After years of avoiding the media, Gilad Sharon, the son of former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has broken his silence. In an interview published in The New York Times on Thursday, the younger Sharon spoke of his soon-to-be-published biography of his father and claimed that the controversial 2005 disengagement from Gaza, which Ariel Sharon pushed through in government, was actually his idea. In January 2006, Ariel Sharon suffered a massive stroke, and has been in a coma-like state ever since. According to The New York Times, doctors initially told the Sharon family that CT scans show recovery is impossible and urged Gilad and his brother Omri to let the prime minister die, but they would not hear of it. When he is awake, he looks at me and moves fingers when I ask him to, I am sure he hears me," Gilad said of his father. According to Gilad, he and his family have visited his father, now 83, on a daily basis since his hospitalization five years ago. "We have not missed a day since," he said. Get the Israel Hayom newsletter sent to your mailbox! In his book, "Sharon: The Life of a Leader," which is set to go on sale this week in both English and Hebrew, Gilad details the former prime minister's health. He lies in bed, looking like the lord of the manor, sleeping tranquilly. Large, strong, self assured. His cheeks are a healthy shade of red. When hes awake, he looks out with a penetrating stare. He has not lost a single pound; on the contrary, he has gained some, he wrote. The book also details the day Ariel Sharon suffered his stroke. Gilad confirmed that he and his brother did not allow the doctors to let Ariel die, even though the medical staff pleaded with them to do so. "I would never be able to forgive myself if we did not fight to the end," Gilad wrote. Gilad Sharon does not shy away from the political in his book, either. He also writes about what was arguably the former prime minister's most controversial and difficult decision of his career, the unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005. According to Gilad, it was in fact he who gave Ariel the idea to pull out unilaterally, after understanding that it was impossible to defend the settlers in the Gaza Strip and that most Israelis did not want to pay the price for their presence there. Gilad also does not hesitate to offer his own opinion about his father's long-time rival, current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He details a 1997 meeting that, in his opinion, marked the lowest point in the relationship between the two leaders. Netanyahu was serving his first term as prime minister and had just reneged on a commitment to make Ariel Sharon the finance minister. Netanyahu summoned my father to a meeting in his office. Standing at the entrance to the room and putting an end to the shortest meeting in the history of the prime ministers office, my father said to Netanyahu, A liar you were and a liar you have remained, Gilad wrote. According to Gilad, Netanyahu hesitated during Ariel Sharon's push to disengage from the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu, at the time serving as finance minister, called for the decision to be put to a referendum, a request Ariel Sharon swiftly denied. Gilad, who in his book accuses Netanyahu of "subversion," adds that Netanyahu eventually came out in favor of the decision. After The New York Times piece was published, the Prime Minister's Office issued a response, saying, "The book is written with a political agenda, intended to promote Gilad Sharon within Kadima's ranks [Gilad is currently a member of Kadima]. The things Ariel Sharon supposedly told Netanyahu never happened. "With regard to Netanyahu's stance on the [Gaza] disengagement, let us recount that the current prime minister quit the government at the time in protest of the decision, while saying that it would only bring rockets into Israel. History proved his concerns about the disengagement to be true, and now Israeli citizens have elected Netanyahu to handle their security challenges." Itzhik Shadmi, chairman of the Binyamin Resident's Council, which is located in the West Bank, had an even harsher response for Gilad Sharon. "We would have expected that after six years, in which one event after another have proved the disengagement to be a horrible mistake, that Gilad Sharon would come forward, after claiming to have fathered the idea, to express deep remorse for his sin. We paid a heavy price [for the disengagement], in human life, in finances and in our principles. It was a pointless surrender of land that is part of our birthright," he said.
