What do you think?
Rate this book
Ariel Sharon: An Intimate Portrait
In 1954 reporter Uri Dan met a young military commander named Ariel Sharon and followed him closely for more than half a century. Dan became Sharon's trusted advisor and a witness to the defining moments of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict--from secret meetings with heads of state to open warfare in the Sinai. This riveting combination of political history, narrative biography, interviews, and correspondence sheds new light on the conflict in the Middle East and provides an intimate, definitive portrait of Ariel Sharon--a man whose life is inextricably intertwined with Israel's destiny. With Hamas governing Palestine, Ariel Sharon gravely ill and the party he founded, the Kadima, in control of the Knesset, this book couldn't be more timely.
- GenresBiography
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2006
8 people are currently reading
37 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 4, 2026
Ariel Sharon: The Indictment of a Man — and the Indictment of a Narrative
Review of Sharon: The Biography by Uri Dan, on Ariel Sharon*
Ariel Sharon was not merely criticized by the international community — he was mythologized into a villain. Uri Dan’s biography is, in many ways, an act of resistance against that mythology.
This is not the story of a reckless warmonger. It is the story of a man who concluded — from history, not theory — that Jewish survival depends on strength, not sentiment.
The Selective Memory of the World
The book repeatedly confronts a glaring double standard: Israeli force is scrutinized in isolation; Jewish bloodshed is contextualized away.
Sharon’s central claim — that terror against Jews long predates “occupation” — is not ideological rhetoric but documented history. Arab violence in the 1920s and 1930s occurred before a single Israeli checkpoint existed. The British White Paper, enacted under pressure from Arab unrest, restricted Jewish immigration on the eve of the Shoah. The consequence was not symbolic — it was catastrophic.
To sever that chain of cause and effect is not nuance. It is amnesia.
Kibya and the Politics of Outrage
Kibya (1953) is endlessly invoked as proof of Sharon’s brutality. Rarely is the prelude emphasized: a Jewish mother and her two small children murdered in their beds.
Sharon believed the buildings targeted had been evacuated. Civilians were later found inside — a tragic outcome in a retaliatory operation during an era of cross-border infiltration and violence.
But the pattern emerges: when Jews are murdered, the world speaks of “cycles.” When Israel retaliates, it speaks of “atrocities.”
Sabra and Shatila: A Simplified Morality Tale
Sabra and Shatila became Sharon’s international conviction without trial. Yet the Lebanese Civil War was a labyrinth of massacres long before Israel entered Beirut. The PLO’s record against Lebanese Christian communities, including the massacre at Damour in 1976, rarely features in Western moral summaries.
Uri Dan suggests Sharon should have arrested Phalangist leaders afterward. Perhaps politically that would have softened condemnation. But Sharon became the embodiment of guilt in a conflict that was not his creation and not under his direct command.
The world prefers a single villain. Sharon was convenient.
The Second Intifada: When Restraint Meant Coffins
The Second Intifada shattered illusions.
The Dolphinarium bombing.
The Sbarro pizzeria massacre.
The Park Hotel Passover slaughter.
Teenagers torn apart in nightclubs. Families killed at dinner tables. Survivors maimed for life.
Operation Defensive Shield and the battle in Jenin followed. Within days, headlines declared “massacre.” Later investigations dramatically reduced those claims. The correction never traveled as far as the accusation.
Sharon learned that in the modern world, facts arrive late — condemnation arrives instantly.
Targeted Killings and Manufactured Moral Shock
When the IDF eliminated Hamas leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdelaziz al-Rantisi in 2004, international outrage was immediate. These were not obscure figures; they were leaders of an organization orchestrating suicide bombings.
Sharon’s calculation was blunt: removing architects of terror saves lives.
To his critics, it was assassination. To his supporters, it was war conducted with precision rather than indiscriminate force.
The global reaction exposed a paradox: Israel was expected to absorb terror indefinitely, yet condemned when it disrupted it.
Iran: The Threat Others Dismissed
Two decades ago, Sharon warned of Iran’s nuclear ambitions and genocidal rhetoric. At the time, many treated such warnings as alarmist. History has since made those warnings harder to dismiss.
Sharon did not deal in wishful thinking. He dealt in worst-case scenarios — because Jewish history had repeatedly delivered them.
The Private Core
Strip away the uniform and the controversies, and the biography reveals something simpler: a man anchored by two loyalties — the land of Israel and his family.
His devotion to his wife Lily during her illness is not incidental. It explains the intensity with which he approached everything else. Loyalty, once given, was absolute.
The Ending: Power Silenced
Sharon’s catastrophic stroke in 2006 ended a political life defined by motion and defiance. Uri Dan’s death later that year gives the book an unintended finality — as if the chronicler closed the account when the subject fell silent.
Final Verdict
This biography does not ask readers to love Ariel Sharon.
It asks them to confront the environment that produced him.
If one believes that Jewish history is a cautionary tale about vulnerability, Sharon appears not reckless but consistent. If one believes strength invites condemnation, Sharon proved it. If one believes Israel should have behaved differently during waves of suicide bombings, one must explain what alternative would have stopped them.
The world often judged Sharon in isolation from context. Uri Dan restores that context — and in doing so, forces a harder question:
Was Sharon a monster of international imagination — or the inevitable product of a century in which Jewish weakness had catastrophic consequences?
