2004-10-16
 
from Uri Avnery
 
 
 Thank You, Dubby
 
 What really is important is not what he said or why he said it, but 
the world-view that animates 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. His statement is crystal clear: the 
"redeployment plan" was designed to "freeze" the peace process for 
decades, to put all peace plans "in formaldehyde", to put an end to the 
possibility of a Palestinian state, once and for all.
 
 A dozen small settlements will be dismantled in order to keep 
practically all the 250,000 West Bank settlers where they are. Israel 
will "concede" the Gaza Strip, which constitutes 1.3% of pre-1948 
Palestine, in order to take permanent possession of the West Bank, which 
is 16 times larger. The Gaza Strip will be cut off from the world on 
land, by sea and in the air, as will the 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 the face 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 the left. 13 out of the 40 members of his Likud faction 
in the Knesset abstained from voting for him this week, although the vote 
was about nothing more then a resolution to "take notice" of an 
unimportant speech of his. Sharon wants to explain to the extreme right 
wing of his own party that "disengagement" is a war-plan rather than a 
peace-plan, a plan to annex territories rather than a plan to "give up" 
territories, a plan for the rapid expansion of the West Bank settlements 
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 his trusted lieutenant to say it instead of him. The 
settlers know, of course, that "Dubby" is His Master'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 Sharon acidly. Immediately 
afterwards he assembled the Labor Knesset faction and asked them not to 
vote 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) announced that 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 beautiful friendship between Dubby and Condy, between Weis and 
Rice, will hold after Weisglass practically undressed her in public.
 
 But that is not what is really important. After all, Weisglass did 
not reveal anything new to those who know Sharon's intentions. And 
whoever wants to deceive himself will continue to do so.
 
 What is really important is the Weltanschauung, the world-view of 
Sharon as it emerges from Weisglass' long interview. When he exposes 
Sharon's ways of thinking, this sheds light on 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 no foreseeing 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. The world 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 by Sharon).
 
 Their interest is to take possession of all of the territory between 
the Mediterranean and the Jordan (at least).
 
 The Palestinians are powerless. Hence, they are nothing more than an 
object to be kicked around 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 "world management".
 
 All the power of the US is concentrated in the White House. The 
President and a handful of other 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 with the 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 shall take 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 the time 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 perhaps because 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 a blunt instrument that cannot solves complex problems. 
A leader who puts his sole trust in it will 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 decent respect for the opinions of mankind", was 
not just an empty phrase. It was a realistic appraisal: world public 
opinion influences in a thousand ways the behavior of nations and 
governments. 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 march on the parade ground.
 
 Military might is but one of the forces active in the world. 
Economic forces do not have a smaller impact; as a matter of fact, their 
impact may be much bigger in the long run. Moral forces are invisible, 
but their impact is immense. One of the greatest military leaders in 
history, Napoleon, was well aware of this.
 
 The human craving for freedom is invincible, and so is the struggle 
of oppressed nations for liberation. To ignore this is not realism, it is 
blindness.
 
 Even George W. Bush, himself no less primitive and brutal than 
Sharon, is learning that the "world management" is subject to severe 
limitations, as he slowly sinks into the morass of Iraq. The belief that 
Israel's problems can be solved solely by an alliance with the "world 
managers" is an illusion.
 
 The world is not one-dimensional, even though one country has 
attained an impressive military 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 of realism. It is a view that will lead us to disaster.
 
 And to Dubby, who disclosed it, whatever his motives, many thanks.