Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush from Wikipedia

Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush from Wikipedia

Now that Sharon has died, we are already being bombarded with media coverage about what a “strong” leader Ariel Sharon was, and how led Israel in an “uncompromising” fashion.

George W. Bush had once famously called Sharon “a man of peace” (something not even Sharon probably believed about himself), and David Cameron’s statement on the death of Sharon naturally fell back on the cliche of “he took brave and controversial decisions in pursuit of peace.”

Don’t fall for the obfuscation.
Sharon was not a strong leader.
To call Sharon strong is to fundamentally misunderstand what real strength is, and what it is not.

We are called to not just speak truth to power, we are called to speak truth against power when that power is separated from love and concern for fellow human beings.

Sharon made the lives of Palestinians a living hell.
Sharon derailed the peace process.
Sharon assured the continued slide of Israel from a utopian dream down towards becoming an occupying force.

Occupying people, destroying homes, participating in massacres in Shatila and Sabra (Sharon, 1982) are not the sign of “strength.”  These are the marks of brutality.  That is why Sharon is called the “Butcher of Beirut.”

Brutality and strength must never be confused.  Strength is to stand in the midst of a storm, and connect the welfare and wellbeing of your own people to the welfare and wellbeing of others, and insist that dignity is not a zero-sum game.

To remedy the fictitious accounts commemorating Sharon, look at these four articles:

1)     “Ariel Sharon:  Enemy of the peace”
In a dispassionate tone, this essay marks how Sharon worked to make the peace process an impossibility.  It quotes Sharon’s aids as stating:

“The significance of our disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process. It supplies the formaldehyde necessary so there is no political process with Palestinians… When you freeze the process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.  Effectively, this whole package called a Palestinian state, with all it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda.”

For all those who wonder where the Palestinian peace partners are, we have to also be willing to ask why we glorify Israeli leaders like Sharon who have made peace (and a viable Palestinian state) an impossibility over the last few decades.

Continue reading post here.

7 Comments

  1. Israel deserves to survive. God says they will survive, because His will is always done. All the Arab countries surrounding Israel could take in their Arab brothers but they will not. They need the conflict to keep their deception alive. Every time Israelis give up land their enemies use it as a new platform to attack from. They would be fools to give up on more inch of land for “peace”. Obama’s administration has abandoned Israel and I believe that support for Israel was the only thing holding back God’s judgement on our country that has officially told Him to “get lost”. The Bible teaches that in the end times Israel will become hated by all nations and also the source of their destruction. It seems we are getting closer to that scenario all the time.

  2. Hello Dennis. The issue is not the survival of Israel (it’s one of the strongest militaries int he world). It is whether non-Jews will have rights equal to Jews in Israel. That is a simple question. Right now, they don’t. Plain and simple. No person would willingly choose to live in a second-class citizenship context, under occupation, without access to full and equal rights.
    As to the logic of “other Arab countries”, you’re confusing the facts. Palestinians have lived in what’s today Israel for centuries. over 80% of their country is now classified as Israel. What’s left of their land is under occupation. And you’re asking other Arab countries to take them? Here’s an analogy: it would be like me saying I don’t like Tea Party Republicans, and they should move to another country where English is spoken.
    No, the solution is not further exile, further dispossession. The solution is equal rights and justice for all. Do unto others what you would want for them to do unto you.

  3. Hi Omid,

    I have heard and read much about the history of the land of Israel, a land which our creator God promised to them. I don’t think there was any established people there when the UN granted them the land to come back to after nearly 2000 years of exile. Only after they were there was there suddenly this intense reaction to their being there.

    And as to it not being for survival, there are many recorded quotes by Islamic leaders vowing the destruction and annihilation of the Jewish people. It is a spiritual battle not primarily political. And it is a fact that every piece of ground given up has been used by radical Islamists to move forward their attacks. You might have a strong military but when the size of your country is smaller than a US state it is almost impossible to defend, especially when you are talking nuclear ( Iran?).

  4. One more point to consider is the behavior of Islam in relation to their percentage in any given country. The more the percentage the more aggressive and violent it becomes. It becomes not a choice but force. The “equal rights for all” clause only applies until a high enough percentage exists for seizing control. This is obvious in the European takeovers in progress.

  5. Dennis, your statements are simply factually incorrect, and a simple and basic overview of history would correct them.
    “I don’t think there was any established people there when the UN granted them the land to come back to after.”
    This is patently false, and so easily disproven. There were about 1.5 million Palestinians living in Palestine at that time. So much photographic, archeological, and other evidence. If you would read Zionist leaders, they even talk about what to do with the indigenous Palestinian population.
    http://www.1948.org.uk/photo-gallery/historic-palestine/2470299
    and
    http://www.unrwa.org/content/unrwa-photo-and-film-archive-palestine-refugees
    As for the nuclear conversation, remember that we are talking about Iran trying to develop nuclear capabilities. Israel ALREADY possesses over 200 nuclear warheads, ready to be launched.
    It’s good to the facts lined up.
    And then to think about a just, peaceful, and equitable solution to this decades long suffering.

    • I will do more research to back up the historical part because I don’t believe I am incorrect, and will provide documentation. You still haven’t addressed my points concerning land received being used as staging platforms for attack and the violent tactics of Islam when in a higher percentage of population.

  6. And as far as the nuclear side, Israel has had these weapons for decades and will never use them except to survive. No Israeli walks into a crowd of women and children packed with explosives and detonates himself. Project that proclivity onto the nuclear stage and figure that a radical Islamist may fire the first weapon he can make.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments with many links may be automatically held for moderation.