Campus split on impact of Sharon victory

When Sam Spector '03 — president of the Student Executive Board at the Center for Jewish Life — looked at the newspaper Wednesday morning, he had something to be happy about.

In a landslide election Tuesday evening, Ariel Sharon defeated Ehud Barak to become the new prime minister of Israel.

"This is a new step in Israeli history," Spector said. "The election is a new day for Israeli-United States relationships . . . [It is my hope that the two countries will become] partners in peace and democracy."

To Israel and the world at large, the victory of right-wing ex-militant Sharon — a former defense minister — over the more conciliatory and pacifist Barak marks a significant change in the ongoing conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians.

An extremely controversial figure in Israeli political history, Sharon's election has generated a passionate bipolar reaction from members of the Princeton community.

Winds of change

Daniel Mark '03, who has recently returned from a semester in Israel, believes that the time was ripe under Barak for a dramatic change in leadership.

"As noble as Barak's intentions might have been, whatever is going on right now clearly is not working," Mark said.

Spector agrees that Sharon's election provides an opportunity to reshape the current peace process. He is also hopeful that Sharon will "ensure the security of the Israelis as promised."

Spector believes that Sharon's victory does not necessarily imply the end of the peace process.

"Sharon will sit down and negotiate; he does not have much of a choice," Spector said. "But he will make clear certain things the Israelis are not willing to give up."

To many on campus, however, Sharon's victory projects exactly the opposite — a significant step backwards in establishing a peace between Arabs and Israelis.

The prevailing sentiment is more intensely anti-Sharon than pro-Barak because of the fear that Arab-Israeli tensions will escalate and ultimately erupt under Sharon's leadership.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Near Eastern Studies professor Michael Doran, who is currently teaching NES 338: The Arab-Israeli Conflict, called the election outcome "a disaster . . . most unfortunate for both [Jews and Palestinians]."

'Unacceptable'

"Barak might not have had what it takes, but Sharon definitely doesn't," Doran said. "Sharon's answers to the conflict are not real answers. They are completely unacceptable to the Palestinians, and the conflict can only be solved by negotiation."

Mazen Awais '01, a member of the Arab Society of Princeton, echoed the opinion that Sharon's beliefs will damage the progress of the peace effort.

"Sharon will have a difficult time finding support for his antagonistic, counter-productive views," Awais predicted in an e-mail.

For some members of the University such as Nawal Atwan '01, former president of the Arab Society, Sharon's election resonates closer to home. Atwan's father is a Palestinian whose family resides in the West Bank — a hotly contested area in Israel desired by the Palestinians to form their own separate state.

"The overwhelming victory by Sharon indicates that the majority of Israelis do not want peace with the Palestinians and would rather have them suffer through the horrors of occupation," Atwan said in an e-mail.

"Although it is understandable that the Israelis desire protection from violence, the election of Sharon indicates that they are not ready to give the Palestinians the political, social, and economic rights they deserve in order to end the violence," he said.

Atwan also called attention to Sharon's questionable past. Many hold Sharon accountable for the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians in a refugee camp in Lebanon during the 1982 war — for which he was found indirectly responsible and stripped of his office as defense minister.

Though it is widely understood that Sharon's election indicates a radical changing of the guard, many people from both sides of the controversy choose to adopt a 'wait-and-see' attitude.

"I am dismayed, but I also refuse to be totally disheartened. Sharon might yet surprise us. Stranger outcomes have happened in politics before," said Froma Zeitlin, Jewish Studies program director in an e-mail.

"I believe that peace can and must come to this region and soon, but it will not come without adequate leadership on the other side and the recognition of mutual self-interest," she said.