|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Israfax
The freighter--piloted by a P.A. naval captain, who admitted publicly his connection to Arafat's police--indicates Arafat's real intentions. Its modern weaponry represents a serious escalation--powerful new mortars, missiles that can bring down helicopters and jets, and explosives which would markedly extend the number and destructiveness of current suicide-bomber attacks. (And the new P.A. connection to Israel-hating, Hezbollah-supporting Iran is also ominous.) The ship makes clear that Arafat, despite tactical pauses and calls for cease-fires (and despite Sept. 11 and growing U.S. pressure) wants the current war not only to continue, but to be extended. Does he believe he can win it? Is such a calculation entirely irrational? Clearly, there are at least three possible responses. Arafat may well be engaged in a hate-driven, but hopeless, nihilistic campaign As his rejection of Ehud Barak's Camp David peace offer showed, he may prefer war to peace, choosing exile or even death rather than being remembered as the traitor who accepted a Jewish state on claimed Arab land. He may, though, be betting that by raising the military ante and threatening a wider Middle East war, he can force a tired Israel into radical concessions. Or Arafat may indeed want to spark a wider war, by forcing Israel finally to re-occupy most of the Territories and try to force him out, which might lure Egypt, Syria and Iraq (and Iran?) into declaring war. Then, either Israel capitulates and makes major concessions or, with some luck, the Arabs finally make good on their old dream of destroying the Jewish state altogether. Whatever his scenario, the Karine-A underlines the need to defeat Arafat decisively, now, before the situation deteriorates further. In this context, defeat means either (a) blocking his attempts to widen the war, minimizing casualties, and inflicting sufficient punishment to take the steam out of the intifada and lead to a hoped-for leadership shuffle (in effect, Israel's current national unity government's policies). Or (b) "defeat" means what it has traditionally meant in warfare--overwhelming one's enemy and imposing terms of settlement. This adds up to deposing Arafat, re-occupying areas which have been both sources of terrorism and areas of refuge for terrorists, and supporting an interim administration. Both options clearly confirm that the 1993 Oslo Accords are, indeed, dead. Only the re-establishment of a sustained, terrorism-free environment, and interlocutors ready to accept Israel's legitimacy within mutually-acceptable borders, can re-create the conditions for serious peace negotiations. The Karine-A, truly Arafat's ship of fools, has finally made fools of those who continued to think Arafat a serious peace partner. It remains to be seen whether the Arab world will, once again, be foolish enough to think it can defeat or destroy Israel. (Prof. Krantz, Editor of ISRAFAX, is Director of CIJR/ICRJ) ALTERNATIVES TO ARAFAT "Who Needs Arafat?" [A] a growing number of Israelis now greet the possibility of a Hamas takeover with the unblinking response of "so what?" As retired Israeli general and terrorism expert Meir Dagan explained...: "...Today, Arafat conducts a terrorist war against us and still enjoys international legitimacy...If the Hamas takes over, our goal will be clear--to defeat them"... Yet...the prospect of a Hamas-led regime...is also highly unlikely. Although Palestinian support for Hamas has risen...this public backing is due mainly to increased hatred for Israel rather than a swelling of support for Hamas's...agenda... When Mr. Arafat goes, he--like Stalin--will be replaced by a junta. [T]he most likely successor regime will be a quadripartite coalition comprised of two political leaders and two military commanders... The two political leaders, Mahmud Abbas, Mr. Arafat's No. 2 in the PLO, and Ahmed Queria, the speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, have risen to international prominence...as lead negotiators with Israel over the past eight years. Mr. Abbas (a.k.a Abu Mazzan) is viewed as a statesman by Palestinians and Westerners alike... Mr. Queria, who goes by the nom de guerre Abu Ala, rose to international prominence as the chief Palestinian negotiator with Israel--a position he has held off and on since 1993...More important...