted to.

You're right about that I think. Sharon's record as a military commander meant that the Israeli public knew that here was a man who would take no chances where security is concerned, so when he did something conciliatory they were prepared to accept it.
One without such a proven track record might have found it much more difficult to pull out of Gaza.

On the other hand - from the Palestinian side, they might find it easier to deal with someone else, because to them, obviously Sharon was seen as an opressive figure.

[Curios Mike]

My question about the land pull out is.... Was that really a wise choice? Especially from a security point of veiw? Have the Bombings missling, and Terroristic attacks or threats stopped? Wasnt that the point of pulling out, so Hamas or who ever would stop? Maybe I'm miss imformed.