When Arafat's away

Don't get your hopes up that Yasser Arafat's illness will trigger some sort of rapid breakthrough between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, expect a lot of jousting for power among the Palestinian Authority and the terrorist and fundamentalist groups and, sadly, a lot of inappropriate pressure on Israel to make concessions in the name of helping Palestinian centrists come out on top.

The U.S. post-election period and Arafat's absence might seem like an ideal time for Colin Powell's State Department to renew pressure to return to the road map it laid out with Russia, the United Nations and the European Union. But the stubborn fact remains that any solution has to come from Israel and the Palestinians themselves; nothing imposed from the outside has a chance of proving permanent and could even turn out to be harmful.

The homicidal bombing at Tel Aviv's Carmel Market on Nov. 1 shows the terrorists are willing to continue their madness, presumably in hopes of preventing negotiations between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his Palestinian counterpart Ahmed Qurei, or the PA second-in-command Mahmoud Abbas. Groups like Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the radical faction that claimed responsibility for the Tel Aviv murders, fear Arafat's absence removes Sharon's justification for refusing to talk.

Arafat may be hospitalized in France, but as long as he continues to show any signs of a possible return to Ramallah, talking formally with Qurei or Abbas would be just the same as talking with him. Israel doesn't really have the option of refusing to let the 75-year-old dictator come back if he recovers because he remains the symbol of the drive for Palestinian independence.

Israel's stance on resuming talks never became an issue in the U.S. presidential campaign. Both George W. Bush and John F. Kerry endorsed Sharon's position, so overt pressure from Washington would, in effect, be a betrayal of campaign promises.

The White House seems most immediately occupied with Iraq, Afghanistan and an Iran that seems intent on having nuclear weapons. Initiating action between Israel and the Palestinians is unlikely, even though the standoff is a central issue in the Arab and Muslim rejection of America.

The U.N. and the E.U. can be counted on to renew their demands that Israel make concessions as a way to help the moderates. It seems not to occur to either body that the responsibility for meaningful steps rests first and foremost on the people who rejected Camp David and launched the Palestinian intifada four years and 4,000 deaths ago.

Arafat's absence is an opportunity for the Palestinians to decide what they want - more of the same violence, more of the closed crossings and daily hopelessness, or a brighter future. But it is not up to Israel to make that decision for them, and those who will pressure Sharon for concessions now are simply wrong.

Jonathan Friendly is a contributing editor at Jewish Renaissance Media.

Home