Ariel Sharon

I am sure that a lot of my fellow progressives would rejoice in the death of Ariel Sharon in the same way that conservatives and others rejoiced in the death of Yassir Arafat. Sharon is directly and indirectly responsible for the massacre of thousands of Arabs [link]. He seems to have had an unwavering commitment to Israeli expansion through violence. George W. Bush called him a "man of peace," which, in the long standing tradition of American conservatives, means precisely the opposite.

And yet, in recent years, he has orchestrated a plan for disengagement from the Gaza strip. I have very little doubt that the plan was nothing more than an attempt to isolate Palestine in Gaza and eventually annex the entire West Bank. Even so, his plan would eventually result in a Palestinian state, which is a huge concession for a conservative. I may not like the man, but I am concerned that there may not be others within Israel who both have the support of the people, and the same willingness to compromise on expansion. Of course, I said the same thing about Yassir Arafat when he died, and I could not have been more wrong. I just feel that both sides have suffered long enough. I do believe that it is wrong for Israel to continue to occupy the West Bank, however, Sharon's disengagement plan seems to have brought about at least a temporary peace. Admittably, it appears to have fallen apart somewhat in recent months, but with him there seems to be hope for peace.