Ariel Sharon served in the Israeli armed forces from the time of his 1945 pre-state service in the Haganah until his retirement from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in 1972. His record as a soldier and officer was distinctive. He was an unconventional and independent-minded officer to the extreme. He was argumentative with colleagues and was known to refuse the orders of superiors in favor of taking sometimes heroic but life-threatening risks. In some of the bloodiest battles of Israel’s army, he led the troops under his command into situations of unimaginable danger. Often, the result was incredible success on the field of battle.
Following his retirement, he chose to join the Liberal Party. Ariel Sharon was not an ideologue and thus considered the constituency of the Liberal Party to be attractive. It consisted of industrialists, merchants, real estate landlords, professionals in academia and in other white-collar fields. While he had grown up in the milieu of Labor Zionist political and social movements, as an adult he chose to identify with people who functioned in fields of commerce and professions seemingly unhindered by ideological and movement restraints.
Although Sharon was not a Revisionist, early on he assisted his Liberal Party colleagues in partnering with the right of center Herut Party led by Menachem Begin. The two merged into the Likud Party. This enhanced their political strength and electoral potential.
In 1973 Sharon was called back to the army during the Yom Kippur War to take a command position. He is credited with turning the war around in Israel’s favor due to his crossing the Suez Canal and outflanking the Egyptian army.
In 1975-76 Sharon served as a special adviser on terrorism to Labor prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin had succeeded Golda Meir when she resigned her position in 1975. The association of Sharon with Rabin was based on their common military experiences. Indeed, Rabin was well aware of Sharon’s military achievements, calling him “the greatest field commander in our history.”
In 1977 when Rabin and Labor lost the election to Likud under Menachem Begin’s leadership, Sharon was invited back to the Likud Party with an appointment as minister of agriculture. The job included responsibility for establishing settlements in Judea and Samaria, the southern and northern areas of the West Bank.
Sharon was effective in his role
Sharon was effective in his role. He characteristically viewed his job in terms of military strategy: to prevent Palestinian presence in the territories. His motivation was in large part emboldened by the intensity and viciousness of PLO cross border attacks from their headquarters, initially in Jordan and then in Lebanon.
Following the 1981 elections, in appreciation of his achievements in advancing the settlement program, Begin appointed Sharon defense minister. This began a controversial and disruptive chapter in Israel’s military and political history. Sharon schemed with IDF chief of staff Rafael Eitan to invade Lebanon in order to destroy the PLO presence, to remove the Syrian military from Lebanon, and to support the Christian Lebanese. The Christian militia and political arm sought to take control of the government with Israel’s support.
Prime minister Begin was informed of the Sharon/Eitan plan, but neither he nor the government cabinet was prepared to approve the scheme. However, when a Palestinian terrorist group attempted to assassinate Shlomo Argov, the Israeli ambassador to Great Britain, the decision was made to invade Lebanon. Conceived as a retaliatory move against Palestinian terrorism, the government was led to believe that the IDF would not go beyond 40 kilometers north of the border. The assumed objective was to distance Israeli communities in the Galilee from PLO artillery range.
The sorry outcome was a major military war reaching to Beirut; the Sabra and Shatila massacre by the Christian Phalange; and, thereafter, years of military hostility against Israeli presence in Lebanon. One virulent byproduct was the emergence and attacks of Hezbollah against Israeli forces.
Ariel Sharon’s image was severely compromised by these events. They brought international criticism against Sharon and the IDF. And, following the national Kahn Commission of Inquiry Report, Sharon was compelled to give up his position as defense minister. Instead, he was given a place in the cabinet as minister without portfolio during 1983-84. Subsequently, from 1984 to 1990, he served as minister of trade and industry.
When Begin retired and Yitzhak Shamir was selected to assume the Likud Party leadership and the position of prime minister, Sharon was appointed minister of construction and housing. The years 1990-1992 were highlighted by massive immigration from Russia. Sharon was uniquely positioned and able to meet the challenge of creating housing for hundreds of thousands of new immigrants.
The amazing return of Sharon to public life was the result of a process of personal discipline and constructive activity.
When Benjamin Netanyahu defeated Shimon Peres in the first Israeli direct election of Israel’s prime minister in 1996, he appointed Sharon to the post of minister of national infrastructure. Then, in 1998, Netanyahu elevated Sharon to the position of foreign minister.
When Netanyahu lost the 1999 election to Labor Party head Ehud Barak, Sharon succeeded him as interim and then elected chairman of the Likud Party. During this period, he served as a member of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset.
Following the failed Camp David summit conference hosted by US president Bill Clinton in the summer of 2000 in which Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat participated, Barak’s coalition dissembled. He resigned as prime minister and called for a special prime minister election to be held in early 2001. Barak was decisively defeated by Sharon.
