So Israel appears likely to actively "get rid of" Arafat (all options appear open). I fail to see what this will accomplish. Please educate me
Ummm - i fail to see what Arafat has accomplished in his 30 yrs. as a terrorist leader. Please educate me.
well, my guess is there would be no palestinians in palestine if not for arafat. Also, Arafat is a terrorist inasmuch as he hasn't cracked down on terrorists with what little power the PA has. I guess in GWB doublespeak if you support terrorists, you are a terrorist. i guess that also means that GWB, CIA, NSA, etc., are all terrorists.
In the short run, there will be a backlash. Look for more bombings over the next couple of weeks (but those would probably have occurred anyway). Now the Isrealis don't have an excuse. They must now work with whoever's in charge for the Palestinians. I look for Qorie to step down in protest. They've essentially made the Palestinians look even more like the victims. They should look at how the British have handled Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams ended up in Parliament!
Re: Re: Getting rid of Arafat I really hadn't wanted to make this a discussion of what a swell guy Arafat is or isn't. He probably isn't a great guy to carpool with. It was more tailored towards "what does Israel hope to accomplish by removing him?" Or actually, what postive things does Israel hope to accomplish, cuz they seem to be making him stronger and more popular, in effect reducing the chance of finding another effective Palestinian to talk to.
Things are escalating now on the West Bank, and I don't doubt some of the trouble may well be orchestrated by Arafat. Having said that, though, was it really any better in that region the last time Arafat was in exile? When Arafat is gone (by exile or other means), the Palestinan Authority is gone. Anarchy reigns until Israel occupies the West Bank again, thus giving the green light for the Arab world to completely shun Israel again (or worse???).
Of course you don't want to talk about what a great guy he is. It would justify Israel giving him the heave-ho. With Arafat not part of the equation, things may get shaken up a little and a new opening to peace can be found. It's not going to happen with him around. He had his chance with Clinton and Barak and stupidly rejected them. I believe "Richth76" is probably correct when he says there will be a short-term backlash, after which I believe he'll become irrelevant as time and events pass him by. Nonsense. The vacuum he leaves will be filled. Unlike the last time he was in exile, he is now old and getting frail. I don't think they'll expect to see him back. The Palestinians will pretend to be outraged that he is gone, but many will secretly be happy to have him out of the way. Most of them are probably fed up with "kissing his ring."
Personally I'd say let Arafat rot into senility and obscurity in his broken down HQ. But instead Israel makes a BFD out of "removing" him (on Sept 11th, funny timing - did they think nobody would notice?). Like he's gonna get on a plane anyway, especially now. So they can physically remove him - I'm sure that would do wonders in reducing violence. Nope, he's still holed up in the compound, more popular than ever, and I get the impression that Sharon just likes kicking a hornets nest every once in awhile. If it wasn't for the uprising, he'd have a much harder time staying in power.
Re: Re: Getting rid of Arafat I guess he's just matching terror with Sharon. not that I condone anything done by the Palestinian camp, I'm just stating that Sharon is a terrorist too.
Re: Re: Re: Getting rid of Arafat Just about every Israeli military and intelligence expert thinks it's a dumb idea, but Israel is a democracy and the people are sick of Arafat (37% want him killed, 23% expelled, only 36% want him to stay). Right now, Israel is testing the waters. It appears they can get away with this, but I doubt they'll do it unless/until there's another major terrorist attack. It's worth noting that Arafat is 74 years old and looks every day of it.
I see three options for the Israelis 1) Exile him, he sets up shop in a casino in Monte Carlo and the EU funds his enormous hooker/gambling bill. Plus side, he gambles away the money that would otherwise be earmarked for suicide bombers. Downside, he is occasionally celebrated as a misunderstood peacemaker by the stupid europeans. 2) Kill him. Arafat gets whats coming to him, way too late. Near term explosion of animosity by all of the sympathizers of terrorists, as well as the terrorists themselves. Longterm, the Palestinians will have to find another bloodthirsty dictator to make their lives miserable for them so they can blame/hate the jews. 3) Leave him there. Status quo, PA money goes to fund more suicide bombings and such. Arafat probably trains and handpicks a terrorist stooge to take over when he dies. No. 1 might see an end to suicide bombings because those hookers will demand top dollar for sleeping with an ugly cretin like Arafat. I like no. 2, though, just because he deserves to be killed. It's a longshot but the palestinians might actually come to their senses and become civilized eventually without a terrorist leading them. It's a longshot because there's lots of Saudis and other arabs willing to fight to the last palestinian.
