Is Everything Arafat's Fault?

The mothers who came to the military court at Salem on Sunday were seatedfive to six meters away from their sons on the defendants' bench. It wasimpossible not to hear their shouted conversations. After they informed theirsons about who had sent them regards, and about how they have been thinkingabout them when they prepare the food for Ramadan, they summed up - forthemselves, for everyone around, for their sons - "If only Arafat would diealready."

It was clear they blame Arafat for "everything:" the arrest oftheir sons, the expected years of imprisonment for them, the meters ofseparation that kept them from the touch of their hands, the dozens of shekelsthey had to pay for the exhausting ride to the distant court and the youngmilitary policemen who were hushing them with waggling fingers and "Sh-sh-sh"every few minutes, as if they were toddlers in nursery school. This reminded oneof the Palestinian lawyers in the courtroom that, during a lecture he deliveredrecently in Italy, a group of workers who support the Palestinian struggle forindependence came and waved a placard along the lines of "We are all withYasser Arafat." You can all be with Arafat, he said to them with suppressedrage, but you are wrong in identifying him exclusively with the Palestiniancause.

There are many aspects to the centrality of Palestinian Authority ChairmanYasser Arafat in the international, Israeli and Palestinian consciousness as therepresentative of the Palestinians. This centrality is not only a result of thestatus he has obtained for himself as father-ruler. It is also the handiwork ofpeople around him - haters and lovers, members of his own people and foreigners.On the one hand, the constant presence of the Palestinian cause on theinternational agenda is attributed to Arafat; on the other, so are thePalestinian failures, which everyone defines differently, especially since 1990.

The mothers who blamed Arafat for "everything" are part of acurrent fashion. Not only like former prime minister Ehud Barak and PrimeMinister Ariel Sharon, but also like Fatah activists, officers in the securityapparatus and Palestinian government ministers. Thus, it is convenient not toexamine the traditional social ties and the political habits within which Arafatoperated. Thus, it is convenient among the Palestinian elite and many activiststo shrug off any personal and collective responsibility for what is happening.

Over the years, Arafat would not have been able to display his virtuosity increating circles of supporters and doers of his bidding in return for money andperquisites had not prominent individuals and movements, including some in theopposition, agreed to take this from him. His skill in creating mechanisms andinstitutions that compete with one another, in order to ensure that no leaderwill compete with him, rests on a tradition of inter-tribal tensions andcompetitions.

Wide circles of Palestinian politicians were partner to the colossal failureduring the Oslo years, when the worship of the symbolism of an airport andpostage stamps and the easing of restrictions on movement that they receivedfrom Israel prevented them from seeing in time that Israel was aiming at a newkind of control, not at a peaceful solution. The rapidity with which the currentintifada degenerated into the use of weapons and explosives is not only theresult of "his decision not to decide:" The cult of the "armedstruggle" has also been nurtured by his fiercest opponents, like Hamas andthe Popular Front. His opponents, and there are more than a few of them, do notdare to come out systematically and openly against this cult, and not because ofArafat or armed gangs. After all, for many years people dared to come outagainst the Israeli army of occupation and endanger their lives, their libertyand their jobs. Here, among other things, there is also a role played byconsiderations of tribal loyalty, personal prestige, socialization processes,the fear of harm to salaries and perquisites, class alienation and socialdistance from the objects of the criticism.

Arafat's wise disciples and his foolish disciples say that without him theworld would not have taken any interest in the fate of the Palestinians. Thisdoes an injustice to the entire Palestinian population that has declined to meltaway, without an identity, into the countries of its diaspora. There are thosewho say that without Arafat it is impossible to reach a peace agreement based onthe fair and realistic solution of two states within the borders of June 4,1967. In this they are not recognizing the contribution to the Palestinian causeof the tens of thousands of Palestinian activists in the territories, whoadopted this solution over the years, brought about the eruption of the firstintifada and contributed to the explicit change in the position of the PalestineLiberation Organization.

Arafat could not have sold the Oslo agreement to his public without an entiregeneration of Palestinian activists - in Fatah and in the organizations to theleft of it - familiar with Israel from the struggle against the occupation andfrom the prisons and wholeheartedly believed that this agreement would lead toindependence. This generation exists, be Arafat alive or dead. But Israel willlose it entirely, and will lose what is left of the chance for normal life inthis region, if it continues to spin solutions that are not based on a totalwithdrawal from the territories that were occupied in 1967.

Originally published in Ha'aretz