Sharon’s election as prime minister occurred just one month after the inauguration of US president George W. Bush. As a matter of policy, Bush initially decided to distance himself from the Israel-Palestinian conflict. He viewed the Clinton experience as having been exhausting and irreconcilable.
Then came 9/11 (September 11, 2001) when Taliban terrorists attacked the United States in New York and Washington. The US was shocked into a bitter and bloody engagement with a vicious Middle East terrorist network. In response, Bush initiated a NATO-led invasion of Afghanistan against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
In Israel, the intifada was raging throughout the country, which included a series of terrorist bombings that killed and wounded hundreds of innocent civilians. In the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, resistance was equally volatile. In response, prime minister Sharon initiated Operation Defensive Shield, the largest military operation in the West Bank since the 1967 War. Some 20,000 soldiers were called up to take part. The announced objective was the end of the intifada and the destruction of the entire terrorist infrastructure. Every major Palestinian city and village was occupied. In the process, the IDF destroyed the entire Palestinian security and civilian infrastructure.
In a 2004 poll following the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Palestinian population centers, 80% of Jewish Israelis expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
The Arab world, however, was incensed. Major leaders throughout the region turned to the US to intervene. At the time, however, the US was preoccupied with military planning for an invasion of Iraq. And the Bush regime wanted principal Arab countries in the region to commit troops to the invasion forces.
In order to pacify relevant Arab leaders, Bush announced his Road Map to Peace to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The details of his announcement were lacking, as he was not prepared to say anything more until after the war with Iraq. Nonetheless, his reversal of policy to become engaged in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict was definitive.
On his part, Sharon was intrigued by the implications of a successful invasion and military defeat of Iraq. He was convinced that such an outcome would have a substantial influence on other militant regimes. Included, of course, were the leaders and supporters of Palestinian terrorist groups.
As a follow-up to what was considered a successful outcome of Operation Defensive Shield, Sharon decided to fund and build a long-discussed permanent barrier along the seam line between Israel proper and the Palestinian territories in the West Bank.
The situation in and around the Gaza Strip was no less concerning. During the intifada, the violence there was more effective and complicated because of the isolation and vulnerability of Jewish settlements. Both Hamas and the Islamic Jihad were engaged in road attacks and the shooting of rocket and mortar rounds at the settlements.
The number of Israeli settlers and soldiers killed during the intifada was 124. This was in spite of the fact that tens of thousands of Israeli reserve soldiers were annually ordered to protect the 8,000 Israelis living in 21 Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip.
Sharon viewed the situation within Gaza in terms of his deep knowledge of military strategy and conflict analysis. He considered the cost in human and economic resources. He also studied the rapidly changing demographic balance between the Arab and Jewish populations in Gaza, as well as in the West Bank and Israel.
Soon after his election, Sharon had studied a report prepared by Israeli demographer Arnon Soffer, published by the Center for National Security Studies at the University of Haifa. In the report titled “Israel Demography 2000 – 2020 Dangers and Opportunities,” Soffer noted the rapid increase in the Palestinian Arab population in both Israel and the territories.
In sum, he concluded that by 2020, the demographic balance between Jews and Arabs would reach a tipping point, shifting significantly in favor of the combined Palestinian Arab population in Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.
In fact, the tipping point was not reached in 2020 but in 2022. Still, the reality in the Gaza Strip was particularly obvious and dangerous.
Sharon’s military experience and understanding of the consequences of Israel’s unresolved struggle with Palestinian political aspirations and terrorism was concretized following the war in Iraq. And, when Bush made good on his promise to the coalition of Arab partners, announcing his intention to advance his Road Map for Peace, Sharon was ready to engage in the process. He had already concluded that his primary mission as prime minister was “to bring peace and security to Israel.” And he saw in the Bush initiative a strategic opportunity to ensure Israel’s future.
Sharon then announced his commitment to the two-state solution as outlined by the US president’s Road Map. Soon after, he began developing what he called a Disengagement Plan.
When the time came to submit it for approval by the Knesset, Sharon’s presentation was comprehensive and direct. He reiterated his support for “the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside of Israel.” And he stressed that “We have no desire to permanently rule over millions of Palestinians, who double their numbers every generation. Israel, which wants to be an exemplary democracy, will not be able to bear such a reality over time.”
August 15, 2005: Sharon addresses the nation
Sharon’s emphasis of the demographic process was clearly a central theme in his thinking. As a first step, he decided to disengage from the Gaza Strip by removing both the Israeli military and the civilian presence in Gaza and in several places in northern Samaria. Thus, on August 15, 2005, the day in which Sharon announced the beginning of the evacuation of all civilian and military assets from the Gaza Strip, he addressed the nation.
