For decades the name of Ariel Sharon elicited the most negative reactions from Palestinians and Arabs. He was the embodiment of evil associated with Israel’s military; the conqueror of Arab armies and the facilitator of horrific massacres carried out against hapless Palestinian civilians in Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps in Lebanon. But Sharon, who died Saturday after spending the last eight years in a comma, was much more than a controversial Israeli general. In the latter years of his life he became a powerful political force that changed the map of Israeli politics.

Sharon was an Israeli war hero, the last in a generation that helped realize the Zionist dream in Palestine. He was known for his military brilliance, but also for his impetuous and reckless actions. His role in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, the occupation of Beirut and the massacres in Palestinian refugee camps will forever remain an indelible part of his divisive legacy.

Sharon believed in greater Israel and supported the colonization of occupied Palestinian territories. For years he was at the forefront of those critical of the peace process and the Oslo Accords. He was a hero to the settlers and an enemy of the Israeli left which favored a two-state solution and the creation of an independent Palestinian state. He was the exact opposite of another Israeli general and war hero: Yitzhak Rabin.

He was also a calculating politician. His provocative visit to Al-Aqsa Mosque in 2000 triggered the second Palestinian Intifada and brought the peace process to a halt. Few months later he became prime minister and head of the newly formed Kadima Party. He deliberately sabotaged the peace process with the Palestinians and re-occupied the West Bank holding Palestinian President Yasser Arafat prisoner in his Ramallah compound. The rest is history.

It is believed that Sharon had his own vision for a unilateral final solution with the Palestinians. He built the notorious separation wall, snaking through the West Bank and representing the new borders of Israel with the Palestinians. He took the bold decision to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip, realizing that holding on to that region had no real value for Israel.

Had he not succumbed to a brain stroke in 2006, Sharon would have enforced his own plan on the Palestinians, withdrawing from populated areas, annexing settlements and burying the two-state solution forever.

But his vision may still survive. His party is no longer as effective but Israel is now governed by a right-wing government whose outlook on peace with the Palestinians does not differ much from what Sharon had in mind. Today the peace process struggles with the same difficult issues that Sharon wanted to resolve unilaterally. Benjamin Netanyahu’s positions on East Jerusalem, refugees, borders, security and Palestinian rights are almost identical to those of Sharon. The difference is that Sharon, as a former general, would have moved to liquidate the Palestinian issue without hesitation.

Sharon’s legacy as a right-wing fighter and politician continues today. His death will revive his views and inspire politicians to carry on with his vision for a unilateral solution. Sharon never believed in a peaceful and just settlement with the Palestinians or with Israel’s Arab neighbors. He had rebuffed the Arab Peace Initiative. He believed in Israel’s military might and regional superiority as the only requirements to guarantee its survival. It is difficult to say that his views had died with him. His extremist approach to challenges will survive him.

- Osama Al Sharif is a journalist and political commentator based in Amman.

Email: [email protected]