Volume CXXXI, Number 20 April 5, 2002 f

Yasser Arafat is a terrorist
PATRICK ROCKEFELLER

The Bush Doctrine states that if one harbors, supports, finances, or aids terrorists, then that person is a terrorist and will be treated as such. Sadly, the Bush administration has skirted the issue in regards to Yasser Arafat.
The confusing policy-or lack of policy-that Bush set out in regards to American support for Israel does not qualify Arafat as a terrorist. The policy neglects to do so because of Arafat's past efforts to make peace. This is ridiculous.

As the leader of Palestine, Arafat has been given an impressive police force armed by Israel. Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered all the concessions that Israel could possibly have offered, while still maintaining the integrity of an Israeli state, in the Camp David meetings of 2000. However, Arafat turned it down and began the current Intifadah, which has resulted in the death and injury of thousands.

Now, two paths of thought exist in regards to Arafat. If we want to be generous, we can simply say that he is unable to control suicide bombings-even though some of the groups claiming responsibility are closely linked to Al-Fatah, the military wing of the PLO (founded by Arafat). However, I find this hard to believe, especially since Arafat's cry to end the targeted attacks on civilians at weddings, bar mitzvahs, and pizza diners has been less than enthusiastic.

But if we were to accept his inability to stop the bombings, then why should Israel or the United States waste time talking to him at all? If he cannot provide the one thing that Israel wants from him-a cessation of the terrorism-then what use is he? At one point, as a precondition for peace talks, Israel said that Arafat had to maintain one week without bombings.

Keep in mind that Israel didn't call for a total ceasefire, but merely seven days without a suicide attack. Only seven days, and Arafat couldn't do it.
Now, I fear that although the other possibility is a little more disturbing, it is a bit more likely. This option is that Arafat is unwilling to stop the bombings. If this is the case, then Arafat is a terrorist, plain and simple, and should not be negotiated with at all. In fact, he should face the same fate as any al Qaeda leader who is captured.

But why would Arafat be in favor of suicide bombings? For starters, he lives in a violent society. On a daily basis, he associates with people who plan terrorist attacks for a living. To a degree, he is dependent upon their support for his life. Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an Israeli who was unhappy with his land secession policies, and it doesn't require a stretch of the imagination to think that Arafat would have been assassinated if he had accepted Barak's offer in 2000. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

There is also the possibility that, while Arafat claims to respect Israel's right to exist, he wouldn't lose much sleep if it were wiped out of existence. Other Arab states have been less than helpful in this regard. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and Iraq, all claim to believe in the Palestinian cause, yet none has ever offered land to the Palestinians. In fact, the rest of the Arab world would have problems with a successful, democratic Palestinian state, as it would cast a bright light on their own failures. It is in their best interests to use the Palestinians as leverage against the Israelis.

The other side of the equation is Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, no sterling character himself. But those who claim one is as bad as the other are fooling themselves.

As the Israeli leader, Sharon does not target civilians. Arafat and his murderous gang do. They specifically send Palestinian youths to blow themselves up in well-populated public places. Cafés, pizzerias, weddings, and bar mitzvahs are all legitimate targets in their warped world.

The U.S. policy is not to make deals with terrorists, but to oppose and destroy them. Making deals with these groups legitimizes the targeted killing of innocent people as a political tool and thereby encourages it further. If Israel were to acquiesce and withdraw to the 1967 borders, the suicide bombings could be considered successful-and more could be expected-until Israel is forced to submit to new demands, perhaps withdrawing to the 1948 borders. This can be followed to a logical conclusion, given the destruction of the Jewish state.

This is not to say that the Palestinian people do not have legitimate grievances, but sadly, they will never be heard, understood, or taken seriously when their spokesmen make their points with C4.

Israel is the only democracy in the region and stands as a beacon to liberal democratic values in a region plagued by oppression. It is a close military ally to the United States, and an ideological friend. The process of solving the conflict between Israel and Palestine is neither easy nor pretty, and may not be possible at all. However, the first step should be for the U.S. to refuse negotiations with those who use terror as a political tool and who are willing to target innocent civilians to make a statement. Yasser Arafat is one such man, and he needs to be treated as such.