Yasser
Arafat and the Future of Palestine
By Dr Nayyer Ali
The death of Arafat has brought
a long chapter in the history of the Palestinians
to a close. His defining achievement was to lead
a dispossessed and despised people and turn them
into a national movement that sustained itself against
unbelievable odds. He brought them to the brink
of a real victory, but ultimately failed in delivering
a state of their own to them.
Arafat in the last 10 years was not the best man
to lead the Palestinians. His style of leadership,
which kept all power and decision-making to himself
while his underlings constantly jockeyed for advantage,
prevented serious decisions from being made. His
biggest miscalculations were in 2000. First was
the failure to present a real counteroffer at Camp
David, a decision that allowed Israel and Clinton
to blame him for the failure.
Second was the decision not to stop the second Intifada
when it broke out in September 2000. Once Sharon
took power, the Israelis began a strategy of destroying
the Palestinians’ security infrastructure,
which then prevented the PA from reasserting control
even if it wanted to. But during the first six months
of the uprising, Arafat could have stopped it if
he so desired. He calculated that perhaps the Palestinians
could force the Israelis to leave under fire, just
as they had finally withdrawn from Lebanon earlier
that year.
But the West Bank and Gaza were far different in
importance to Israel than southern Lebanon, and
Israel quickly replaced the failed Barak with the
hawkish Sharon who set out to destroy the Palestinian
Authority. Eventually, Arafat would find himself
confined to a partially rubbled complex in Ramallah
where he spent the last two years fighting any Palestinian
reform effort that would have created a more democratic
and accountable Palestinian leadership. The Israeli
and American pressure on him actually strengthened
his ability to resist reform as reformers could
then be accused of being stooges of Israel. Arafat’s
end now gives the Palestinians a golden opportunity
to build a democratic government, which will sharply
raise their international credibility and strengthen
their hand in negotiating with Israel.
The death of Arafat may be welcomed by Israelis,
but it is actually bad for Zionism, at least the
Ariel Sharon kind. The Israelis and Americans will
be forced to deal with a new Palestinian leadership,
which will likely be a coalition that includes Hamas
and Islamic Jihad. For Israel, the choice will be
clear. If it wants peace, it will have to give up
the West Bank and East Jerusalem and withdraw the
settlers, of which there are over 400,000. The 7,000
settlers in Gaza are to be unilaterally withdrawn
next year, and Sharon is setting the precedence
for further settler withdrawal.
Between the Jordan River and the sea, there are
now three Palestinian children for every two Jewish
ones. By 2050, there will be 20 million people living
in historic Palestine, and two-thirds will be Palestinian.
Even if the Israelis make a peace of equals with
the Palestinians, one-third of Israeli citizens
will be non-Jewish in 2050. The end result will
be intermarriage, and a rate of even 5-10% will
result in the inevitable bi-national state that
Zionists have always rejected. Even the demographic
consequences of the right of return, once there
is a peace treaty between Israel and Palestine,
will be partially carried out through a mix of newlywed
Palestinians with Israeli citizenship bringing in
their spouses from Palestine, and illegal immigration
into Israel from just over the border. Economic
imperatives such as free trade, labor flows, and
a common currency, along with integrated national
electric grids and water systems wi ll tie Israel
and Palestine into the functional equivalent of
a single state.
If Zionism means having a “Jewish state”,
i.e. a state that embodies Jewish values and in
which a Jew can feel at home, then Zionism, and
Israel, can survive and even thrive in this future.
But if Zionism means creating a “state of
the Jews” as a people, an exclusivist and
ethnically defined state that marginalizes its non-Jews,
then Zionism is headed for a demographic cliff.
A real peace will only accelerate the process. In
fact, the oppression of the Palestinians, and the
resentment that creates toward Jews, is the oxygen
on which right-wing Zionism survives. Which is why
right-wing Zionists do not want the conflict to
end. It is the only thing that sustains their dream.
Comments can reach me at Nali@socal.rr.com.
