Sharon the warrior thriving as peacemaker: editorial

Score one more for Ariel Sharon.

This week, Israel's prime minister defeated yet another parliamentary push to scuttle his Gaza settlement withdrawal. In a convincing 72-39 vote, the Knesset rejected an anti-withdrawal referendum seen as the settlers' last gasp politically.

Moreover, by a vote of 58-36, the legislature also passed Sharon's 2005 budget, which allocates funding for disengagement. A defeat could have brought down the Sharon government.

But he won.

What happens next is anyone's guess. Pro-settlement forces promise continued resistance. Some threaten unrest and civil war. Sharon's coalition of centrist Likud, Labor and other parties promises the rule of law and an orderly withdrawal from Gaza.

However things unfold (and we hope for a peaceful outcome), we have to admire the masterful tactics of Sharon. The former champion of the settler movement and worst nightmare of the Israeli left has proven himself a statesman and political survivor.

Through all the upheaval Israel has endured over the past four years, Sharon has wielded power skillfully, forging alliances with former rivals, thwarting challenges from within his own party and steering his nation through dark days.

Detractors from within Israel and around the world have had to concede his adroit handling of the passing of Yasser Arafat, revived peace talks with the Palestinian Authority, Israel's economic freefall and subsequent turnaround.

Chief among those is his leadership in the region-wide peace process. History is replete with warriors-turned-peacemaker: Nixon in China. Sadat in Jerusalem. Begin in Cairo. Add to that list Sharon in the territories.

It's not that any of these men went soft on their former enemies. Rather, for each, pragmatism trumped dogmatism. Each saw a historical moment and seized it.

For that, many one-time Sharon lovers are now Sharon haters. They see him as a tyrant and a traitor.

Such attacks are part of the congenital mismatch between leadership and democracy. Americans and Israelis live in societies built on consensus and coalition, in which strong leaders may be perceived as budding autocrats. President Bush faces such criticism daily, and so does Sharon.

That is the price of leadership. It may engender fierce opposition. In Sharon's case, he is virtually a marked man by zealots on the right (not to mention Palestinian terrorists).

But Sharon has taken Israel to the brink of what may be an era of real peace. Given his skills, we are not about to bet against him.