And it's not just me, a right winger who feels this way. Former Shabak head, Adm. Ami Ayalon, someone with whom I rarely agree politically, feels the same way:

Ayalon is, unsurprisingly, a firm supporter of disengagement – as a first step toward a pullout from most of the West Bank. But he is withering in his criticisms of the prime minister's presentation of it, especially to the settler public. Instead of holding "humiliating" discussions with them over the process of their evacuation and financial compensation, Ariel Sharon should be highlighting the imperative – to ensure a democratic, Jewish Israel – that is impelling the pullout.

"The settlers are not merely our brothers," Ayalon says. "They are the pioneers of the past 35 years. We owe them an explanation."

And the New York Jewish Week underscored this with an editorial (July 1, 2005) criticizing how PM Sharon does business with his political opponents:

Sharansky has his critics among American Jewish leaders, primarily for what they perceive to be his lack of support for religious pluralism. But even detractors would admit that his life story personifies the goals and work of the Jewish Agency. So for the Advise and Consent committee of American Jewish leaders to conclude last week that Bielski was the only qualified candidate for the Jewish Agency chairmanship, suggesting that Sharansky was unfit to run for the post, was unfortunate and unnecessary.

Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.