Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pjbrow 4606 days ago
At the risk of getting down voted on what is an emotional issue for a lot of people, here's my (quite realist) view.

I was living in the West Bank when Arafat died, and I knew a bunch of people who worked in his compound. He got very sick, very quickly. The doctors around him were baffled by the steep decline, which is why he was flown to France just before he died.

I acknowledge that my theory on the issue is purely circumstantial, but a good place to start with these things is "qui bono?". Ariel Sharon (and Israel, and in my view, everyone) had a lot to gain by Arafat's death.

Whatever you think of the nastiness that he'd been involved in, Sharon was a remarkable human - Israelis aren't given to overstatement and they called him the "Lion of God".

Sharon was clearly making a dash for a grand bargain, and it's obvious that the "bulldozer" (another of his nicknames) wasn't letting anything get in his way.

By pure force of will, he withdrew Israel from Gaza (an absolutely wrenching move for Israel to make), and then left Likud to establish Kadimah so that he could move forward without blockage from the right wing radicals in his old party. In a very short time frame, Sharon bent a famously fractious Israeli parliament into a position to make a grand bargain that would stick - the last major road block to a bargain was Arafat.

Israel had had a real go at negotiating with Arafat with Bill Clinton at Camp David. It didn't work out. Of course, there are a bunch of conflicting opinions on who's to blame for the breakdown in talks, but the basic, unarguable outcome was that Arafat wasn't willing to take Israel's best offer.

Sharon obviously knew that, and also knew that Arafat's successor was going to be the comparatively mild mannered Abbas, who Sharon was already dealing with constructively. I think Sharon basically decided that, given Arafat's previous form, he was a very high risk as a grand bargain spoiler - Arafat's moral authority with the Palestinian population remained high. So, in the absence of any other option (since Arafat was essentially a dictator), good night Arafat.

If you think that Sharon wasn't capable of something that cold, take a look at his conduct in the massacre at Sabra and Shatila in Lebanon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre).

Sharon had a stroke shortly thereafter, and with that, arguably the only person capable of cutting the gordian knot in the medium term was out of the picture. Gotta love ash-sharq al-awsat.

4 comments

An interesting point of view, but I think you're way off. You make it sound like Sharon's strategy was to find a willing partner to negotiate with to find a "grand bargain". He wasn't. His strategy was to destroy any peace process. Pulling out of Gaza demonstrates that. It was done to completely destroy any need to negotiate with the Palestinians, as described by Dov Weisglass, Ariel Sharon's senior advisor in an interview with Ha'aretz. The following is quoted from here: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/top-pm-aide-gaza-p...:

"The disengagement is actually formaldehyde," he said. "It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians."

Asked why the disengagement plan had been hatched, Weisglass replied: "Because in the fall of 2003 we understood that everything was stuck. And although by the way the Americans read the situation, the blame fell on the Palestinians, not on us, Arik [Sharon] grasped that this state of affairs could not last, that they wouldn't leave us alone, wouldn't get off our case. Time was not on our side. There was international erosion, internal erosion. Domestically, in the meantime, everything was collapsing. The economy was stagnant, and the Geneva Initiative had gained broad support. And then we were hit with the letters of officers and letters of pilots and letters of commandos [refusing to serve in the territories]. These were not weird kids with green ponytails and a ring in their nose with a strong odor of grass. These were people like Spector's group [Yiftah Spector, a renowned Air Force pilot who signed the pilot's letter]. Really our finest young people."

Weisglass does not deny that the main achievement of the Gaza plan is the freezing of the peace process in a "legitimate manner."

"That is exactly what happened," he said. "You know, the term `peace process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen.... what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did."

* edit: changed wasn't to was

They call Ariel Sharon "Lion of God" because Ariel means Lion of God in Hebrew.
Thanks, I didn't know that. According to Wikipedia, another of his nicknames amongst Israelis was "The King of Israel". That moniker at least, indicates that he was regarded as a formidable character.
Did you just repost that from /r/worldnews?
Nope, authored it here and then posted it on worldnews afterwards. That's quite clear from the timestamps.
Interesting and well thought out. (I don't even know if it is a conspiracy theory or not. :-) )

Regarding Sabra and Shatila, afaik two separate courts said he couldn't be proven to be responsible? He should have considered the risk of a revenge. The wikipedia link supports this, too.

(I read up on this because I've seen SaS arguments so often. I've never seen an answer to the counter question of how to judge those who themselves did attacks on civilians in that civil war. Like PLO, unlike Sharon.)