For Arafat, the
issue is as clear as the problem: " a viable Palestinian state on
the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, living as an equal
neighbor alongside Israel with peace and security for both the
Israeli and Palestinian peoples."
So, what do the Israelis want more?
Some years ago, such approach was merely
unthinkable. Who would ever imagine that the PLO could some day
recognize to the Israelis a right of sovereignty on those lands from
which the Palestinians have been expelled in the wake of 1948’s war?
The Palestinian leaders who would express such views would be
treated as traitors by their compatriots. Perhaps would they even be
exposed to violent death. It happened. We will never know who were
the killers, and it is also superfluous to mention the names of
their victims. The point is that terrorism is blind. Whether it is
Arab or Israeli does not matter anymore since it is still the
violent expression of the vicious circle wherein all the parties
concerned are being locked up. For Arafat, " terrorism is simply the
symptom, not the disease." And the disease is certainly the foreign
occupation his people is "the only people in the world" still
undergoing.
How could the USA, Europe, and the civilized world
tolerate this?
In the same op-ed, Arafat underlined the change that
occurred in the PLO, without which it was merely impossible to
imagine any peace process.
" In 1988", he said " the Palestine National Council
adopted a historic resolution calling for the implementation of
applicable United Nations resolutions, particularly, Resolutions 242
and 338." To understand the importance of the change, we should
recall that the PLO and the majority of the Arab states as well have
so far rejected the Israeli-Egyptian Camp David accords including an
annex about Palestinian self-rule in Gaza and the West Bank. What
actually happened afterwards would sound much amazing particularly
in that worked up region, because it reversed the whole rejection’s
process and at last embraced the Camp David notions.
Arafat summed it up in the following sentence: " The
Palestinians recognized Israel’s right to exist on 78 percent of
historical Palestine with the understanding that we would be allowed
to live in freedom on the remaining 22 percent, which has been under
Israeli occupation since 1967."
The point is that while this important shift
occurred in the PLO, almost nothing of the same kind happened in the
Israeli establishment. Better still: the American administration
always very sensitive to the Israeli claims adopted their official
viewpoint to the extent of shocking the European allies. When Mr.
Bush was expressing his "disappointment" at the perspective of the
"irrelevant" behavior of the besieged Arafat – still hijacked in his
compound under the Israeli menace-, the foreign ministers of the
European Union affirmed their full support to the Chairman of the
PA.
Israel says Arafat is a terrorist. He is behind the
violence. His Dec. 16 truce declaration was a sham, intended to
deflect international pressure and buy time for his fighters to
regroup and rearm. A 50-ton Iranian weapons shipment intercepted en
route to the Gaza strip recently is proof of Arafat’s evil
intentions!
If the Israelis could prove the existence of a
connection between Arafat and the Mullahs of Tehran, he is done. In
some American media, commentators are already debating about his
succession. In the French press, they said Sharon has begun his
fourth official visit to Washington with the idea of burying Arafat.
The advisers of the latter say Bush sounds as if he had already
bought whatever the Israelis would sell him out! Talking to ABC
television, Dick Cheney said: " We’ve just seen evidence that he was
involved in this Karine A shipment". He was referring to the
freighter seized in the international waters of the Red Sea on Jan.
3. " He has been implicated now in an operation that puts him
working with a terrorist organization, Hizbullah, and Iran, a state
that’s devoted to torpedoing the peace process", the U.S. Vice
President added.
According to the Saudi cyber magazine "Elaph", the
Bush administration is convinced that Arafat used Imad Mughniya as
his middleman in the weapons deal.
Mughniya is one of the most wanted men on the black
lists of the FBI and the CIA, for his alleged responsibility in some
operations that costed hundreds of lives to the USA, particularly
the 1983 bombing of the marines’ barracks in Lebanon. It is said
also that prior to his commitment with Hizbullah, Mughniyah had
served for a while as personal bodyguard to Yasir Arafat.
"Elaph" reports that when Mr. Bush was briefed about
Mughniyah’s connection to the arms shipment and to Arafat, he asked:
who is Mughniyah? He was said that he is a terrorist who took part
in hijacking and killing Americans. Then the President furiously hit
the table with his fist and shouted: " How could Arafat, the son of
… do that? How could he deal with that kind of people who killed
Americans, and how could we possibly deal with him now?"
The Saudi magazine reported that when a moderate
Arab state tried to convince the Bush administration of the
inaccuracy of its information about Arafat’s involvement, Washington
sent them audio records and satellite snapshots proving the
contrary. (: Elaph.Jan.29)
But if such evidence is available, why the Americans
did not share it with their European allies?
No later than February 6, Mr. Hubert Védrine, French
foreign minister told France Inter radio: " Europeans are unanimous
in not supporting the Middle East policy of the White House". And he
added: " We think it is a mistake to blindly accept the policy of
pure repression conducted by Ariel Sharon".
The Europeans, it is known, insist on stopping the
process of unlegitimizing the Palestinian Authority, started by
Sharon and endorsed by the American administration. The question of
Jerusalem is also disturbing. The Quai d’Orsay (French foreign
ministry) issued recently a declaration saying:" ensuring the
security of the Israeli population is a legitimate objective, but
sealing off places has already been shown for months now to
exacerbate rather than resolve the conflict. Given that context, the
plan to isolate Jerusalem from the Palestinian Territories is
particularly disturbing. France’s position, unchanged, on the
question of Jerusalem is that its status must not be settled
unilaterally."
The point is that this is not just a French sniping.
In Europe, such stances are not rare. Recently, the Swedish foreign
minister Anna Lindh described the United States’ siding with Israel
as "extremely dangerous", and only serves to escalate the tension.
She expressed concern regarding the severing of ties between the
U.S. and the PA and described Washington statements that link
between Yasir Arafat and terrorism as "stupid".
Anna Lindh added: " I believe that such statements
lack objectivity and are stupid; it is a very dangerous policy that
aims to reward the violence of Sharon in the Middle East."
Spanish foreign minister Josep Pique, whose country
holds the EU’s rotating presidency, said: " We including Israel, all
need the Palestinian Authority and its elected President Yasir
Arafat as a partner to root out terrorism and achieve peace."