[Mr. Queria] has controlled and managed the PLO's finances for the past 20 years... The military commanders who will stand beside Messrs. Abbas and Queria are Jibril Rajoub and Mohamed Dahlan--the heads of the Palestinian preventive security forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip...Whereas all the other militias are comprised of officers and troops who came into the region with Mr. Arafat in 1994, the preventive security forces consist chiefly of locals. This distinction is crucial, for the main bone of contention between the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza and Mr. Arafat's PA has been the feeling among...Palestinians that they replaced one foreign occupier--Israel--with...Arafat's forces and cadres from abroad... Although Mr. Arafat's removal will not be a panacea...and while the unabated...terrorist attacks of the past 15 months make it difficult to look to the future with optimism, a future without Mr. Arafat will scarcely be worse than the present...And, with the proper management, it could be far better. (Caroline B. Glick, chief diplomatic commentator for Makor Rishon newspaper in Israel, served as assistant foreign policy adviser to P.M. Netanyahu in 1997-98. Wall Street Journal, December 17, 2001) Arafat Doesn't Really
Want Peace The weapons were on the ship Israel intercepted en route from Iran to Gaza. The ship's captain has been a member of Arafat's Fatah for 25 years. He is an officer in the Palestinian navy. His ship was purchased by the P.A. His instructions came from Arafat's arms paymaster. Arafat is shocked--shocked!--by these revelations. Comically, he has ordered an investigation. This will rival Hitler's investigation of the Reichstag fire... Arafat's strategy is crystal clear. After Sept. 11 [and] the Dec. 1-2 terror bombings in Jerusalem and Haifa, he came under enormous international pressure to restrain the violence...He...tries to sucker the Americans with a few low-level arrests. Meanwhile, he leaves the entire Hamas infrastructure intact and orders $100 million worth of weapons--obvious preparation for war... ...Arafat is embarked on a strategy of war...and has been ever since he signed the September 1993 Oslo "peace" accords...Take it from...one of the leading Palestinian moderates, Faisal Husseini. Shortly before his fatal heart attack last year, he openly admitted that Oslo was "a Trojan Horse...just a temporary procedure...just a step towards something bigger." That something bigger is "Palestine from...the Jordan to the Mediterranean." That means eradicating Israel. Oslo...gave the PLO an army, autonomy, money and territory--the perfect base from which to fight for the ultimate eradication of Israel...This strategy has been the declared PLO position ever since it adopted the "Phased Plan" in Cairo in 1974. Phase 1: accept any territory offered of whatever size within Palestine. Phase 2: make it the forward base for the war to destroy Israel. Our refusal to acknowledge this...strategy is one of the great acts of self-delusion in diplomatic history... If we want peace, Arafat and the P.A....must be de-legitimized, de-recognized, de-funded by the U.S. And by Europe. And if that does not bring them down, Israel should be allowed to go in and do the job itself. (Washington Post, January 11, 2002) FOCUS: SHIP OF FOOLS? Anchors Away The rest of the world treated the news with a yawn. Italy's La Republica restricted its discussion of the ship to a sidebar within a front-page article about Yasir Arafat's confinement to Ramallah, entitled "The Sad Days of Arafat--President in Prison." Germany's Berliner Zeitung mentioned the ship under a headline about the Palestinian Authority's (PA) arrest of six extremists. London's Observer buried the story altogether. In much of the international press, Arafat's denial of responsibility...has been treated as a credible counterweight to Israeli claims... Not even the televised admission by the ship's captain that the weapons were loaded near the Iranian coast, overseen by a Hezbollah agent, and bound for the PA...convinced foreign observers that Israel had uncovered a Palestinian-Iranian-Hezbollah triangle...Even the State Department...reacted with the bland assertion that it was awaiting more conclusive proof. In Israel, by contrast, the operation...was treated as an epic...In its first edition after the news broke...Ma'ariv devoted 17 pages to the story; commentators recalled the Entebbe rescue and the bombing of the Iraqi reactor at Osirak...Israelis...were relieved:...we were still smart and daring enough to protect ourselves. And the operation...had an enormous political impact...After the suicide bombings...last month, P.M. Sharon increased his demands on Arafat...to uproot Hamas and Islamic Jihad's terrorist infrastructure, and collect...illegal Palestinian weapons...Recently, though, Shimon Peres had begun to erode those demands...And a weary Israeli public seemed prepared to go along. Indeed...many Israelis