Ariel Sharon, Israel’s former prime minister whose eight-year-long medical nightmare has now worsened, helped save Israel at least twice. The first time, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, won him worldwide acclaim. The second time, against Yasir Arafat’s terror war three decades later, earned him broad denunciations. That shift reflects the change in tactics in the decades-long war against Israel’s existence, and the resulting plunge in Israel’s standing worldwide.

In October, 1973, Sharon, a fierce fighter who was left for dead in the 1948 war, and pioneered new tank battle tactics in 1967, risked a court martial when his troops crossed the Suez Canal. Israel was reeling from the Egyptian-Syrian Yom Kippur offensive. Defying his superiors, Sharon insisted that rather than fighting defensively, Israel should take the offense and enter Egyptian territory. His daring maneuver worked, encircling Egypt’s Third Army, and helping Israel triumph. This was Sharon`s Sabra Zionism; his Israel boldly determined its own destiny. Millions toasted Sharon and his plucky little country’s comeback from a dastardly surprise attack.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.

Since that Arab military defeat, Israel’s neighbors have not invaded the Jewish state. Instead, as the Israeli-Arab conflict became the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Arab tactics shifted from armies and delegitimization to terrorism and delegitimization. By 1975, when the UN General Assembly libeled Zionism as racism, the Palestinian approach of globalizing the war against Israel began getting traction. Rooting the fight against Israel in the broader post-colonialist war, emphasizing Palestinian suffering, and targeting Israel’s controversial settlements, cast Israel as the aggressor not the victim to many. Israel – as we see in the latest academic boycott moves – became caricatured as theinternational outlaw, the ultimate imperialist, colonialist, racist nation – although its ties to the land make it guilty of none of those crimes in what remains a national not racial border conflict. The Jewish state has now become the favorite target of radical elite bullies just as Jews used to be the favorite target of more vulgar bullies.

Over the decades, the conflict also became more complex, partially due to Sharon’s own contributions. Likud`s rise and Labor`s decline made Israel less popular in Europe and with Social Democrats. Escalating the settlement project from developing security footholds ala the Allon Plan and restoring Jewish communities like Kfar Etzion destroyed in 1948, to creating ideological outposts sometimes surrounded by Palestinians, proved polarizing. Moreover, in the 1982 war against the Palestinians in Lebanon, Sharon, as Defense Minister, overstretched by invading Beirut, then failed to stop Christian Phalangists from massacring Palestinians at Sabra and Shatila. Such moves had Israel`s critics calling Israel Goliath and the Palestinians the new Davids.

As a result, in 2000, when Yasir Arafat disappointed Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak by rejecting a serious peace offer and leading his people back to terror, many outside Israel blamed the Israelis and particularly Ariel Sharon rather than Arafat and the Palestinians. The resulting waves of Palestinian suicide bombings catapulted Sharon into power as prime minister in March 2001. A year later, after terrorists murdered more than 130 Israelis in one month – and after the 9/11 attacks helped change American policy – Sharon counterattacked. The military offensive against the West Bank in April, 2002, eventually calmed the region, but made Sharon a hated figure by the Left and throughout the Arab world.

Israelis made a cosmic mistake by not celebrating this victory over terror a decade ago. We deserved brass bands and victory parades for our achievements, while Sharon should be lionized for what he did. Like Joshua`s ability to see "milk and honey" when his fellow spies were terrified of giants, Sharon taught Israelis - and a terrorized world - that democracies could defeat terrorists.  In building a security fence and going on offense militarily, Sharon showed that the Palestinian turn from negotiation toward terror disproved the delusions of Israel''s left and right. And with his final move, disengaging from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank in the summer of 2005, Sharon demonstrated that while pandering to Palestinian terrorists would not bring peace, neither could Palestinian aspirations be ignored. Those deeming the disengagement a failure forget the exorbitant military and diplomatic price Israel was paying for staying in Gaza – Sharon helped staunch that wound.

It is fitting that Ariel Sharon''s half-century in history''s limelight would end by confusing his enemies, for he never fully explained his new vision. His post-disengagement strokes left friends and foes to speculate about how he would have responded to the first waves of rockets from Gaza and to the Hamas coup seizing control there, among other challenges.

Sharon`s career teaches us to appreciate unconventional tactics, subtleties, complexities, and the need for pragmatism not millennialism. There will be no peace until partisans on all sides can acknowledge the situation as multidimensional and dynamic, realizing that sometimes generals can become statesmen, warmakers can become peacemakers, longstanding assumptions can become discarded notions, and foes can become friends.

Sharon''s zigs and zags expressed and confirmed the non-messianic pragmatism that has been the key to Zionism''s success. Most Palestinians remain addicted to their maximalist, unrealistic fantasies. Zionists succeeded by solving problems not seeking messianic justice, even after the monstrous Nazi injustice. That search for solutions, that ability to adjust ideology to fit new perceptions of reality, led David Ben-Gurion to accept the 1947 UN partition, led Yitzhak Rabin into the Oslo gamble, and led Ariel Sharon to re-enter West Bank cities in 2002, build a security barrier, and leave Gaza.

Ariel Sharon lacked Bill Clinton''s charisma, Ronald Reagan''s eloquence, Menachem Begin''s principles, or Theodor Herzl''s dreams. But "Arik" epitomized the Sabra`s bold, improvisational, no-nonsense, can-do sensibility.  All of us who seek peace and abhor terror should be grateful for Ariel Sharon''s majestic, far-reaching, surefooted Zionist pragmatism.

Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University and the author of eight books including, most recently Moynihan''s Moment: America''s Fight Against Zionism as Racism, just published by Oxford University Press. Watch the new Moynihan''s Moment video!

Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this blog article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or viewpoint of The Jerusalem Post. Blog authors are NOT employees, freelance or salaried, of The Jerusalem Post.

Think others should know about this? Please share