In his remarks, he said: “We cannot hold Gaza forever. More than a million Palestinians live there and double their number with each generation. They live there in uniquely crowded conditions in refugee camps, in poverty and despair, in hotbeds of rising hatred with no hope on the horizon…It is out of strength not weakness that we take this step…The unilateral disengagement plan I announced two years ago is the Israeli answer to this reality.”
In December of 2005, Sharon had a minor stroke. Following his release from the hospital, he returned to work. But then, just weeks later, he suffered a serious hemorrhagic stroke. He fell into a permanent coma and died in January 2014.
Who is Bezalel Smotrich?
BEZALEL SMOTRICH was born and raised in religious settlements on the Golan Heights and in the West Bank. His father was an Orthodox rabbi who guided his son to a religious education in a number of yeshivot, such as Mercaz HaRav Kook in Jerusalem (the best-known National Religious yeshiva); Yashlatz (a National Religious yeshiva for youth) in Jerusalem; and Yeshivat Har Bracha (a National Religious institution) in the settlement of Kedumim. Smotrich’s home is adjacent, outside of the settlement’s boundary.
Among other programs, Yeshiva Har Bracha has a track to educate young men to integrate their National Religious learning into public roles of leadership and influence. Included in this category is IDF service.
In Smotrich’s case, his army service, at age 28, consisted of a reduced period of 14 months as a secretary in the Operations Division of the General Staff.
Smotrich also earned a BA at Ono College, majoring in law.
As a young right-wing activist, Smotrich was involved in the protests against Israel’s evacuation of the Gaza Strip in 2005. He was arrested and interrogated at the time by the Security Services. Since he was in possession of 700 liters of gasoline, he was held in jail for three weeks. He refused to speak about his activities and was not charged.
In 2006, Smotrich was one of the founders of Regavim, a public organization committed to protecting “Israel’s national lands and resources.” In particular, Regavim is active on the West Bank and in parts of Israel proper where Palestinians and Israeli Arabs are allegedly building structures or cultivating lands without permits and/or the approval of Jewish-Zionist authorities, which are hard to obtain, if at all.
Smotrich became involved politically when in 2015 he was elected to the Knesset on the list of candidates of the Bayit Hayehudi (Jewish Home) party. Founded in 2008, it was based on the vestiges of the National Religious Party (NRP) and another half dozen or more right-wing, Orthodox religious, nationalist parties which merged, separated, and united in whole or in part over a period of some 15 years.
Smotrich has consistently sought to advance legislation that would legalize settlements and expand Israel’s control of the West Bank. He has also advocated for the integration of Torah law into the Israeli justice system and for recognition of the supremacy of Jews in all matters of civil and national life. In this regard, he is consistent, as his personal values and prejudices are extreme. He is a “proud homophobe.” He is opposed to same sex marriage. He claims that non-Orthodox religious movement are “fake” and should be prohibited from using state-supported religious facilities.
Smotrich advocates the segregation of Arabs in public institutions and their prohibition from living in Jewish communities. He has also publicly called for the militant (violent) treatment of Palestinians and their towns and villages whom he holds to be collectively responsible for acts of violence against individuals or groups of Jews.
As regards Jewish extremism and aggressive acts against Palestinians, even when the homes and lives of Palestinians are threatened and victimized, Smotrich contends that there is “no such thing as Jewish terrorism.”
Smotrich has targeted Israeli and international human rights organizations as antithetical to and threatening to the interests of the State of Israel. He has encouraged legislation to prohibit foreign funding of human rights organizations. And he has authored legislation requiring all Israeli organizations that receive donations from abroad to report their sources.
Today Smotrich is the head of the Religious Zionism Party, which in the 2022 election ran on a joint list with the racist Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) Party led by Kahanist Itamar Ben-Gvir. The two parties won the third-largest number of seats in the election – a total of 14 seats.
As a result of the outcome, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu granted vital government departments to both Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. Smotrich is now minister of finance, although he has virtually no knowledge of economics. However, he has explained that “if we follow the Torah, we’ll be rewarded with financial abundance and great blessings. That is my approach to the economy.” Smotrich, at his demand, was also appointed as minister in the Defense Ministry with authority over all civil affairs in the Palestinian territories. In this regard, his articulated objective is to impose Israeli sovereignty throughout the entirety of the West Bank. That is, over each of the three distinct areas A, B and C, in which Palestinians reside with differing degrees of autonomy.
