The timing of disclosing Israel’s expansionist policy came at a critical time in the evolving Palestinian position. The Palestinians have effectively agreed to a unilateral cease-fire, while the Israeli government has stepped up efforts to corrode all possible conditions for genuine peace in the region.

Sharon’s ‘disengagement’ plan from Gaza was the result of both tactical and strategic imperatives not his genuine desire to end Israeli’s occupation of Palestinian lands. The much touted ‘positive’ de-occupation of Gaza can now be explained by Israeli’s decision to expand its annexation of West Bank lands for Jewish- only settlements. Sharon views the wanton expansion of settlements in the Jerusalem area as a factual translation of the "letter of assurances" President Bush granted Sharon last year. As such President Bush bears the reasonability to stop Israel’s from destroying real chances for peace. Sharon’s political survival depends on the continuation of violence not the possibility of reconciliation with the Palestinians.

Sharon is no humanist or democrat. He is a general, and his logic is military. So is the logic of the “disengagement” plan: giving up a secondary goal to reinforce and legitimize the main objective. This means giving up some 6% of occupied lands in order to consolidate and strengthen the important settlements, which constitute 58% of the West Bank. Under this plan, there will never emerge a contiguous Palestinian state. The future state will be connected only through tunnels and bridges under the control of the Israel Army. Such an arrangement will invariably remain a source of grave tensions and will render the sovereignty of the Palestine state impossible.

Sharon is not known for his honesty either. In fact, Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, once called him a serial liar. "If Sharon would get rid of his faults, such as not telling the truth… he would have been an exemplary military leader."


Aref Assaf