For Jerusalem's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, appearing before the Israeli parliament in recent months has almost always been a heavy burden. The Israeli leader is frequently confronted with serious accusations, most recently because of his alleged involvement in a corruption scandal, and he has barely survived many a vote of no confidence. Even members of his own coalition have abandoned him. At times, Sharon has assumed a rather lonely position within the administration.

However, when the 120 members of the Knesset convene for a scheduled special session this coming Thursday, they will encounter a prime minister who is more self-confident than ever before. The session is being convened by opposition parties to call Sharon to account for his negotiations in Washington last week. As a spokeswoman angrily proclaimed, it is "not acceptable that he disclose his plans to the US president before explaining them to the Israeli people."

But the prime minister sees himself as a victor - and he knows that public opinion is on his side. The Israeli newspapers celebrated the summit meeting with the US president with such headlines as "Sharon got everything he wanted," and "Bush capitulated." Sharon, acting on his own, had sealed a sensational deal in Washington. In return for Sharon's removing Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip, the US president gave his blessing to more settlements in the occupied West Bank. One paper even celebrated the triumph in Washington by printing its headline in the national colors, white and blue.

Will Israel truly withdraw from the Gaza Strip? If one is to believe Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, he intends to clear the impoverished, overpopulated Palestinian territory within a year. 7800 settlers, protected by the army, have settled in a region where 1.3 million Palestinians live. This time, unlike 1982, when Israel completely dismantled the Jewish settlements on the Sinai Peninsula under a peace treaty with Egypt, houses and the infrastructure are to be left to the Palestinians - at least according to the "solution plan" Sharon announced on Friday.

The fact that Sharon, normally such a strong proponent of the settlements, has taken this historic, long overdue step after almost 37 years of occupation has generated strong protests among Israel's settlers and ultraconservatives. They speak of betrayal and are fighting the plan as vociferously as they once attacked the peace policies of Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.

Sharon faces domestic political opposition on multiple fronts - from his former settler friends, but also from adversaries in his own party and his cabinet. If the ultraconservatives and religious ministers withdraw their support, as they have threatened to do if he implements his withdrawal plan, the country may be faced with a governmental crisis. Settlers and ultraconservatives have been mobilized by such slogans as "withdrawal rewards the terrorists."

Even among his own Likud ministers, only about half clearly support the prime minister. Minister of Finance Benjamin Netanyahu, a strong candidate to succeed Sharon, plays a key role here. Until recently, the ambitious former prime minister has declined to say whether or not he supports the withdrawal.

Sharon, the deflated head of the government, has certainly taken precautions. If the ultraconservatives leave his coalition and it collapses, the Labor Party is prepared to step in to provide a majority, or possibly become part of a coalition government. The liberal left is not interested in torpedoing the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, which they supported. And 80-year-old party leader Shimon Peres is still very interested in another position in the administration.

However, the prime minister cannot play his trump card - the grand coalition - too soon. First he must win a referendum in his Likud Party, which is scheduled for May 2, where he will be able to present a glowing reference from Washington. Has an Israeli prime minister even been so flattered at the White House? Sharon made a "bold and historic decision," said Bush, "good job, Prime Minister! I am proud to call the prime minister my friend."

Jerusalem political expert Abraham Diskin believes George W. Bush's surprising support has "significantly increased" Sharon's chances of winning the referendum. After all, current surveys of party members show that a majority supports the plan of "unilateral disengagement" from the Palestinians.

In return for getting a boost from Washington, Sharon did not hesitate to openly support George W. Bush's campaign for reelection. "I have never met a leader," the prime minister enthusiastically proclaimed, "who has been so committed to the fight against terrorism and to freedom." When Bush challenger John Kerry tried to arrange a politically opportune meeting with Sharon, he was ignored.

In contrast, the outcome of the summit between Middle East strategists Bush and Sharon was not as favorable to the Palestinians. Bush thoughtlessly made it clear that he has written of the Arafat team as negotiating partners. The leadership in the Autonomous Territories is helplessly complaining that Sharon must "make peace with the Palestinians, not with Bush."

This is its punishment for taking the wrong side in the fight against terrorism. Instead of bringing an end to the armed Intifada, with its suicide attacks, Yassir Arafat and his powerless prime minister, Ahmed Qorei, are now flirting with the likes of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which are associated with the Fatah movement.

Palestinians of even the most disparate factions agree that Bush's most recent statement is one of their heaviest defeats. "President Bush has struck us straight to the heart," complains Qorei, "no one has the right to rob the Palestinians of their rights." A clearly agitated Arafat has threatened that the resistance against "Israel's crimes" will only increase, once again making it clear that he apparently views violence as an opportune political tool.

On the international front, Bush's declaration of solidarity with Sharon has also triggered annoyance at the UN and the EU, the co-sponsors of the Middle East peace process.

The pact with Sharon is certainly a risky unilateral step for Washington, because it compromises the role of mediator cultivated by the US for decades. Even though the Americans have consistently felt more closely allied with Israel than with the Palestinians, they have always taken pains not to overlook Palestinian interests while playing the game of political poker.

This was not the only taboo Bush violated last week. In making his statements about the borders of the Middle East and the future of the refugees, he also solidified a framework that should only be part of the two parties' final status negotiations. The Palestinians, already consumed with hatred for America, are unlikely to be particularly accepting of future US mediation efforts.

Bush attempted to dispel criticism during a meeting with Tony Blair in Washington on Friday. Of course, he affirmed, all issues relating to a final treaty between the Israelis and the Palestinians would have to be negotiated jointly.

However, these statements are unlikely to minimize Sharon's success on the home front. His iron-fisted anti-terrorism policies, under which the Palestinian civilian population is suffering more than ever before, remained essentially unchallenged by Washington. He is being allowed to continue building his controversial security fence, with just a few changes. And to top off Sharon's success, the US president declared Israel's complete withdrawal from the 1949 armistice line to be "unrealistic."

For now, at least, Sharon's calculation seems to be working out: He sacrifices Gaza to save a large portion of the West Bank. Only 4 of more than 140 settlements are located in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians complain that this would leave them with only about half of their territory - too little for a viable state.

Activists who support reconciliation are criticizing Sharon for attempting to create "Bantustans," based on the model of the former South African black homelands. Optimists in Israel and the EU console themselves with the hope that the withdrawal may trigger an internal dynamic, one that could spell the "beginning of the end of the occupation."

The smug manner in which the allies congratulated one another in Washington is deceiving, because both men are acting with limited authority. Bush's disaster in Iraq could cost him the reelection. And Sharon's career lies in the hands of the chief public prosecutor, who will soon decide whether to file corruption charges against Sharon.

Experts in Israeli domestic politics, such as party researcher Diskin, believe that Sharon is still a long way from defeat: "The man is almost unique is his ability to assert himself and withstand pressure." As far as the Gaza referendum in the Likud block is concerned, the Prime Minister has already dispatched his son Omri to let the party's rank and file know that he will resign if he is not supported.