John Rapley
ISRAELI DOCTORS say that Ariel Sharon's condition continues to improve. Nevertheless, few expect him to ever resume his functions as prime minister.
The country is thus confronted with the real question of what it will do after Sharon. The man has left a strong mark on the country's past, and looked set to do so again on its future. Having fought or commanded in all of the country's wars, he acquired a reputation as a tough, even savage defender of Israel's interests.
Above all, Ariel Sharon has made Israel's security his life's task. If that meant countenancing brutal tactics in battles with the Palestinians, so be it. If it meant violating international law by building settlements as buffer zones, so be it. But if it meant withdrawing from those settlements in the face of vitriol from settlers, so be that as well.
As a result, Mr. Sharon acquired a reputation as perhaps the only man in Israel with the authority to recognise an eventual Palestinian state. It would be, admittedly, a state on his terms. He wished to retain some West Bank settlements, and his government showed every sign of wanting to annex Arab East Jerusalem.
Nevertheless, weary at the harsh toll taken by the Palestinian intifada, many Israelis appeared to have coalesced around Sharon's agenda of building a separation wall and then withdrawing from most of Palestine. This appeared to go further than anyone has towards reconciling the demands of security-conscious Israelis with the desire for peace of Israel's left. The only unhappy faction was the right. It clung to dreams of restoring Israel's Biblical borders.
AHEAD IN THE POLLS
Concentrated in Mr. Sharon's Likud Party, the right was preparing to turn on him. So Mr. Sharon bested them. He left Likud to form his own party, attracting prominent Likudniks and even some Labour politicians to his cause. Polls indicated that in the upcoming March elections, Mr. Sharon's party would take a third of the seats in the Knesset, and easily form a centrist coalition.
Then came the stroke. And it became painfully clear that this political strategy hinged on one man. Perhaps his health may be restored to the point that he can play an inspirational role in the election, and the subsequent government. But more likely, a successor will have to do the job. And it is not yet clear that anyone else will be able to hold his party together and deliver the victory.
Adding to the sudden vagueness in Israeli politics is that the situation on the Palestinian side is also becoming murky. With elections due later this month, the ruling Fatah is splintering in the face of a disciplined Islamist opposition. Many analysts believe that Fatah will grasp any opportunity to postpone the vote. Indeed, the theory has been floated within Palestine that the recent spate of violence in the Gaza Strip has been orchestrated by Fatah elements looking to create a pretext for postponement.
For now, within Israel, a centrist coalition is holding. Early polls suggest that Mr. Sharon's Kadima Party will maintain its position and form the next government. But it would probably also please centrists if Mr. Sharon's health were restored to the point that he could play a background role, however modest.
It is a vivid illustration of the bizarre twists that politics can take in the Middle East to say, as former U.S. President Bill Clinton did this week, that Sharon's illness puts Middle East peace in question. But those who would wish to end the long war with the Arabs are probably praying for the health of a man many of them long despised.
John Rapley is a senior lecturer in the Department of Government, University of the West Indies, Mona.
