Middle Eastern Peace After Arafat?
The Diplomad
One of our Diplomads in an unusual place in the far Abroad filed these thoughts on the "peace process" after the death of the billion-dollar man.
We're hearing a lot of noise these days -- notably in Europe -- about how important it is for the world for the Mideast Peace Process (MEPP) to get back on track now that Yasser Arafat is dead. The Diplomad has looked and listened to all this pretty seriously and has these observations to make:
-- A lot of what we're hearing is really criticism of President Bush. That is, he has not paid attention to MEPP because he's distracted by Iraq. Or, if/when he has paid attention it has been too one-sided in its approach, and in the process we have dissed all the Arabs. CNN's Chrisian Ammanpour's coverage of Arafat's death watch in Paris included this reporting angle: "European leaders now expect the U.S. President to finally wake up to the importance of this issue..." or words to that effect.
-- The flip side of this anti-Bush coverage is the sickening praise we're reading and hearing about Arafat, which really proves nothing other than that Arafat made it fashionable once again to kill Jews. Other professional columnists (Friedman, Krauthammer) have done a good job of explaining the disastrous legacy that Arafat is leaving behind. But Friedman repeats the same line as Ammanpour, to wit, the need for the US Government to start paying attention to the MEPP.
-- Friedman and Ammanpour are wrong. The USG always pays attention to MEPP. Every day there are Diplomad colleagues at our Embassy in Tel Aviv, our Consulate in Jerusalem, in Arab capitals, and at senior levels in WashDC whose full-time job is the MEPP. This went on even though the chances of there being a solution while Arafat lived was nil. Even though MEPP was a contradiction in terms in the Arafat era, even when Oslo was proven a costly and bloody failure, we still had and kept our MEPP bureaucracy going. Readers, pleas believe us, there are dozens, scores of diplomats who sepnt their careers on MEPP and are now retired and have passed on the MEPP to a new generation of FSOs. It's a major money-maker.
-- Should the Secretary of State have spent the last 4 years on Kissinger-esque shuttle diplomacy, and President Bush gotten the White House absorbed in MEPP to the extent President Clinton did? No, obviously not. You do not place your most valuable chips on the table when you're holding a pair of twos, which isn't even a good hand for high-low. No, you learn from history. President Clinton himself NOW has been very public about how mistaken he was to risk his presidency on Arafat and MEPP.
-- The wise, statesmanlike course for President Bush was to keep diplomatic options open at various levels, but also use the prestige of the White House to promote democracy and good governance among the Palestinians. It's amazing how much this talk of democracy and good governance irks the Europeans and our own left. But that was an appropriate initiative, although the attempt to empower Abu Mazen as a genuine Prime Minister eventually failed.
-- In the mean time, President Bush is on record as favoring a Palestinian state living next to Israel side-by-side in peace -- a democratic Palestinian state, not a gangster state run by an Arafat and bent on destroying Israel. President Bush was quoted as saying that he took down two terrorist states on his watch and wasn't about to help create a new one. If in 2005 the Palestinians hold new elections and produce some sort of accountable leadership, President Bush will look as having been brilliant and wise, as opposed to all the critics, who already appear as having been impulsive and stupid.
-- OK, now Arafat is gone, and Abu Mazen is back, and has ALREADY SURVIVED HIS FIRST ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT. Diplomads watching the footage of that scene in Gaza are probably already checking to make sure they do not have stock in whatever company holds Abu Mazen's life insurance policy.
-- Diplomads watching that footage also advise that we proceed cautiously, and not assume that Arafat's death, while a welcome development, solves everything magically. We say thanks to God for putting an end to Arafat (but also while we're at it, ask God what took so long), but recognize that the culture of violence that Arafat created will be around for a long time. Whopping majorities of Palestinians (in the 80-percent range) actually support suicide bombings, for example.
-- Believe it or not, Diplomads wish the Palestinians well as they go about creating a post-Arafat identity and structure with which the rest of us can deal. But Diplomads don't assume that there are Palestinian George Washingtons, Mahatma Ghandis or Nelson Mandelas waiting in the wings, even if Mandela seems to be losing it lately.
-- To say that Arafat was an elected leader and deserving of our fawning adulation, as anti-American former US President Carter did this past week, really misses the point about democracy. Elections are only one part of democracy; an important part but certainly not the only part. Hitler made his way to power through elections, so did a lot of 20th and even early 21st Century leaders who cared or care very little about democracy. And even Arafat was "elected" in a process only carter and the Europeans could take seriously. Was there a genuine opposition candidate? Were there open debates and opportunities to present different governing platforms? Are you laughing yet? |
