|
|
November 19, 2004
Where do we go from here?
Pundits believe much depends on the moderates in post-Arafat era.
Katharine Hamer
There has been a plethora of commentary on Yasser Arafat's death
from all corners of the world – and our own community is no
exception. The Bulletin polled some of the Lower Mainland's
leading Middle East experts to get their take on what happens now.
Since Arafat was the most recognizable and powerful figure in Palestinian
politics for a full quarter-century, we began by asking about his
legacy – not only for Palestinians themselves, but for the
entire Middle East peace process. For many, what Arafat has left
behind is a big mess.
"He made a terrible mistake," said Andre Gerolymatos,
a history professor at Simon Fraser University who specializes in
international relations and security.
"He condemned his people to civil war or civil strife. I think
there will also be a lot more revelations about his personal life.
There were billions of dollars for his wife – money that was
supposed to support the Palestinians. Where did that money come
from? Foreign aid. Foreign aid was being used to keep his spouse
living in the lap of luxury that she'd become accustomed to.
"I don't think Arafat will have a good legacy at all when all
is said and done, because his failures outweigh his successes. He
had the opportunity to keep the peace process on track, but he didn't,
especially in 2000, when Israel offered him a good deal, and he
turned it down and restarted the intifada, which led nowhere."
Since Arafat refused to name a successor, said Gerolymatos, "now
there will be an inevitable power struggle – and the fear is
that the radicals will take control."
Who takes over leadership of the Palestinian Authority is one of
the biggest questions international observers are asking. For now,
it's former prime minister Mahmoud Abbas, with help from current
Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia. Elections are supposed to take place
within 60 days.
But as many commentators have noted, neither Abbas nor Qureia enjoy
the sort of popular support afforded Arafat – and keeping both
the Palestinians and the international community happy is no easy
task.
"It will be very tough on the moderates, especially Abbas,
to establish leadership over all the Palestinian organizations,"
said Gerolymatos. "If they become less accessible to the Palestinians,
they will be more accessible to the West. If they become more accessible
to the Palestinians, they become less accessible to the West. It's
a Catch-22."
Next up: The ballot box
SFU Prof. William Cleveland, an expert in modern Middle Eastern
affairs, has his doubts about the legitimacy of an election.
"It remains to be seen whether [the election] is fair and open,"
he said. "Since there's been stability so far, a successor
could be chosen at the ballot box, which would be encouraging –
or some of those impatient young men could take matters into their
own hands."
By "impatient young men," Cleveland means members of Hamas,
Islamic Jihad and other extremist groups – who've gained a
foothold in Palestinian society, he said, in part because of the
social welfare programs they've implemented.
"The saddest part is that the [PA] government wasn't concerned
with social welfare or education," he said. "They spent
a lot of money on security forces and not on other things,"
allowing the terrorists to win public support in many quarters.
"A lot depends on how successful the moderates are in seizing
control," said Gerolymatos. "There's a real schism among
the leadership. The older leaders are prepared to come to terms
with Israel and the United States. But the younger generation, who've
been insulated from the peace process, all they see is violence
ahead."
For a long time, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the leaders
of other nations have refused to deal with Arafat.
His departure may help smooth things over – although, as Gerolymatos
noted, Sharon is still in a difficult position: "He's damned
if he does and damned if he doesn't [evict Israeli settlers from
the Gaza Strip]," he said. "He's like a man sitting in
the middle of a fire."
An uncertain future
"The passing of Arafat will bring opportunity if only because
his removal means some countries that wouldn't talk with him won't
have that obstacle," said Alan Sens, chair of the University
of British Columbia's international relations department and a political
science professor. "But there's the question also of Arafat
as symbol. Can a new Palestinian leadership move along without Arafat
– can they maintain political agility and bring the Palestinian
people along with them?"
Another key issue: involvement from the United States. President
George W. Bush has promised to shepherd the implementation of an
independent Palestinian state.
The extent of American involvement, given the antipathy towards
them in the Arab world because of the war in Iraq, remains to be
seen.
"The question is whether the U.S. can do what it takes. There
are problems within the Palestinian leadership. There are also problems
with the Israeli government. There is an awkward, at best, unity,
within Israel's coalition government," said Sens.
"[The Americans] need to pressure Israel into a bargaining
position. Israel has more room for manoeuvring from Washington than
many people believe. Is the U.S. a necessary component to the peace
process? Yes. Is it a sufficient component? No. Other actors need
to be engaged."
Arafat, said Cleveland, "was very good a making short-term
strategy decisions to keep himself in power – tactical things,
like moving his subordinates around or dealing with the security
forces. He was very skilful at keeping the reins of authority in
his hands. He wasn't very good at making long-term commitments.
"He can't be solely blamed for the failure of the Oslo Accord.
The Oslo Accord wasn't a very good agreement for the Palestinians
– it didn't mention a Palestinian state. But he had to do it
to keep relevant."
In Sens' view, "the problem with Oslo was it just didn't deal
with any of the big issues. The big logjams are still there: the
settlements, Jerusalem, the new wall that's gone up, the level of
poverty among Palestinians, the issue of refugees returning....
It was a short-term solution and, when the rubber hit the road and
things like Jerusalem came up, the peace agreement unravelled. There
was renewed violence and retaliatory violence.
"[Peace brokers] have to publicly bring compromises to achieve
momentum – and be strong enough and committed enough for the
long term."
Katharine Hamer is a Vancouver freelance writer.
^TOP
|
|
