Sharansky's Exit
One of the foremost minds, hearts and consciences in the world today, Natan Sharansky, author of The Case for Democracy, has resigned from the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon. His letter of resignation, available at Winds of Change, is a must read for those seeking to understand why he would step down at this time. In his own words:
"As you know, I have opposed the disengagement plan from the beginning on the grounds that I believe any concessions in the peace process must be linked to democratic reforms within Palestinian society. Not only does the disengagement plan ignore such reforms, it will in fact weaken the prospects for building a free Palestinian society and at the same time strengthen the forces of terror.
Will our departure from Gaza encourage building a society where freedom of speech is protected, where independent courts protect individual rights, and where free markets enable Palestinians to build an independent economic life beyond government control? Will our departure from Gaza end incitement in the Palestinian media or hate- filled indoctrination in Palestinian schools? Will our departure from Gaza result in the dismantling of terror groups or the dismantling of the refugee camps in which four generations of Palestinians have lived in miserable conditions?
Clearly, the answer to all these questions is no."
There is little that can be said to challenge his assertions here. The withdrawal from the Gaza is a political move. As such, it is not based on principle or character – attributes that Sharansky, his thoughts and actions are bound to. Prime Minister Sharon is acting as a leader, and in this case, his leadership isn’t intended to impact the Israeli people.
From my take, Sharon’s move is aimed at leading the Palestinian people and world opinion. In the absence of positive Arab or Palestinian leadership, particularly in the autocratic nations backing the Palestinian Authority for years under Yassir Arafat and holding the reigns of power with a perverted blend of false piety and ethnic nationalism, the Palestinian people have failed to establish an sense of democratic normalcy or basic systems of supporting life in a free and open society. Their lack of trust in Israel, as well as moderate Palestinian leaders, cannot be modified from within in short order. To hasten the transition, Sharon takes an unpopular course at home.
Sharansky should be applauded for his principles, while the pragmatically minded will also recognize that his stepping down in no way aids his overall objective. Would I have had it that Sharansky stay despite his disagreement with the policy? Probably not, for a man of his character would be hard pressed to be most effective in that role, and yet, I can’t help but believe that had he been willing to accept the political boldness of the plan, and recognize that while nothing is guaranteed, it is leadership by example for a people who’ve known only negative leaders – the Palestinians.