The book does not whisper its answer.
It dares you to argue with it.
Review of Sharon: The Biography by Uri Dan, on Ariel Sharon*
Ariel Sharon was not merely criticized by the international community — he was mythologized into a villain. Uri Dan’s biography is, in many ways, an act of resistance against that mythology.
This is not the story of a reckless warmonger. It is the story of a man who concluded — from history, not theory — that Jewish survival depends on strength, not sentiment.
The Selective Memory of the World
The book repeatedly confronts a glaring double standard: Israeli force is scrutinized in isolation; Jewish bloodshed is contextualized away.
Sharon’s central claim — that terror against Jews long predates “occupation” — is not ideological rhetoric but documented history. Arab violence in the 1920s and 1930s occurred before a single Israeli checkpoint existed. The British White Paper, enacted under pressure from Arab unrest, restricted Jewish immigration on the eve of the Shoah. The consequence was not symbolic — it was catastrophic.
To sever that chain of cause and effect is not nuance. It is amnesia.
Kibya and the Politics of Outrage
Kibya (1953) is endlessly invoked as proof of Sharon’s brutality. Rarely is the prelude emphasized: a Jewish mother and her two small children murdered in their beds.
Sharon believed the buildings targeted had been evacuated. Civilians were later found inside — a tragic outcome in a retaliatory operation during an era of cross-border infiltration and violence.
But the pattern emerges: when Jews are murdered, the world speaks of “cycles.” When Israel retaliates, it speaks of “atrocities.”
Sabra and Shatila: A Simplified Morality Tale
Sabra and Shatila became Sharon’s international conviction without trial. Yet the Lebanese Civil War was a labyrinth of massacres long before Israel entered Beirut. The PLO’s record against Lebanese Christian communities, including the massacre at Damour in 1976, rarely features in Western moral summaries.
Uri Dan suggests Sharon should have arrested Phalangist leaders afterward. Perhaps politically that would have softened condemnation. But Sharon became the embodiment of guilt in a conflict that was not his creation and not under his direct command.
The world prefers a single villain. Sharon was convenient.
The Second Intifada: When Restraint Meant Coffins
The Second Intifada shattered illusions.
The Dolphinarium bombing.
The Sbarro pizzeria massacre.
The Park Hotel Passover slaughter.
Teenagers torn apart in nightclubs. Families killed at dinner tables. Survivors maimed for life.
Operation Defensive Shield and the battle in Jenin followed. Within days, headlines declared “massacre.” Later investigations dramatically reduced those claims. The correction never traveled as far as the accusation.
Sharon learned that in the modern world, facts arrive late — condemnation arrives instantly.
Targeted Killings and Manufactured Moral Shock
When the IDF eliminated Hamas leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdelaziz al-Rantisi in 2004, international outrage was immediate. These were not obscure figures; they were leaders of an organization orchestrating suicide bombings.
Sharon’s calculation was blunt: removing architects of terror saves lives.
To his critics, it was assassination. To his supporters, it was war conducted with precision rather than indiscriminate force.
The global reaction exposed a paradox: Israel was expected to absorb terror indefinitely, yet condemned when it disrupted it.
Iran: The Threat Others Dismissed
Two decades ago, Sharon warned of Iran’s nuclear ambitions and genocidal rhetoric. At the time, many treated such warnings as alarmist. History has since made those warnings harder to dismiss.
Sharon did not deal in wishful thinking. He dealt in worst-case scenarios — because Jewish history had repeatedly delivered them.
The Private Core
Strip away the uniform and the controversies, and the biography reveals something simpler: a man anchored by two loyalties — the land of Israel and his family.
His devotion to his wife Lily during her illness is not incidental. It explains the intensity with which he approached everything else. Loyalty, once given, was absolute.
The Ending: Power Silenced
Sharon’s catastrophic stroke in 2006 ended a political life defined by motion and defiance. Uri Dan’s death later that year gives the book an unintended finality — as if the chronicler closed the account when the subject fell silent.
Final Verdict
This biography does not ask readers to love Ariel Sharon.
It asks them to confront the environment that produced him.
If one believes that Jewish history is a cautionary tale about vulnerability, Sharon appears not reckless but consistent. If one believes strength invites condemnation, Sharon proved it. If one believes Israel should have behaved differently during waves of suicide bombings, one must explain what alternative would have stopped them.
The world often judged Sharon in isolation from context. Uri Dan restores that context — and in doing so, forces a harder question:
Was Sharon a monster of international imagination — or the inevitable product of a century in which Jewish weakness had catastrophic consequences?
The book does not whisper its answer.
It dares you to argue with it.
February 27, 2011
A great book about a great soldier for the Jewish people, in many senses of the word.
However, being that the author was so close to the subject, it would be difficult to label this a completely objective biography. A man of controversy, Sharon broke many hearts with his policies toward the end of his involvement in Israeli affairs. Overall, a great read about a great man.
However, being that the author was so close to the subject, it would be difficult to label this a completely objective biography. A man of controversy, Sharon broke many hearts with his policies toward the end of his involvement in Israeli affairs. Overall, a great read about a great man.
February 7, 2020
A good insight in to Ariel Sharon the person, what made him tick and not the myths.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews