Prime Minister Ariel Sharon may have won approval from the Knesset yesterday for his new coalition government, but he most certainly didn’t receive the mandate he had been hoping for.

By the slender margin of 58 to 56, with 6 abstentions, the Knesset backed the formation of the new unity government consisting of the Likud, Labor and United Torah Judaism. But there are several good reasons why the outcome of the vote is likely to leave Sharon more than a little concerned:

1) One-third of the Knesset members from Sharon’s own Likud party defied his wish to have Labor join the coalition. 13 Likud members, referred to by the media as “the rebels”, voted against the move, while one other member, Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin, chose to abstain. If left untended, the “rebellion” simmering in the Likud could very well lead to a split in the party.

2) Since Sharon cannot count on many of his own fellow Likudniks, he is essentially heading a minority government, one which does not command the loyalty of a majority – i.e. 61 – of parliamentarians. This means that on critical votes, such as the national budget, Sharon may find it difficult to achieve his policy objectives.

3) In yesterday’s tally, Sharon was forced to rely on the six votes of the Yahad party, headed by super-dove Yossi Beilin, to stave off defeat. This reinforces Sharon’s image as one who is pursuing the agenda of the far-left, rather than of his own electorate.

4) While United Torah Judaism (UTJ) in the end voted for the coalition (actually, 4 out of its 5 representatives did, with one – Meir Porush – abstaining), they certainly made clear that they are not overly thrilled with the new political constellation. At the very last moment, they sparked a crisis over the wording of the coalition agreement, thereby signaling both to Sharon and the public that their participation in the government should hardly be taken for granted.

Sharon’s new government, then, is characterized by a level of instability far greater than those of his previous two coalitions. Both Communications Minister Dalia Itzik (Labor) and Health Minister Danny Naveh (Likud) essentially acknowledged as much today, with Itzik even suggesting that elections may be near.

Sharon’s only chance of achieving some stability would be to entice the Shas party to join the government – a scenario that would necessarily require a great deal of political maneuvering that may even be beyond Sharon’s legendary prowess.

But for opponents of the Gaza withdrawal plan, the goal is now clear – pound away at the government at every political opportunity, and focus on the weakest link in the coalition chain – namely, UTJ.

With some skillful planning, and a little bit of mazel, they can succeed in ensuring that the only withdrawal this year will be that of Ariel Sharon from the premiership.

Israel set a new record this week – though it is hardly one to be proud of.

For the first time in recent memory, the Supreme Court of a liberal Western democracy has given its imprimatur to the mass expulsion of thousands of citizens from their homes by their own government.

By a vote of 10 to 1, Israel’s chief justices ruled against a series of petitions that had been filed against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s proposed retreat from Gaza and northern Samaria. Though the Court did amend certain sections of the Compensation- Evacuation Law passed by the Knesset, it refused to declare the eviction itself to be illegal.

This is a sad day for Israeli democracy, but it is an even sadder day for Zionism, the State of Israel and the Jewish people.

To think that a gathering of Jewish justices in the sovereign Jewish State would approve of the forcible removal of Jews from their homes is simply too shameful and ludicrous to contemplate.

Of course, no one really expected anything less from the Court, which in recent years has become as predictable as it is left-wing in its verdicts.

Nonetheless, we can not help but ask ourselves how it is possible for a government to stray so far from its nation’s values so quickly. How can our elected leadership so brazenly ignore Jewish history and Jewish destiny in their mad dash to plunge the country into yet another disaster of their own making?

More importantly, though, is the question we all must start asking ourselves: what did I do on behalf of the Land of Israel today?

How we choose to answer this query may very well help to determine the future - not only of Gaza, but of Israel itself.

Is Israel really using all the punitive sanctions at its disposal to combat terror?

A decision by the Interior Minister today demonstrates clearly that the answer is no.

