ARIEL SHARON'S NOW IRRELEVANT VIEW OF EGYPT

The New York Sun has written about Ariel Sharon's POV of Egypt, but considering his act of defeatism and dhimmitude, I can only say that I wish I could appreciate this more than I do:

Some murmurs of surprise were heard. In theory, after all, Egypt and Israel had been at peace since Camp David. But the man who was about to become prime minister of Israel said that not only was Egypt the most hostile but it was also the most dangerous. It was the most populous Middle East country; it was influential in the Arab world. Egypt had something like 12 divisions in its Army alone, one of the 10 largest air forces in the world, and millions of males of military age. In recent years, it had been armed and trained by America. That worried him. He didn’t belittle the fact that some Egyptians were prepared to gamble on peace. But the gamble had cost President Sadat his life, and the peace had been cold. In the order of battle, the great strategist had his eye on Egypt.

As Egypt is engulfed in flames, we can’t help thinking of Ariel Sharon’s warning. He was prepared to treat with Mr. Mubarak, and did on a number of occasions, but he never had illusions about him. He was well aware of Mr. Mubarak’s machinations against Israel in the United Nations, of his agitation against Israel’s nuclear capacity, of the fact that if Egypt really wanted to stop the arms smuggling into Gaza it would have.

But now, almost 6 years after he expelled Jews from their homes, and even came dangerously close to uttering something anti-semitic when he said that there would be no Jews left in Gaza after what he did, I'm afraid Sharon's viewpoint is largely nullified. Especially after the Hamas ultimately took over the Gaza strip, and rockets were fired at Jewish residences, mainly in Ashkelon.

Based on this, I don't think the NY Sun is making much of an impact. Granted, the view of Islamofascism dominating Egypt and why it's dangerous is a very vital argument, but Sharon is no longer someone to look to for the explanations, as he trashed them shortly before he went comatose.

I would recommend Prof. Paul Eidelberg instead, as he spotted the problems too, and unlike Sharon, Eidelberg hasn't betrayed his principles.