It was an ominous beginning to the Sharon era. Before the incoming prime minister had even formed a government, Palestinians seemed to be telling him in words and deeds that he would have to deliver more concessions than even his predecessor Ehud Barak had offered–or risk a widening conflagration. In the West Bank, the Jewish settlement Psgot came under withering gunfire Thursday night for the first time in six weeks; in Ramallah, hundreds of youths clashed with Israeli soldiers on Friday; the street battles included tank fire, and left several injured. In Gaza, the head of the militant Islamic Jihad group pledged to continue the bombing campaign as part a wider jihad. “The choice of holy war will never stop,” said Islamic Jihad leader Abdallah al-Shami.
The trouble is nothing new: bombings and clashes have formed the backdrop for years of Israeli-Arab peacemaking. But the election of Sharon–one of Israel’s most unbending politicians–could alter the balance. Sharon insists he will negotiate with the Palestinians only on his terms–demanding first an end to the violence that has raged for the past four and a half months. Many Israelis believe that strategy will curb Palestinian violence. Others fear it will give it new momentum.
Sharon doesn’t have free reign. His policy will depend largely on the look of the government he is able to put together. Because Likud has only 19 seats in the 120-seat Knesset, the new prime minister can’t rule without forming a stable coalition. Last week Sharon put out feelers to both right-wing allies in the Knesset and more moderate Labor Party leaders, who favor continuing dialogue with the Palestinians. He even met with outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Barak, though officials said the talks focused on an orderly transfer of power. Sharon’s preference: a “unity government” in which Labor stalwarts such as Shimon Peres would hold key cabinet posts. “Sharon badly needs a deal with Labor to show the world that he’s not so extreme,” says Ze’ev Shiff, a political columnist for the Israeli daily Ha’aretz. But some powerful left-wing Laborites, including Justice Minister Yossi Beilin, oppose a deal with Sharon, and warn that the party could break apart if Labor leaders opt to join Likud. Should negotiations with Labor collapse, Sharon would be left with a less palatable option: cobbling together a coalition with the religious and right-wing parties, which would give him a razor-thin majority in the Knesset.
That’s a scary prospect for Israeli moderates and Arabs. One figure who could play an influential role in Sharon’s coalition is Avigdor Lieberman, a leader of the hard-line National Union Party and longtime aide-de-camp of former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A hot-tempered former nightclub bouncer who was recently charged for calling the deputy commander of the Israeli police “an anti-Semitic racist,” Lieberman has advocated rolling back the Oslo peace accord if Palestinian violence continues. He’s urged the Israeli military to reoccupy the West Bank town of Beit Jala as a response to continued shooting from there into the adjacent Jewish neighborhood of Gilo.
Michael Kleiner, another right-wing Sharon ally in the Knesset, told an Israeli newspaper last week, “Maybe we’ll have to retake Ramallah, or charge into Gaza or Jericho with tanks in order to clean things up.” Then there’s Rehavam Ze’evi, a potential cabinet minister who supports the “transfer” of the entire Arab West Bank population to neighboring Jordan. Ze’evi has vowed to “bring down” Sharon if he attempts to hand more territory to the Palestinians.
Sharon would prefer not to be boxed into a corner by such extremists. But he’s already made it clear that he’ll toe a tough line. Unlike Barak, who kept talking to the Palestinians as the Intifada raged, Sharon won’t negotiate with Arafat until the violence stops. He’s also vowed that he won’t divide Jerusalem or accept Palestinian refugees from 1948–fundamental Palestinian demands–and that he’d be far more tightfisted in handing over land for a Palestinian state. Still, he hasn’t ruled out dismantling some Jewish settlements on the West Bank, and he’s talked about establishing an “interim agreement” with the Arabs that could pave the way for a comprehensive settlement. Palestinians might forswear further street battles and terrorist attacks in return for, say, a dollop of territory and an easing of the harsh restrictions keeping them penned up inside the West Bank and Gaza. Another possible strategy would be to implement what Israel calls “unilateral disengagement,” or total separation, in which the government would establish a border, build a high fence, and let the Palestinians fend for themselves.
The real danger, many observers say, is that Palestinians will see little to be gained by trying to bargain with Sharon, and will again take their frustration to the streets. That could arouse the ex-general’s bellicose instincts–and lead to a deadly escalation of the conflict. “When the shooting starts again and cars start exploding in the middle of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, then we’ll see how short his fuse really is,” says a senior military source. “He’ll be out there, razing houses to the ground, doing whatever it will take to stamp it out. But there is a price to be paid–and the price may be war.” That’s a terrifying prospect to both sides, but one that is certainly not implausible in the harsh new climate. “We have entered a new tunnel,” says columnist Ze’ev Shiff. The next few months should determine whether there’s light at the end of it–or only deeper darkness.