Didn't we just have this discussion a week ago? Arafat's forced departure solves nothing. It matters not one iota if he's a bad man; he's the leader of the PA and Israel can do nothing about that. Putting him into exile will make him into the posterboy for Palestinian statehood, the #1 interview guest on Al Jazeera and Hezbollah TV, a major fundraiser for Palestinian causes, and more of a pain in the ass to Israel than he is now. Killing him would be worse, and likely end up with Hamas in charge of the PA and thousands more dead on both sides. Neither of these results will lead to anything good beyond the first 15 minutes of the Knesset gloating about how they got rid of him once and for all. Keeping him there under wraps, on the other hand, allows Israel to monitor his movements, who he meets with, what he's talking about, and what TV cameras he get in front of. Right now he looks like exactly what he is -- an ineffectual leader of a dispossessed people who will eventually get rid of him anyway.
> Arafat's forced departure solves nothing. That's because the root of the problem is far too many people trying to live on the same worthless bit of land. That can't be solved with political agreements.
When I first heard about this I thought about the odd double edged sword it put directly in the path of Isreal. To Isreal, Arafat has been the problem since the late 70s. They chased him from Lebanon, bombed him, exiled him, surrounded him, hounded him and kept him imprisoned in his compound. He was held up as the terrorist, the leader, the reason why tensions were so high, why terrorism was so bad, they relations could never improve, why peace could never be realized. To Isreal, Arafat is a lying terrorist and this is why there can be no peace. If he leaves and nothing changes, or if they get worse, god help them. This seems like a smart, pro-peace decision to make. I'm not sure it's either. If they hand pick a successor and he fails, it's Isreal's fault. If they remove Arafat and things get worse, it's Isreal's fault. Only if they get all of palestine to rally behind the new leader of the week and the peace process works does Isreal come out looking good, and I have to think that there are too many terrorists in Palestine to let that happen. That being said, I do think Arafat is a very large part of the problem, and getting him out is a good thing. I can say this because to me Isreal only exists on the evening news. If I'm riding a bus to work in Jerusalem every day, I'd be one nervous b@stard they day after they kick him out.
I believe that Arafat is a terrorist and a saboteur of the peace process, but as long as the majority of Palestinians appear to support him and agree with him I cannot think of anything good that will come from removing him. There are no easy answers, but this course of action can only benefit Arafat. Let Israel touch him and his stature among the Palestinians (not to mention their apologists in Europe and America) will increase. Wherever he ends up, he will have a bully pulpit to proclaim himself a martir. The only way Arafat can cease to be a problem is when the Palestinian people realize that he is leading them down the road to destruction. And that won't happen if Israel makes him into a sympathetic figure by forcibly sending him into exile.
It's certainly true that there are no easy answers, particularly when the most logical solution to the Palestinian problem is one that is anathema to both sides. Contrary to the wishes of Palestinian nationalists, the state of Israel isn't going anywhere anytime soon by any means. Unfortunately for fundamentalist Zionists, the Palestinians aren't going anywhere else anytime soon either. Furthermore, with higher birthrates among Arabs in Israel and the territories than among Jews, the latter will be minorities by 2020. Israel can turn itself into a straight forward apartheid state and continue to exist in a state of conflict indefinitely or it can annex all territories altogether and become a multinational state.
I just don't get it! I have an easy solution...well at least for the U.S.... Let these other countries use their sovereignty as they see best fit - let them deal with their own problems... Why should this even be an issue we as Americans have to trouble ourselves with?? I mean c'mon if I born were an Israeli - yep I’d hate Palestians.... If I were born a Palestinian - yep I’d hate Israeli's... Talk about a catch-22.... No matter which side the U.S. chooses they can't win. Hmm, sounds like a brilliant cause to champion ehh? And in all honesty, too choose just one side – well that’s not a honest evaluation of the situation. I expect to get flamed for this, but at least I have the courage to explain things as I see it.