June
7, 2002, 9:00 a.m. The
House that Yasser Built
Losing support.
By Nissan Ratzlav-Katz
he
panel on the radio call-in show included a representative of the Islamist
terrorist organization Hamas and a representative of Fatah, the terrorist
faction headed by PLO chairman Yasser Arafat. Callers from the Palestinian
Authority weighed in with their opinions as to the desirability of reform
in the PA governing structure. Of course, the show would never have been
broadcast at all had PLO leader Yasser Arafat not already agreed to make
changes in the Authority, as demanded by the United States and others,
but it was still unique in that it was a forum for oblique public criticism
of the PA leadership. Surprisingly, the Hamas spokesman came out strongly
against any changes to the structure of the PA, despite the fact that
his organization is not currently represented in official circles, while
the Fatah man was solidly behind anything agreed to by his supreme leader.
After most callers pressed for pursuing political reforms in the PA, the
Hamas representative felt it necessary to "explain" his position.
Hamas, he clarified, is against reforms only because they originate with
Israel and the U.S. and are intended to halt the intifada, not because
there is something wrong with reforms per se.
The
call-in show was a small, opaque window into the world Arafat has created
for the Arabs of the Palestinian Authority. A recent poll, conducted by
the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO) has also reflected this
reality, with the overwhelming majority of PA Arabs (72.5 percent) expressing
support for "changing the Palestinian government." A similar
majority (68.6 percent) supported "the restructuring of [the] Palestinian
Authority" and (67 percent) "support Javier Solana's statements
and calls on the PA to be more transparent, accountable and democratic."
Arafat got his first taste of the public discontent with his leadership
in May, when he was released from his Ramallah headquarters at the end
of a month-long standoff with Israel and after a widespread Israeli military
offensive against terrorist bases in PA areas. At first, Arafat was received
with cheers in Ramallah, but only small crowds greeted him as he made
his way through other PA towns. He even cancelled a tour of Jenin when
he was informed that he would be confronted by supporters of the Islamist
opposition.
This
grassroots support for the Islamists is the reason why Arafat offered
to incorporate them into his governing structure, as part of the much-discussed
reforms. It is also the reason that the Islamists refused the invitation.
They get much more mileage out of being independent of an administration
seen by many as corrupt and weak than they would by sitting closer to
the governmental plate. In addition, the Hamas and Islamic Jihad want
to remain free to continue suicide bombings against Israelis, something
Arafat has said is not currently in the Arab interest. One might conclude,
based on their behavior, that the Islamist gangs do not believe that Arafat
has any intention of implementing anything but cosmetic reforms, nor that
he has any real intention of putting an end to terrorism, Islamist or
otherwise.
If
so, then the Islamists hold the same view of Arafat as does Israel Defense
Forces Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz. "The Palestinian approach to Israel
will not change as long as Arafat is navigating the ship, incorporating
terrorism and violence," Mofaz told an audience of journalists this
past week. The same is true for the reforms, he said, "As long as
Arafat is the one in charge of the reform it's not going to happen. He
will try to water it down." Mofaz pointed out that the calls for
reform are not just Israeli demands, they come from the people in the
PA street, from the Arab world, and from the United States. Some Arab
leaders, noted the chief of staff, actually seek to reduce Arafat's influence
in the PA in order to facilitate a political solution.
One
of those leaders is Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak told Patrick
Tyler and Neil MacFarquhar of the New York Times earlier this week
that the plan he intends to present to U.S. President George W. Bush includes
the declaration of a Palestinian state early next year, with Arafat assuming
a ceremonial role by that point. In other words, Mubarak wants to kick
the old boy upstairs. The Egyptian president minced no words when telling
the Times, "I am not saying Arafat is the best man, no. But
we have to use Arafat in this present situation. Arafat would be much
more flexible than ever before after this period of the past year."
There
is a great deal of skepticism about Yasser Arafat even at home, as reflected
in the recent PCPO poll of residents of the Palestinian Authority. Despite
their overwhelming support for reform in the PA, they do not believe that
Arafat is serious about it. The largest group of those polled "believe
that Arafat's call for reformation was only to get out of a plight,"
with 52.5 percent of them agreeing that "decisions made by the PA
will remain in the hands of [a] limited number of people." As stated
by a senior White House official in another context, after a suicide bombing
killed 17 people on an Israeli bus this week, "Yasser Arafat has
never played a role of someone who can be trusted or effective."
Arafat
can be counted on for one thing, though — trying to extricate himself
from any commitment to halt violence against Israel or to share power.
After the IDF retaliated for the latest suicide bus bombing by entering
Ramallah and destroying part of his headquarters there, Arafat told reporters,
in English, "We are defending the holy places of the Christians and
Moslems and we are ready to die defending them!" On June 4, prior
to the Megiddo bus bombing and its aftermath, on the Voice of Palestine
radio station, Arafat is reported to have said, "the continuation
of the aggressive policy and destructive war will deprive our people of
their right to participate in the parliamentary, presidential, and local
elections. It will also obstruct holding the elections at the target dates
and hinder the reconstruction of the areas and installations that were
destroyed by the occupation forces."
The
PA daily al-Ayyam quoted a senior Authority official as saying,
"The President stressed that restoring the peace process and bringing
about security and stability in the region is unattainable while the Israeli
occupation forces continue their siege, closure and incursions, which
cause daily suffering to our people." Employing a tactic former prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu called "reversal of causality,"
the PA leader is attempting to blame the lack of democratic process in
the Palestinian Authority and the ongoing terrorist offensive on the recent
Israeli antiterrorism campaign in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. The problem
is that the recent two-month-long Israeli offensive against terrorist
bases cannot explain the preceding years of incessant terrorism, systemic
corruption, and lack of democracy in Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority.
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
he
panel on the radio call-in show included a representative of the Islamist
terrorist organization Hamas and a representative of Fatah, the terrorist
faction headed by PLO chairman Yasser Arafat. Callers from the Palestinian
Authority weighed in with their opinions as to the desirability of reform
in the PA governing structure. Of course, the show would never have been
broadcast at all had PLO leader Yasser Arafat not already agreed to make
changes in the Authority, as demanded by the United States and others,
but it was still unique in that it was a forum for oblique public criticism
of the PA leadership. Surprisingly, the Hamas spokesman came out strongly
against any changes to the structure of the PA, despite the fact that
his organization is not currently represented in official circles, while
the Fatah man was solidly behind anything agreed to by his supreme leader.
After most callers pressed for pursuing political reforms in the PA, the
Hamas representative felt it necessary to "explain" his position.
Hamas, he clarified, is against reforms only because they originate with
Israel and the U.S. and are intended to halt the intifada, not because
there is something wrong with reforms per se.
