Political Uncertainty in the Wake of Ariel Sharon's Stroke

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

On Wednesday, Ariel Sharon suffered his second stroke in less than a month.  Doctors expected a full recovery after the first stroke, but the prognosis is bleak after the second one.  Although there is still confusion in the Israeli press as of this writing, it's evident that Sharon is fighting for his life.  At the very least, it seems that his political career is over.

The New York Times reports that it will be near impossible to treat Sharon's stroke because of the blood thinners that he began to take in the wake of the first stroke:

Although Mr. Sharon was taken to surgery to try to remove the blood pouring into his skull, it was a desperate move, neurologists said. Hemorrhages in the brain while the patient is taking blood thinners "are usually devastating events," said Dr. Matthew E. Fink, chief of the Division of Stroke and Critical Care at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center.  "This sounds really terrible."  Statistically, the likelihood of death is greater than 80 percent, Dr. Fink said.

The political uncertainty created by this medical calamity cannot be overstated.  Sharon's powers have been transferred to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem.  Omri Ceren of the Mere Rhetoric blog, who's done an excellent job of following the Hebrew press in the wake of Sharon's stroke, reports that commentators in Israel are confident in Olmert's ability to win over the public with no real basis for the confidence:  "They aren't sure why they're confident, but it has something to do with the . . . er . . . unique way that Israelis approach their politicians."

There are three key uncertainties on the horizon at present.  The first is the uncertainty that this creates for Israeli politics.  Israeli elections were set for late March after Sharon's request to dissolve the Israeli government was granted.  Sharon's new party, Kadima, was expected to emerge victorious in the March elections.  However, CNN.com reports that "the party is so closely associated with Sharon that his health problems are likely to inject significant uncertainty into the campaign."

The second key uncertainty is the upcoming Palestinian elections, scheduled for Jan. 25.  Israel has been greatly concerned about Hamas's participation in the elections, and recently insisted that Palestinians residing in East Jerusalem couldn't vote in the election.  Sateh Noureddine, the managing editor of Lebanon's As-Safir newspaper, told the Associated Press that if Sharon dies, it "could lead to the postponement of the Palestinian elections and the Israeli elections and possibly could lead to a security deterioration."

A third critical uncertainty what will become of Sharon's plans for enhancing Israeli security.  Time describes Sharon's vision, which many Israeli politicians have embraced:

[I]n recent months, Sharon has managed to break the mold of Israeli politics and initiate a realignment based on politicians' abandoning traditional party loyalties and lining up behind the old general's vision.  His unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, the security wall he has built to secure Israel and the West Bank possessions it claims, and the expectation that a similar unilateral withdrawal would eventually occur in the West Bank as well are not part of any political party's standing program, nor of any treaty or "road map."  They reflect Sharon's own vision of a peace concluded without the participation of the Palestinians, based on his long-held premise that "there is no Palestinian partner," and that Israel's best interests are served by unilaterally -- and occasionally in consultation with the U.S. -- resolving the problem of the occupation on its own terms.  When his own Likud Party balked, he simply formed a new party, Kadima, supremely confident in his personal standing with the electorate.

All of this is now in doubt.  As Time states, Sharon's departure from the Israeli political scene leaves "an epic vacuum," one that will most certainly not be easy to fill.

TrackBack