Stop Blaming Sharon
We are just so sick of this argument. Did you hear that Sharon is recklessly endangering the entire world? Daniel Pipes:
This step is the worse for being self-imposed, not the result of pressure from Washington. When the Bush administration first heard in December 2003 that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had unilaterally decided to pull all soldiers and civilians from Gaza, it responded coolly. Months of persuasion were needed to get the White House to embrace the initiative. The harm will be three-fold: within Israel, in relations with the Palestinians, and internationally.
As proof that Sharon was not responding to pressure from Washington, Pipes links to one of his own previous articles. That article concludes:
Sharon provided a very lengthy response... "I understand that the Oslo agreements were the greatest disaster Israel ever had. But we cannot sit quietly and take no steps. The world won't accept it, including the U.S. and the U.S. is under pressure from Europe to pressure us."
Which is exactly the opposite of "Sharon isn't responding to the prospect of US pressure". Now, Pipes is skeptical about whether Sharon was being totally honest, but at a minimum it's his burden to provide some evidence on that question. And even if Pipes is right and the Bush administration never directly pressured Sharon, that point is a red herring. The question is not whether Bush was pressuring Israel at the time - Sharon was calculating that eventually the US would have been begun turned on Israel to appease European and Arab allies. The question is: was Sharon reasonable in thinking that he had to act now to prevent pressure later?
On that precise question, it's almost perverse to insist that Sharon was misguided. While Bush's June 24 speech was a high point in US support for Israel, there were undeniable and overwhelming indications both before and after that this support was fickle at best. Sharon concluded, based on constant interactions with US officials, that the Bush administration would eventually begin pressuring Israel.
So we can even nuance the previous question and ask: was Sharon correct that the Bush administration, some time towards the beginning of the second term, would begin pressuring him to make concessions ot the Palestinians? Yes and yes and yes and yes.
In fact, a world that has for five decades forced Israel into senseless concession after senseless concession has no right to act either surprised or indignant when Israeli leaders calculate that Israel will eventually be pressured to make more senseless concessions. Sharon is evacuating Gaza now rather than later, and hoping to salvage something in the process. It might turn out that he fails, and that the disengagement loses Israel Gaza and while gaining the country nothing. But even then, the blame must be laid not at the feet of Sharon for taking a desperate gamble, but at the feet of a world that made him think he had no other choice.
[Cross-posted on IsraPundit]
This step is the worse for being self-imposed, not the result of pressure from Washington. When the Bush administration first heard in December 2003 that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had unilaterally decided to pull all soldiers and civilians from Gaza, it responded coolly. Months of persuasion were needed to get the White House to embrace the initiative. The harm will be three-fold: within Israel, in relations with the Palestinians, and internationally.
As proof that Sharon was not responding to pressure from Washington, Pipes links to one of his own previous articles. That article concludes:
Sharon provided a very lengthy response... "I understand that the Oslo agreements were the greatest disaster Israel ever had. But we cannot sit quietly and take no steps. The world won't accept it, including the U.S. and the U.S. is under pressure from Europe to pressure us."
Which is exactly the opposite of "Sharon isn't responding to the prospect of US pressure". Now, Pipes is skeptical about whether Sharon was being totally honest, but at a minimum it's his burden to provide some evidence on that question. And even if Pipes is right and the Bush administration never directly pressured Sharon, that point is a red herring. The question is not whether Bush was pressuring Israel at the time - Sharon was calculating that eventually the US would have been begun turned on Israel to appease European and Arab allies. The question is: was Sharon reasonable in thinking that he had to act now to prevent pressure later?
On that precise question, it's almost perverse to insist that Sharon was misguided. While Bush's June 24 speech was a high point in US support for Israel, there were undeniable and overwhelming indications both before and after that this support was fickle at best. Sharon concluded, based on constant interactions with US officials, that the Bush administration would eventually begin pressuring Israel.
So we can even nuance the previous question and ask: was Sharon correct that the Bush administration, some time towards the beginning of the second term, would begin pressuring him to make concessions ot the Palestinians? Yes and yes and yes and yes.
In fact, a world that has for five decades forced Israel into senseless concession after senseless concession has no right to act either surprised or indignant when Israeli leaders calculate that Israel will eventually be pressured to make more senseless concessions. Sharon is evacuating Gaza now rather than later, and hoping to salvage something in the process. It might turn out that he fails, and that the disengagement loses Israel Gaza and while gaining the country nothing. But even then, the blame must be laid not at the feet of Sharon for taking a desperate gamble, but at the feet of a world that made him think he had no other choice.
[Cross-posted on IsraPundit]