The division of territory was decided in the Oslo peace process under Yitzhak Rabin’s leadership. It was meant to be temporary, while over a period of years there would be a progressive transfer of control to the Palestinians. Each phase was to be coordinated with the realization of agreed-upon political and security targets. Ultimately, the Palestinians were to have gained full control of most of the land, with agreed-upon final borders in their own state.
Smotrich’s aspiration is, of course, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. And, concurrently, with his new authoritative position of power over all aspects of life in the West Bank, he is determined to develop a huge Jewish presence in new settlements throughout Judea and Samaria.
Smotrich’s second ministerial position grants him authority over decisions dealing with planning and construction in the West Bank. This includes deciding on the legitimacy of existing residents and their rights to land usage. And it empowers him to authorize the removal of residents and the destruction of alleged illegal Palestinian sites.
Smotrich is now in a position which enables him to bring to fruition what in 2017 he titled his Decisive Plan “for winning and ending” the Israel-Palestinian conflict. His vision was what he called “victory through settlement.” Smotrich’s announced objective is to double the current population of some 500,000 settlers to one million. After all, the principles of the government coalition have asserted that the Jewish people have “exclusive and indisputable right to all parts of the Land of Israel.”
As a matter of fact, the planning and construction process has been underway for some time. In addition to new housing starts, a mass of new highways and bypass roads are under construction. Others are in various stages of planning. The road network is considered to be a high priority, as it will make accessibility to Israel proper and travel, on “safe” roads, for residents in the settlements.
In his paper, Smotrich asserted that the presence of half a million more Jewish settlers would be decisive. He exclaimed that “nothing would have a greater and deeper effect on the consciousness of the Arabs of Judea and Samaria… demonstrating the impossibility of establishing another Arab state west of the Jordan (River).”
Reality, however, contradicts the pompous objectives of Smotrich’s Decisive Plan. In Smotrich’s role as minister of finance, he is committing nearly a billion additional shekels to underwrite his vision. Even so, he cannot ensure anything beyond the expenditure of additional sums of money on a losing and dangerous enterprise.
In recent years, the population in the settlements, large and small, has in relative terms decreased. This, in spite of the fact that some settlements benefit from natural growth in numbers. This is a phenomenon largely of the haredi settlements. In fact, 47% of the natural growth in the settlements is due to the progeny in two haredi towns – Modi’in Illit and Beitar Illit. But there, too, in recent years more residents have left than new ones have joined. And these are communities on the lowest rung of the economic ladder.
That is, the residents of haredi communities are neither productive nor self-sufficient. Just these two towns alone represent nearly one-third of the entire Jewish population in the West Bank. And with the addition of other haredi communities, close to 50% of all the settlers are haredi.
In addition to sustaining the haredi communities, most of the other settlements are likewise not self-sufficient. They require external (Israeli government) support. In fact, nearly 80% of settlement budgets are subsidized by government grants. This is double the average grant given to Israeli towns and cities.
It is also of note that exorbitant grants are necessary in order to underwrite the swollen number of “workers” employed in the settlements. This is a convenient way to ensure income for about one-third of the community’s workforce. This is twice as great as the number of people employed by municipalities in Israel.
The test of reality therefore also brings one to ask the critical question: Where will Smotrich find his half million new settlers? And what are his plans for protecting new and existing settlements from threatened Palestinian terrorism? He and his colleagues have complained loudly and passionately about the failure of Israel’s security forces to protect the settlers. How, then, do they plan to reconcile the huge manpower and financial resources needed to fully secure on a permanent basis all the settlements and accompanying road network? The Israeli military and police are already stretched to the extreme.
The consequence of supporting the Smotrich plan, let alone the status quo, is likely to be a severe manpower shortage in the face of large-scale terrorism, domestic criminality or war. Simply put, we do not have now nor will we in the future possess the manpower and resources needed to ensure security for the fantasized, messianic vision of the Smotrich settlement enterprise.
Perhaps he and his partner Ben-Gvir and their supporters believe that the more than two million Palestinian residents in the West Bank are going to pack up and leave, making room for Jewish settlers.
Rabin and Sharon and numerous other Israeli security-minded and politically wise leaders have concluded that the demographic facts are indisputable. Rabin and Sharon have left us a legacy of social and political realism embedded in a foundation sustained by the values of democracy, justice, and the peaceful resolution of conflict.
Smotrich, on the other hand, has proven to be an astute yeshiva bocher. He has much to contribute to the Religious Zionist messianic community of faith. Indeed, his fantasies are best played out in that venue, not in public life. ■
Stanley Ringer is the author of The Arc of Our History – A Social and Political Narrative of Family and Nation; he previously worked in the Israel Labor Party in support of the policies of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Ehud Barak.