A different view is of course heresy on this list, but here's one Paula might think about: > >From The Washington Post > Friday, Oct. 6, 2000 > > Arafat's War > By Charles Krauthammer > Friday, October 6, 2000; Page A31 > > Fighting has broken out in the Middle East, we read. This use of passive > phrasing, almost universal in media reports on the violence in Israel, is > a way of deliberately expressing agnosticism about the cause of the > fighting. It is a scandal. It is akin to writing that on Sept. 1, 1939, war > "broke > out" on the German-Polish frontier. > > Few wars break out spontaneously. And certainly not this one. Does anyone > believe that Ehud Barak, who went to Camp David and offered the > Palestinians peace terms of breathtaking generosity, would be starting a > war? Does anyone believe that the most dovish government in Israeli > history, feeling itself just inches away from concluding a permanent > peace, would initiate gun battles? > > The plain fact is that Yasser Arafat, thrown on the diplomatic defensive > by rejecting Barak's offer (to the astonishment and dismay of the American > mediators), has done what he has always done: resort to violence to regain > the initiative and, most important, mint new underage martyrs--on world > television--to regain the international sympathy he had forfeited by > turning down peace at Camp David. > > His pretext was that the Sept. 28 visit to the Temple Mount by Israel's > leader of the opposition so offended Islam that the faithful erupted in > violence. The audacity of this claim is astonishing. Yes, the Temple Mount > is the third-holiest place in Islam. But it happens to be the single most > holy place for Jews. Why does the Muslim claim so trump all others that > Jews may not set foot on their most sacred site, their Mecca? > > The war that followed was as spontaneous as a Havana demonstration. The > preacher at the al-Aqsa mosque called at Friday prayers to "eradicate the > Jews from Palestine." Official Palestinian television began playing over > and over archival footage of the Palestinian intifada of 1987-1993 showing > young people out in the streets throwing stones. > > In case one still didn't get the message, Voice of Palestine radio began > playing patriotic war songs. Arafat then closed the schools and declared a > general strike, causing everyone to go out into the street. With Arafat's > chief political lieutenant on the West Bank orchestrating the militias, > war then "broke out." > > The doves are stunned. Avraham Burg, speaker of the Israeli parliament and > one of the architects of the Labor government's bend-over-backward peace > proposals, writes perplexedly, pathetically: "Do we really understand what > is going on? After everything was given, there are still demands on the > other side." > > "Suddenly we discovered," he continues plaintively, "that what we mean by > peace--which is mutual reconciliation--is not being met by the other > side." > > Suddenly? Where has he been for seven years? Seven years during which > Arafat built his "police force" into a 40,000-man army now unleashed on > Israel. Seven years during which Arafat repeatedly said that the peace > process was one option and that if he did not get everything he wanted > there was another. Seven years during which his state-controlled > television, radio, newspapers and now children's textbooks inculcated in > his people an antisemitism and anti-Zionism so virulent that it has > succeeded in producing a new generation bred on reflexive hostility to > Israel. > > Seven years during which he repeatedly called for "jihad" for Jerusalem. > Well, it has now arrived. That is the meaning of the current fighting. > > This is, as the Palestinians openly call it, a war for Jerusalem. Not, as > the world press has reported endlessly and fatuously, an expression of > Palestinian "frustration." Frustration with what? Israeli occupation? It > ended years ago; 99 percent of Palestinians live under the rule of Yasser > Arafat. Over territory? Barak has conceded virtually the entire West Bank. > Over political subordination? Barak offered full recognition of the first > independent Palestinian state in history. > > The Palestinians are less frustrated than emboldened. Emboldened by an > Israeli government so desperate for peace it has given up "everything," as > Burg admitted. Emboldened by the fecklessness of Burg and his colleagues, > so impervious for so long to empirical evidence of Palestinian > implacability that in this moment of supreme crisis they admit openly to > disorientation. > > Emboldened by an American administration so craven that it refuses to > condemn Arafat for cynically starting this war, indeed for repeatedly > violating his single obligation under Oslo: the renunciation of violence. > > "After everything was given," laments Burg. Yes everything, except one > last thing: the Temple Mount. Why, Barak went wobbly even on that. He > offered > to relinquish sovereignty over Judaism's holiest site and internationalize > it > under the U.N. Security Council. > > Arafat refused. He demands ownership--the audacity is breathtaking--of > Judaism's holy of holies. Hence this war. > > It is not spontaneous. And it is not without direction. Arafat knows what > he wants, and he is prepared to sacrifice as many of his own people as it > takes to get it. Preferably on television. > > 2000 The Washington Post Company
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/07/00 EDT