Check out the following from Yediot Aharonot:

4 terrorists to lose Israeli ID cards

by Doron Sheffer

Interior Minister Pines-Paz decides to strip east Jerusalem residents of their permanent residency rights due to involvement in series of terror attacks; terrorists refused to express regret for their actions

The Interior Minister’s decision is of course correct. But what is inexplicable is that a terrorist’s residency rights are not automatically annulled once he or she is convicted of involvement in an attack.

This should be made into a statutory requirement, rather than being left up to the discretion of the Minister who happens to be in power.

When a state finds itself under attack, it must use the various means at its disposal to protect itself and its citizens.

The permanent residency rights that the four terrorists had were – as their name implies – rights, and if they chose to abuse them in order to murder dozens of Israeli citizens, then it only seems logical to take them away.

Not only to punish those who exploit these rights, but to deter others from doing the same.

It is time for Israel to whip its bureaucracy into shape, and to start thinking more creatively about how to use the levers of power to combat terror more effectively.

Bureaucrats excel at driving people mad and making their life a living hell – so what better way to punish terrorists and their conspirators then by unleashing some bureaucracy against them.

When Prime Minister Ariel Sharon meets US President George W. Bush in Texas, it seems safe to say that they will not have any trouble finding issues to talk about.

From Israel’s planned Gaza withdrawal to the Palestinians’ ongoing failure to fight terror to the terrorists’ renewal of mortar attacks in the past few days, the two leaders will have to tackle an intricate and complex agenda.

But there is one matter which they should be able to resolve fairly easily, if only they have the will to do so: the case of Jonathan Pollard.

For the past 20 years, Pollard has been rotting in jail in the United States after being sentenced to life in prison for passing confidential information to Israel.

The facts of his case are well-known, so there is no need to repeat them here. But suffice it to say that the sentence he received violated the plea-bargain agreement he made with the US government, and that spies convicted of working for America’s enemies have received far more lenient terms of imprisonment than Pollard did.

Prime Minister Sharon has demonstrated a decided lack of interest in the case, doing virtually nothing to seek clemency for him – and that has got to change. Whatever one may think of Pollard and his actions, the fact is that he worked on Israel’s behalf and it is therefore the Government’s responsibility to help him.

With Sharon doing his best to please the American government in just about every possible sphere, there is simply no reason why he can’t “cash in” a chip or two and ask Bush to set Pollard free.

After all, Pollard did the crime, and he has done the time. And now it is time to bring him home.

He has led men into battle, braved enemy gunfire and engaged in some of Israel’s most daring and well-known military operations. But for all the courage he has shown on the battlefield, when it comes to the political arena Ariel Sharon has suddenly lost his nerve.

“There will definitely be no referendum,” Sharon told reporters at the Knesset yesterday, referring to mounting demands that the Israeli people be allowed to vote on his Gaza withdrawal plan. “The public supports the disengagement plan,” he insisted, “as does the Knesset.”

And yet, Sharon’s statement actually raises more questions than it answers. If indeed he is so sure that the country backs his move, then why is he afraid to put it to the test of public opinion? And if a majority actually opposes such a plan, then how legitimate would any withdrawal actually be?

Sharon also sought to argue that a referendum would divide the nation still further – but that is simply untrue. The whole idea of giving the public a voice on the issue is to stifle the growing split within the country, because the outcome would necessarily result in the bulk of the Israeli public accepting whatever the majority would decide.

Moreover, if Sharon refuses to hold a referendum, and goes ahead with the withdrawal anyway, it will leave an open wound on Israel’s national psyche. Rightly or wrongly, huge portions of the public feel that Sharon has no mandate to pull out from Gaza, leaving a heavy scent of illegitimacy hanging over the entire affair.

The only way to dispel that notion, and to re-unite the country, is to hold a referendum as soon as possible.

Deep down, I think that Sharon knows that. But whether or not he still has the courage of his convictions, as he did long ago during his military career, only time will tell.