continued to cling to a distinction between Arafat and Hamas. No more. "Operation Noah's Ark" has quickly returned Israel's focus to infrastructure. Defense Minister and newly elected Labor Party leader Benjamin Ben-Eliezer has warned that the relative lull in violence conceals a steady expansion of the terrorist infrastructure...most Israelis now realize that...the biggest terrorist infrastructure in the PA is the PA itself... In delegitimizing Arafat, Sharon has the crucial backing of the army's general staff. Once a key bastion of Oslo support, the general staff's attitude has gradually shifted from skepticism over Arafat's intentions to public contempt. Following the seizure, Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz...declared that it was time for the government to reevaluate its relations with Arafat--implying that Israel should label him...an outright enemy...[T]his time Ben-Eliezer refused to join the left-wing Knesset members who justifiably criticized the chief of staff for trying to publicly influence the government's agenda... For the first time since Oslo, you don't have to be right-wing to question the wisdom of a Palestinian state segmented between the West Bank and Gaza...The arms seizure has negated the most basic [Oslo] assumption: that a Palestinian state would be demilitarized and devoid of terrorist intent... If this is what the Palestinians attempt now, with Israel in control of the borders and the seas, how will we enforce demilitarization in a sovereign Palestine? Barely anyone anymore even tries to provide an answer. (The New Republic, January 21, 2002) Disloyalty and Patriotism ...The irresponsible behavior of some of our rejected political leaders raises serious questions challenging the fundamentals of Israel's democratic ethos. In the most liberal of democracies it would be unacceptable that a former justice minister--in this case Yossi Beilin--would be given sanction to lobby foreign governments...urging them to reject the policies of his own democratically elected government...Likewise, Beilin providing tactical advice to Arafat...is scandalous. ...Beilin is...drafting a document with Nabil Sha'ath summarizing the "understandings" which...members of the Barak government desperately sought to reach with Arafat's representatives. The Taba negotiations...took place in the absence of a mandate from the Knesset...and were ultimately nullified by prime minister Barak himself. Yet here is Beilin producing such a document knowing full well that it will be used as leverage against the coalition government of Israel. No less appalling, the leader of the opposition, Yossi Sarid, recently wrote an article in The New York Times demonizing P.M. Ariel Sharon...and calling on the American administration to reject the policies of the elected Israeli government...here we have the leader of the opposition...undermin[ing] the policies of a government during a time of war... Such politicians and the media that support them could take an example from the behavior of their American counterparts after September 11, when all political groups set aside differences and united behind their president... We must demand that...politicians abide by the decisions of the electorate. Certainly, they have every right to try to persuade their fellow Israelis to support their views. But they must cease...collaborating with our enemies or trying to persuade other countries to impose solutions on us... (Isi Liebler is senior vice-president of the World Jewish Congress. Jerusalem Post, December 30, 2001) A Twin for Arafat Nusseibeh even criticiz[es] Arafat himself...He has been preaching that the "refugees,"...should not be brought to Israeli territory but to "Palestinian territory"...to a Palestinian state...in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and "half of Jerusalem."...Nusseibeh in fact seems to be just another unrestrained promoter of vicious Arab propaganda... Israel, he says, must go back to the 1949 lines. But that is not all. Israel, he says, must recognize its "moral responsibility for the problem of the refugees...and must participate in compensating them and in their rehabilitation." ...The events of September 2000, he assert[s] were a reaction...to Israel's provocation. He also revives the silly excuse that it was Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount that "provoked" them...Nusseibeh...believes that the "heart of the problem" is that "Israel was born in sin"--meaning that Israel was responsible for the 1948 invasion by the Arab states who ordered the Palestinians to flee... (Shmuel Katz is a biographer of Ze'ev Jabotinsky. Jerusalem Post, January 8, 2002)
|
|
ISRAFAX
EDITORIAL
