>I never would've known it from this column:
>http://eserver.org/bs/editors/2002-4-2.html
I don't know anything about Lockard's politics, but there's nothing in this editorial that contradicts his alleged Zionism. Unless of course you think Sharonism=Zionism and anti- Sharonism=anti-Zionism. But until 1967, and maybe even up to '77, Sharonism was considered way outside the mainstream of Zionism. Lockard's dovish Zionism had been the dominant ideology. It may even still be today, if you believe that the Israeli ideal is still a political solution, not a military solution ("Sharonism"), to the conflict and a status quo of peaceful colonialism instead of violent expansionism.
Eric