What really is important is not what he said or why he said it, but the world-view thatanimates him.
By now, everybody has had a go at analyzing the interview with Dov (“Dubby”) Weisglass,Ariel Sharon ’s most intimate confidant. But there is precious little to analyze. Hisstatement is crystal clear: the “redeployment plan” was designed to “freeze” the peaceprocess for decades, to put all peace plans “in formaldehyde”, to put an end to the possibilityof a Palestinian state, once and for all.
A dozen small settlements will be dismantled in order to keep practically all the 250,000West Bank settlers where they are. Israel will “concede” the Gaza Strip, which constitutes1.3% of pre-1948 Palestine , in order to take permanent possession of the West Bank , which is 16times larger. The Gaza Strip will be cut off from the world on land, by sea and in the air, as willthe seven or eight similar Palestinian enclaves that will come into being on the West Bank .
Why did “Dubby” disclose this plan? After all, the disclosure was like spitting in theface of the Labor Party, exactly when Sharon needed them most!
The answer is simple: Sharon wants to convince the right and has only contempt for theleft. 13 out of the 40 members of his Likud faction in the Knesset abstained from voting for himthis week, although the vote was about nothing more then a resolution to “take notice” of anunimportant speech of his. Sharon wants to explain to the extreme right wing of his own partythat “disengagement” is a war-plan rather than a peace-plan, a plan to annex territoriesrather than a plan to “give up” territories, a plan for the rapid expansion of the West Banksettlements rather than a plan to dismantle the settlements in the Gaza Strip.
Sharon cannot say so openly without making a fool of George W. Bush. That’s why he sent histrusted lieutenant to say it instead of him. The settlers know, of course, that “Dubby” is HisMaster’s Voice.
Sharon can afford to treat the “left” with disdain. Witness the farce with Shimon Peres:he analyzed Weisglass’ statement in an uncompromising Knesset speech and condemned Sharonacidly. Immediately afterwards he assembled the Labor Knesset faction and asked them not tovote against Sharon . But the Members were so convinced by his speech that they overruled him,10 to 9. “I was too successful,” Peres complained.
Thereafter, the two “leftist” parties, Labor and Yakhad (formerly Meretz) announcedthat they were going to vote for the disengagement plan when Sharon submits it to the Knesset.No disclosures will cause them to desist. Sharon knew that he could rely on their feebleness,and how right he is.
Only Weisglass himself may pay a price. It is difficult to believe that the beautifulfriendship between Dubby and Condy, between Weis and Rice, will hold after Weisglasspractically undressed her in public.
But that is not what is really important. After all, Weisglass did not reveal anything newto those who know Sharon ’s intentions. And whoever wants to deceive himself will continue todo so.
What is really important is the Weltanschauung, the world-view of Sharon as it emergesfrom Weisglass’ long interview. When he exposes Sharon ’s ways of thinking, this sheds lighton the basic beliefs and perceptions of his master.
Sharon ’s world is one-dimensional, as limited as the flat world before Galileo.
A world where brute force, and only brute force, reigns supreme.
This is a world where there are no past and no future, no lessons of history and noforeseeing of things to come. Whatever exists now will exist forever.
This is a world without moral constraints, where the opinions of mankind do not count. Theworld of Stalin, who once asked contemptuously: “How many divisions has the pope?”
His world looks like this:
The only thing that counts is the interest of Israel and the Jewish people (as seen bySharon ).
Their interest is to take possession of all of the territory between the Mediterraneanand the Jordan (at least).
The Palestinians are powerless. Hence, they are nothing more than an object to be kickedaround as much as one pleases.
Europe is a pathetic lot. To hell with Europe .
There is only one real power in the world: The United States . They are the “worldmanagement”.
All the power of the US is concentrated in the White House. The President and a handful ofother people are the managers.
That’s how it is now, and that’s how it is going stay in future.
Therefore, all we need is to maintain the power of the Israeli army and the alliance withthe White House. All the rest is nonsense, fantasies of eggheads.
The Israeli army and the White House – that is the winning combination. With it we shalltake complete possession of the whole country. There is no need for a peace process, indeed,there is no need for peace. The Palestinians are a negligible factor. Let them vegetate for thetime being in their ghettos. In due course, they will disappear from the country.
This is, in free translation, the world of Sharon according to Weisglass.
On the face of it, a realistic picture. Sharon’s thoughts are primitive, and perhapsbecause of this, one might believe, he sees things as they really are.
Really? Is this in truth the real picture? History shows that brute military power is ablunt instrument that cannot solves complex problems. A leader who puts his sole trust in itwill discover that it is a broken reed which wounds the hand that grasps it.
What Thomas Jefferson wrote in the American Declaration of Independence about “a decentrespect for the opinions of mankind”, was not just an empty phrase. It was a realisticappraisal: world public opinion influences in a thousand ways the behavior of nations andgovernments. It can have far-reaching effects. “The pen is mightier than the sword,”according to a British poet. And the pope does indeed have divisions, even it they don’t marchon the parade ground.
Military might is but one of the forces active in the world. Economic forces do not have asmaller impact; as a matter of fact, their impact may be much bigger in the long run. Moralforces are invisible, but their impact is immense. One of the greatest military leaders inhistory, Napoleon, was well aware of this.
The human craving for freedom is invincible, and so is the struggle of oppressed nationsfor liberation. To ignore this is not realism, it is blindness.
Even George W. Bush, himself no less primitive and brutal than Sharon , is learning thatthe “world management” is subject to severe limitations, as he slowly sinks into the morass ofIraq . The belief that Israel ’s problems can be solved solely by an alliance with the “worldmanagers” is an illusion.
The world is not one-dimensional, even though one country has attained an impressivemilitary superiority. The world is a very complicated place; numberless forces are at work,nothing stays in one place. “Everything is in flux,” as the ancient Greek philosopher said.
One is tempted to paraphrase Hamlet: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Arik,then are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
The world-view of Sharon , which at first appears so realistic, is the very opposite ofrealism. It is a view that will lead us to disaster.
And to Dubby, who disclosed it, whatever his motives, many thanks.