Arafat's Dilemma

Yasser Arafat, chairman of the Palestinian Authority, does not speak for the Palestinian people; he does not represent them, and he certainly does not rule over them. Israel, the U.S. and the world must stop trying to fool themselves into believing that in Arafat’s administration there lies the institutional possibility of peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and begin to prepare for whatever and whoever may lie ahead.

Arafat’s official authority was encouraged by the U.S. and Israel at the beginning of the peace process, because they believed he was someone who could potentially gather all the Palestinian people behind him and be involved in negotiations on the entire population’s behalf. Unfortunately, Arafat has proven to be unwilling or unable to unite the Palestinian people in the peace process, as radical groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad have gained more and more popularity among the Palestinian people.

Recent days have illustrated Arafat’s lack of control, and more importantly the Palestinian people’s unwillingness to submit to his orders and authority. Arafat’s security forces shot and killed two supporters of Osama bin Laden last week, infuriating the Palestinian public and leading to the ransacking of several Palestinian Authority buildings and police stations. Arafat, determined to avoid the embarrassment and loss of political capital that resulted from his support of Saddam Hussein in 1991, was determined to quell the sentiments of the protesters, who vehemently disagreed with his perspective. Hamas and other radical groups have pledged to ignore any cease-fire directives given by Arafat or his authorities, and have acted against Israel despite Arafat’s public exhortations to the contrary.

The recent assassination of Israeli Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze’evi serves to highlight the incredible disparity between Arafat’s public statements and the actions of Palestinian groups on the ground. Following intense pressure from Israel, and probably from his own advisors, to consolidate his power and control his people, Arafat declared any group disobeying him to be illegal. Should he elect to follow through on this threat, Arafat may find himself facing the frightening prospect of a civil war in the occupied territories.

Arafat’s failure to deliver a consolidated, united front in his dealings with Israel has left the peace process nothing more than a laughable quest to sign a piece of paper, which would potentially bind only some of the Palestinians in peace with Israel, continuing to leave Israelis vulnerable to Palestinian terrorists. From the Israeli perspective, the entire point of the peace process is to achieve peace and security for its citizens and inhabitants, and without this prospect for a lasting peace, there seems little reason to negotiate or make concessions.

Arafat must prove to Israel and the world that he is capable of following through on his words of peace. If he is not able, or if the Palestinian people are not willing to follow, than there can be no hope for peace.

The result is a stunning quandary: the autocratic, authoritarian leadership of Arafat may be the only hope for peace, if he is able to exert control over his entire population, while popular support seems to lie more and more with Hamas and the other extremist groups.

It is unfortunate that, should democracy ever come to the Palestinian people, they may choose to move even further from the path of peace. The pursuit of peace and the promotion of democracy in the region seem to lead to a contradiction, a sad commentary on the peace process and hopes for the future of the Middle East, where democracy and peace find themselves at odds.