May 08, 2002

Ben Sheriff notes that the

Ben Sheriff notes that the "dossier" on Arafat's direct involvement in terrorism is up on the IDF site: here's the index and here's the stuff about the Arafat/PA financing of terrorist activity.

Also on Ben's site is a sensible response to Robert Wright's quirky column arguing that proof of Arafat's direct involvement in terrorism strengthens his desirability and credibility as a negotiating partner. This is nuts, though it's the logic that terrorists always hope will prevail. Rewarding terrorism = a guarantee of further terrorism. Granting concessions to Arafat in response to such blackmail sends the message that blowing up pizza parlors and pool halls is a viable method of statecraft. The Israelis won't allow this, nor should anyone expect them to; the US, in its own interests, should do what it can to ensure that such tactics not be rewarded. Whether or not the newest round of evidence holds up, it's plain as the blue day that the Palestinian Authority and its "president" have been involved in the planning, funding and incitement of terror attacks on Israeli civilians as means of achieving their political goals. In other words, the PA is in essence and in effect a terrorist and criminal organization which has in turn been funded and supported (unwittingly or "winkingly," depending on ones level of cynicism) by the "international community." It's not the only such organization, of course, and Arafat obviously isn't able to turn the terror off and on at will: but eliminating him and dismantling his organization would be a step in the right direction, both as a pragmatic and as a moral matter.

As Ben writes:

Whichever way you slice it, it seems to me that you have to have some faith in Arafat to buy into this, faith that doesn't fit with an examination of what's happening. Sure, this shows he potentially could do something but a) not that he necessarily could and b) not that he would. Plus, it shows that he's definitely in cahoots with the terrorists, so there was little reason to think that Fatah would act effectively against them.

This may make the case Wright wants to. Or, it might be a good reason to get rid of the guy once and for all. If he's been running the suicide attacks on Israel, or turning a truly blind eye, how much worse could his replacement be?


My first reaction on hearing of the latest suicide attack was like that of Glenn Reynolds: "IT'S JUST A HUNCH, but I think this last suicide bombing may have been it for Arafat." But that was my reaction to the Karin-A story, to the Passover Bombing, to each new suicide bombing, in fact. It's simply mind-boggling that he's still being offered a "place at the table." I suppose our leaders believe that keeping Arafat marginally in the picture is the best chance of avoiding, for the present, a general middle eastern war. It's starting to look less and less avoidable, isn't it?

Posted by Dr. Frank at May 8, 2002 11:17 AM | TrackBack