USS Clueless              Voyages of a restless mind

Main: normal long no graphics Contact Log archives Best log entries Other articles Site Search

Stardate 20011220.1308 (On Screen):Regarding a successor for Arafat, this article states:

Of the half-dozen or so Palestinian figures usually mentioned as prospective leaders, none combines the veneer of legitimacy, popular support and muscle to make a strong candidate.

"No other leaders are viable," said Ziad Abu Amr, a Palestinian scholar and lawmaker. "These people have no power bases independent from Mr. Arafat, and Arafat is not going to yield his power to people of his own making."

Your honor, I object: this statement makes an assumption not yet proved in court. It assumes that Arafat himself actually has popular support and "muscle", thus trying to claim that replacing Arafat would lead to a less powerful leader less capable of making a deal.

But the evidence at this point is that Arafat himself is not capable of that, either. The only thing that a new leader will have less of is fame and exposure; he won't have any less power, because Arafat actually has damned little. When Israel declared Arafat "irrelevant" it was because it finally decided that Arafat himself is impotent. There isn't any point in negotiating with someone who can't actually deliver what he promises. So they're putting it on the line now, and forcing Arafat to prove that he actually can back up any deal he makes. After thirty years, he is now in the position of having to prove that he is capable of pacifying the Palestinian zone for one week. So far he's failed even in that. He's made a lot of pretty speeches, but the attacks continue.

This article contends that if Arafat is deposed then the situation will become worse. That's not obvious, by any stretch. It will be bad, but it's already bad. (discuss)