On June 24, President George W. Bush demanded that Palestinians should change their leader and set this as a precondition for US support of the establishment of a Palestinian State. This move was seen as being targeted against Yasser Arafat. At the G8 summit on June 26, Bush spoke frankly about Arafat’s removal from the Palestinian leadership and warned of a cut-off in US aid to the Palestinians if he was reelected. It seems the Bush government is determined to write off Arafat.
But, why has the Bush administration turned so sharply against Arafat?
In fact, it is not new for the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and Arafat to hear Bush’s accusations, but they are mainly blamed for “encouraging terrorism” in the past. Since the Sept.11 attacks, Israel, holding high the banner of counter-terrorism, has tried hard to win over public opinion by converting the long-lasting Israel-Palestine conflict into an art of the war against terrorism. In Israel’s lexicon, its occupation of Palestinian land is a fight against terrorism while Palestine’s resistance against the Israeli occupation becomes a terror action. With this principle, the Bush administration, busy fighting the global anti-terrorism war, should certainly support Israel’s “anti-terrorism campaign,” while Arafat, who is blamed for failing to curb terrorism, should naturally be punished, even being kicked out of the Palestinian leadership.
Although on the surface the suicide bombings targeted on civilians by a few Palestinian extremists look like terrorism, the nature of the Mideast conflict is still a fight over Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. The reason why the conflict continues is that peace talks between the Palestinians and the Israelis are slow in coming. It is Israel who rejected the “land for peace” principle set at Madrid Peace Conference and refused to withdraw completely from Palestinian land according to Resolutions 242 and 338 passed by the UN Security Council that delayed the resumption of the peace talks. Moreover, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has adopted a hard-nosed approach towards Palestine since he came to power, refusing to hand over occupied land on the one hand, and on the other hand demanding security for Israel. Once the Palestinians resisted, he asked Israeli troops to put this down without any hesitation.
To a large extent, Bush’s determination to oust Arafat represents Sharon’s idea. Sharon never hides his hatred of Arafat and he has openly expressed his regret for not killing him in the 1982 Lebanon War. He has refused to meet with Arafat ever since he became Prime Minister. Later, with the worsening of the Mideast conflict, he began directly targeting Arafat. He not only destroyed Arafat’s compound and private plane and attacked his bodyguards, but also besieged Arafat many times, seriously threatening his personal security.
For Sharon’s such actions, the US government has expressed understanding many times. In order to protect the global anti-terrorism campaign, the US administration decided to step up its diplomatic efforts in the Mideast conflict. But while Bush invited Sharon to visit the US and held talks with him many times, he has never given Arafat a chance to meet or even talk over the phone. According to reports, it is Sharon’s recent visit to US that helps Bush to make up his mind to demand the ousting of Arafat.
Complying with Sharon’s desires to see the ouster of Arafat is another reflection of the US long-term stand of favoring Israel while suppressing Palestine. Israel has always been the most reliable US ally in the Mideast. Besides, Jews living in the US have great impact on domestic politics and economics. This fall will see mid-term elections in the US, which is very important for the 2004 presidential election. Currently, the Bush administration is busy winning support from senators, representatives as well as gubernatorial candidates. So it is not difficult to understand Bush’s choice between irreconcilable Sharon and Arafat at such a crucial moment.
In its new Mideast Peace Plan, the Bush administration promised to back the creation of a Palestinian state, which is welcomed by the international community; yet, the condition of replacing Arafat drew world-wide criticism. Many countries, including American allies, believe it is up to the Palestinians to choose their own leaders, while other countries have no rights to interfere. Besides, Arafat has long been a symbol of the Palestinian national cause and he has won global recognition as the Palestinian leader who has been leading the fight against Israeli occupation. Therefore, a big question mark hangs over whether Bush’s wishes to get rid of Arafat can be realized.
(china.org.cn translated by Zheng Guihong, July 4, 2002)
