Ariel Sharon: Made it a Desert and Called this Peace

Ariel Sharon: Made it a Desert abd Called this Peace

✍️ Author’s Note

This reflection, Ariel Sharon Made it a Desert and Called this Peace, is a critique which explores the events leading up to and surrounding the massacre of Sabra and Shatila in the context of the Israel-Palestine Conflict and Ariel Sharon’s involvement, but placed in the context of the time. The events remain relevant.

With the recent assassinations of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and others, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon once again revealed his true face, that of a war criminal. This label, without a doubt, also applies to Yasser Arafat; they seem to mirror each other in their deeds.

Yasser Arafat, once a revolutionary figure, failed as a leader for the Palestinian people, especially during the Camp David Summit in July 2000. Instead of progress, his leadership led to more discontent, confrontation, and continued occupation following the Oslo accords.

Sharon’s provocative visit to the Temple Mount on September 28, 2000, while he was the leader of the Israeli opposition, was reckless and further fuelled escalation from both sides. Arafat’s failure to rein in Palestinian militants was irresponsible, as was Sharon’s heavy-handed response as Prime Minister since 2001, resulting in thousands of casualties.

History will harshly judge both men.

However, it’s evident to me that with his tactics of state terrorism and targeted killings, Prime Minister Sharon sows the seeds of his own downfall. Unfortunately, others may follow suit in the future, resorting to targeted killings as a means of suppression.

The more terrorism is provoked, the deeper we sink into a never-ending cycle of violence. This also underscores the complete failure of the Bush administration’s Middle East policy.

It’s unrealistic to believe that the Israeli army can quell resistance against the over 35-year occupation, which has entrenched itself as a permanent fixture. Claims by Israeli spokesperson Avi Pazner, suggesting that Israel’s terrorist acts will foster stability in the Middle East and give moderates in Hamas a chance, are illusions. Resorting to massive violence and targeted killings only perpetuates the cycle of terror and marks the beginning of state terrorism.

Sharon’s slogan of “rooting out terror” is a futile illusion, and his so-called victory remains elusive. Only diplomatic negotiations, such as the “Geneva accords,” hold the potential for a solution.

The occupation of the West Bank and Gaza has not only corrupted Israel but also represents a blatant violation of Security Council resolutions, exposing the double standards of the Bush administration, which famously dubbed Ariel Sharon as a “man of peace” — a title he hardly deserves and is highly inappropriate. Throughout Sharon’s career, both as a soldier and a politician, there’s a consistent pattern of using brute force, not only against the regular armies of Arab states but also against Palestinian civilians.

Sharon’s history is stained with atrocities. In 1953, as a young major commanding Unit 101, he was responsible for the massacre of Qibya, where 69 people, including women and children, were slaughtered. This was not his last war crime.

In 1982, as Defence Minister, he orchestrated the invasion of Lebanon, for which he was held personally responsible by the “Kahan” Commission for failing to prevent the massacre in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in September 1982. The Israeli forces enabled these atrocities while overseeing the camps and even aiding the attacks at night. The commission’s report revealed the indiscriminate massacre of about 700-800 innocent Palestinians.

It’s astonishing that those responsible evaded accountability. Despite being deemed unfit as Minister of Defense and forced to resign, Sharon later became the Prime Minister of Israel, showcasing the moral decay within Israel.

Sharon’s ultimate goal has always been to thwart the Israel-Palestine peace process to further a “greater Israel” strategy, extending from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates, including parts of Syria and Lebanon, according to some interpretations.

During the last three years of the intifada, atrocities in the occupied territories escalated under his watch. However, this shouldn’t surprise us, considering Sharon’s history. What has transpired in recent years only confirms that Sharon is a man of war, using diplomacy merely as a means to achieve his military objectives.

In conclusion, while Israel has the right to exist within secure borders and defend itself, the Palestinian people have endured enough under Israeli occupation. They deserve their own state.

 Netherlands, WJJH – June 2004 – Modified March 2024

📌 Blog Excerpt

The actions and failures of Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat are problematic and labelling them as war criminals justified. This highlights Sharon’s history of using force, including massacres, and his obstruction of the peace process in favour for a greater Israel. Emphasizing the need for diplomatic negotiations and the two-state solution.