Arafat Linked
Palestine to the Will of his People
For two weeks
now, I have been trying to write something "different" about the
Arab world. Whenever I start working on a new topic, however,
something comes up in Palestine and overshadows everything else in
the Middle East. At the moment, it seems like Yasser Arafat's nearly
two-month siege in Ramallah is open-ended. Israeli military
officials are speaking of a new offensive, gunning down
Palestinians, destroying homes, and considering the possibility of
re-occupying territory located in Area A, supposedly under
Palestinian jurisdiction. (The article was written before Israel
took over the West Bank
town of Tulkarem yesterday). These "possibilities" were made by the
Deputy Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon to the Jerusalem Post on January
17. Adding insult to injury is an increasing rift in the Palestinian
leadership, with the latest arrest of Ahmad Saadat, the
secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (PFLP). Saadat, who was arrested by Arafat, is wanted in
Israel for ordering the killing of an Israeli minister in October
2001. His arrest has split the Palestinian movement right in two,
with some supporting Arafat's move (a minority), and the masses
calling for Saadat's release. On January 18, the PFLP military
branch went as far as to present Arafat with an ultimatum, asking
that he release their leader, or face the killing of his own
officials, a demand that could threaten his life as well. For the
first time since the intifadah began, the hard-boiled Arafat
seems to be losing it. Old age, anger, despair, and impatience seem
to be finally getting the best of Abu Ammar. What hurts him the
most, however, is having lost the faith that Palestinians and Arabs
once had in him.
In 1988,
Arafat was described by one reporter as having been born "with the
cunning of a bazaar merchant, the now you see-it-now-you-don't hands
of a magician, the balance of a tightrope walker, and most
importantly, the skin of a chameleon which took on whatever
political colors were in season." This was true for the better part
of his career, stretching from 1968 until the present. We as Arabs
convinced ourselves that this was also true even after the
intifadah broke out in September 2000. On a personal level, my
views on Arafat since then have fluctuated like never before.
Despite my sincere admiration for the man, I wrote an article for
The Daily Star in October 2000, two weeks after the uprising
began, entitled, Obituary of the Arab Che Guevara. This
article was turned down by the newspaper editor, who argued that the
intifadah was the biggest face-lift in Arafat's career. As
the intifadah progressed, Arafat managed to recapture his
long-lost glory as revolutionary leader of the Palestinians. Arafat
returned to the limelight by absenting himself from the latest
struggle. By refusing to crack down on the intifadah leaders,
he was in fact, giving his blessing to the movement. Pretty soon,
however, as the Palestinian funerals increased, he was reduced to a
marginal observer who could do nothing but sit back and watch as the
people retaliated against Israeli aggression.
He became
as much an observer of events, than a maker, as any one of us. Prior
to the siege of Ramallah in December 2001, it was clear that nobody
was listening to Arafat anymore, neither the Israelis, nor the
Americans, nor the Arabs. Although the Americans and Arabs joined a
chorus of condemnation to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's
earlier comments, claiming that Arafat was finished and was
"irrelevant" to the ongoing crisis, no steps have been taken to
prove otherwise. For a brief period, amidst all the shouting, Hamas
seemed willing to listen, yet reneged on its policies following the
latest January 2002 Israeli onslaughts. Early on, Arafat boasted,
"The keys to the intifadah are in my hands." Obviously,
events have proven otherwise.
A short
while ago, I visited one of Arafat's long-time allies in Lebanon,
Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, to discuss the latest in Palestine.
