Copyright 2003 Haaretz
September 29
HEADLINE: Background / If Nasrallah's OK, what about Arafat?
BYLINE: Danny Rubinstein
The conclusion that Yasser Arafat is no longer a
partner to negotiations is acceptable not only in
Israel and the United States, but also in some
European countries. The question is: What are the
alternatives? Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed
Maher said over the weekend that the U.S.
administration must recognize the fact that there
is no option but to negotiate with Arafat.
This approach, of course, is
acceptable to all the
Palestinian speakers who
learned from the bitter
experience of the Mahmoud Abbas
(Abu Mazen) government. Israel
accuses Arafat of being almost
exclusively responsible for
terrorist attacks, and says he
is the ruler in the
territories. And the Palestinians respond: If
he is the only ruler, that's the clearest
indication that he is the only one to negotiate
with.
The editor of the Palestinian Authority's
periodical Al-Khayat Al-Jadida, Hafez
Barghouti, asked why Israel is willing to
negotiate with Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah,
but not with Arafat and his people. What is the
difference between them? Is Nasrallah less of a
terrorist than Arafat? He and his organization
openly stand for eliminating the Zionist
entity. Can we believe Nasrallah, the artist of
cynical deception, more than we can believe
Arafat?
The Palestinians' answer to these questions is
clear. Nasrallah is relevant for Israel only
because he's stronger and has better bargaining
chips than Arafat.
This week the cabinet of Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala)
will be sworn in, and one can see already there
is no chance it will try to stop Hamas by the
use of force. The compromise Arafat and Qureia
reached on the control of security mechanisms
ensures that Arafat rules everything by means
of the National Security Council, which he
chairs.
The council will consist of the prime minister,
Interior Minister Nasser Yussef, Foreign
Minister Nabil Sha'ath, Finance Minister Salam
Fayad and Security Adviser Jibril Rajoub and
the heads of the mechanisms. This is a large,
awkward body, and American officials have
already made it clear to the Palestinians that
they find this arrangement unacceptable. Israel
certainly will not accept it.
Labor Minister Ghassan al-Khatib, who will still
hold the post in Qureia's cabinet, says the
main problem is not who rules the mechanisms
but whether there is any reason for the
mechanisms to do something about the war
against terrorism. The argument is well-known.
As long as Israel continues with targeted
assassinations, military activity and
collective punishment in the West Bank and
Gaza, there is no reason for any Palestinian
body to do anything.
Quite a few Palestinians recognize their limited
ability to act against terror. At a private
meeting in East Jerusalem last week, one of the
Israelis asked his hosts: "Why don't you try to
destroy Hamas?"
The Palestinians countered: "Why don't you
Israelis do it?"
Since the begining of the bloody clashes, three
years ago, Israel has reestablished its full
security control in the West Bank and partial
control of Gaza. The Israeli security system is
assassinating terrorists, arresting masses of
people and imposing heavy punishments. Yet,
with all of Israel's power and innovation, the
terror has not ceased. Every time a Hamas
activist is killed, two take his place, the
Palestinians said. And if you arrest 10, then
20 take their place.
We can accept the accusations that Arafat and
his men are to blame for the deterioration in
the relations between Israel and the
Palestinians in the last three years. But we
must also admit that those who rule out Arafat
have no feasible alternatives to change the
situation. This was true during the Abbas
government, and it is doubly true now for the
Qureia government.