The political future of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has drawn worldwide attention after the United States called for his removal from power.
On June 24, U.S. President George W. Bush unveiled his long-awaited Middle East peace initiative, which conditioned the creation of a provisional Palestinian state on the change of the Palestinian leadership. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Bush's national security advisor Condoleezza Rice make it clear later that Washington wanted Arafat to be removed from power.
Apparently, the United States believes Arafat no longer helps in the resolution of the 22-month-long Israeli-Palestinian bloodshed which has so far claimed thousands of lives. This marks a change in the attitude of both Americans and Israelis towards Arafat, following their disappointment on many occasions over Arafat's failure to control the various Palestinian armed factions.
They blame Arafat for failure to curb the frequent suicide bombings against Israeli civilians launched by Palestinian militants. Moreover, they think peace is no longer the strategic priority for the Palestinian leader.
Earlier, they deemed Arafat an indispensable partner for peace. For them, Arafat's involvement was necessary because of his consistent choice of peace, in addition to his effective leadership, which had for years guaranteed the harmony and unity among Palestinians.
Is Arafat still a powerful leader and a representative of Palestinians? The answer lies in Arafat's close link with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which was launched in May1964, grouping eight Palestinian guerrilla groups. The event is regarded as a milestone on Palestinians' way toward independence.
The fact that Arafat is the President of Palestine, also head of the Palestinian National Authority(PNA), of the PLO's mainstream Fatah faction and of the PLO executive committee, cannot speak fully of his role as regards to the Palestinians.
A PLO founder in addition to the above-mentioned titles, Arafathas made himself the only symbol of the Palestinian cause. He is Palestinians' spiritual, political and military leader in one. Without Arafat, there would not be today's Palestinian cause.
Will any person be able to replace such a historic figure? This is a question raised by many and a source of concern.
The departure or stay of any leader cannot break away from local reality. Is it definite to realize peace between Palestine and Israel and solve the core problem of the Middle East dispute by artificially ending the era of Arafat?
The Palestinians have made great efforts for generations to reoccupy its lost land and obtain independence. As the special historic conditions and various struggling strategies and modes have led to the situation of multiple parties acting independently and defiantly in Palestine, it is a historic necessity and also a practical choice for Arafat to act as a core leader.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has warned that Middle East would plunge into great chaos without Arafat, while Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit told his Israeli counterpart Ariel Sharon that without Arafat, who cannot be replaced, Middle East would face a great danger.
All potential successors of Arafat either lack affinity becauseof being far away from Palestine, or have only political views instead of real power, or have real power in hand but lack high political prestige. If Arafat, who enjoys high prestige, cannot control the situation or make concessions in negotiations, how canthe United States and Israel find out a certain successor of Arafat who will meet the demand of reaching a peace which is unfairly beneficial to Israel?
Furthermore, the issues hindering the realization of peace in Middle East, including the status of Jerusalem, return of refugeesand division of water resources, are multilateral. The solution to all the problems will depend on the end of the Middle East dispute, while they cannot be solved only through Palestine and Israel.
Even more seriously, Israel's long-term occupation, frequent blockage and military retaliation have resulted in an unrest society in Palestine and an upsurge of radical thoughts and anti-Israel sentiments, the rising influence of radical religious groups, such as Hamas and Jihad, for instance.
Under this circumstance, the quitting of Arafat might well lead to results contrary to what the U.S. and Israel had intended.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has recently expressed his deep concern that the step-down of Arafat is likely to bring radical forces to power. He said it is not a proper time now to shuffle the Palestinian leadership.
The Bush administration has found few supporters for its tough position to remove Arafat from the Middle East peace process. Soon after Bush's speech on June 24, the European Union (EU) stressed its persistent stance that it would continue to back Afrat if thePalestinian people again elect him as their leader. EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also reassured Arafat of EU support forhim when he made a phone conversation with the Palestinian leader on Tuesday evening.
Russia has also adopted an independent stance by extending continued recognition of Arafat's leadership. Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said Monday that Arafat is still the leader of PNA and Russia will continue its contacts with the Palestinian leader, neglecting calls from the U.S. to stop links with him.
Many countries hold that it is up to the Palestinians to choose their leader. Out of national feelings and political consideration,none of the Arab nations would support the outright removal of Arafat.
As some observers see it, the U.S. and Israel might not have intended to depose Arafat, but to force him to curb extremist forces, soften his stance in peace talks. They also hope that a Palestinian leadership shakeup could end the chaos in Palestine and improve the conditions of Palestinians, thus eliminating the hotbed of radical ideas and extremist sentiment.
Over the past few days, Palestinians from all walks of life, including leaders of some radical groups, have held demonstrationsto show their support for Arafat in response to Washington's call for his removal. Arafat also announced that he would run again for PNA chairmanship, showing confidence in his re-election in defiance of U.S. demand.
It is widely believed that Arafat, either as leader of the entire Palestinian people, or the PNA, has an unshakable status. His position might be taken over, but his role is irreplaceable. Intensified efforts on the part of U.S. and Israel at dialogue and trust building seem the only sensible way to resolve the current crisis over Arafat's future, observers say.
(People's Daily July 5, 2002)