Jumblatt was one of Palestine's loudest advocates, having allied
himself with Arafat in 1982 to ward off the invading Israeli forces
of Sharon. In August 1983, forced out of Lebanon under Israeli
orders, Arafat held a farewell reception at Jumblatt's Beirut
palace. A Palestinian author present at the reception remembered,
"As Arafat turned about to leave, I sobbed my heart out as the women
threw rice in a last gesture of farewell. I cried for our lost Arab
nationalism (exemplified by Arafat), the indifference of the Arab
world, and the thought of the Israelis at Beirut Airport." As Arafat
headed onto the gangplank, ready to board the Greek liner
Atlantis, scheduled to banish him from Beirut, Jumblatt took out
a pistol and fired into the air in salute. Jumblatt, and many of
those around, wept as the PLO Chairman took his final leave. At the
time, with no Palestine in sight and battles raging on in Lebanon,
West Beirut might as well have been Jerusalem for Yasser Arafat.
Here he was leaving it in defeat and the Arab world was lamenting
the turn of events – cursing him for his blunders yet weeping for
his fate. Many of the Muslims who had supported him during the war
now blamed him for the Israeli invasion and sincerely wanted him to
leave – but not in such a humiliating manner. With a nullified Arab
leadership failing to speak out in his favor, the only ones who did
were the Muslims of Lebanon. "To hell with the Arab world," a
tear-filled Jumblatt was saying, "we are the only Arabs left (who
will speak out for him)."
Today,
Jumblatt tells me, "Poor Arafat. We do not want to gloat at him
today, but what is happening is the result of accumulated mistakes,
both on his part and on the part of the Arabs."
He added,
"Today, I believe that Arafat is finished. Israel wants to get rid
of him both politically and physically. Even the PA, according to
the news, is finished." When asking about whether Arafat will be
able to balance out between Israeli demands and Palestinian
aspirations, Jumblatt cut me short and snapped, "Impossible – he
will not be able to manage. Bush wants Arafat to kill his people.
Arafat can arrest some and silence a few others, but he cannot kill
his people." The pitiful comment, coming from one of Arafat's
loudest friends, was alarming and painful. Back then, unlike today,
the world wept for Yasser Arafat's misery. Thomas Friedman, the New
York Times correspondent in Beirut, described his exodus saying,
"the PLO itself was never quite the same after it quit Lebanon, and
neither for that matter was the Arab world. Something in the Arab
world died on August 30, 1982," the day Arafat left Beirut.
Today,
Arafat is destined to leave the political scene altogether, and
there are no gunshots, there is no rice tossed in the air, and there
is no one to see him off at the gangplank.
The most
striking parallel between Arafat then and Arafat today is comparing
Arafat on August 30, 1982, the date of his exodus, and Arafat on
October 9, 1982, the date of his first post-Lebanon public
appearance. It was at an Amman gathering attended by Friedman, where
Arafat addressed a group of thousands of people still wailing to
uphold his leadership despite the very recent defeat. Friedman
described it saying, "What I remembered most was that they just
wanted to touch him. Arafat was like a rock star after a concert and
the Palestinians were grabbing at his clothes as he ran a gauntlet
of flying hands and arms. What was all this about? Arafat was
supposed to be finished? What were the Palestinians touching? I
think they were touching themselves in a way, making sure that they
were still there, still alive, still visible to the rest of the
world." For the better part of his career, Arafat was a symbol of
Palestinian existence. Whenever he faced a dilemma, observers would
believe him to be finished, and announce, just as I had mistakenly
done, his political obituary.
Then, apparently with superhuman
strength, Arafat would bounce back into life, symbolizing the
Palestinian determination not to be forgotten and not to have the
cause erased. Sadly though, that situation has come to an end, to a
grinding halt.
The Arab world and the Palestinians
in particular have apparently started to accustom themselves,
whether willingly or not, to the idea of a post-Arafat Palestine. In
the past, to three generations of Arab nationalists, this notion
would have been impossible. It would have been, in Winston
Churchill's words, "one of those cases where the imagination is
baffled by the facts." Arafat was Palestine and losing him meant
simply, losing the feasibility of Palestine in the international
world order. Today, however, Palestine lives and will continue to
live without him. The very fact that the country's international
existence has been separated from that of a single man, but rather
linked to the will of a people, is in fact, one of Arafat's greatest
achievements.
London
Gulf News
January 22, 2001