Arafat - terrorist or freedom fighter?

[Uhu]

Well, the inevitable has happened and Yasser Arafat has passed away. Now there will be endless debates about his contribution to the Palestinian situation and whether he was a help or hindrance to his people.

For me, he was both. He famously told the UN that he had a gun in one hand and an olive branch in the other and that it was up to them to ensure that he kept hold of the olive branch. I believe he sincerely wanted to help his people and to establish a country that they could call home, just like the Jews had with Israel. However, I can't help thinking that his missed so many opportunities to move forward with the peace process. Somebody needed to take the lead in the intractable situation between the Israelis and the Palestinians and to some extent Arafat did, but not enough. In the end, I think he became more important than the problem to the extent that he was in dispute with other moderate Palestinian leaders towards the end of his life.

For me, Arafat was a great symbol for the struggle of dispossessed people, like Nelson Mandela but unlike Mandela, he was unable or unwilling to translate that to a successful resolution for his people.

I hope he is at peace now but I fear is legacy will not be one that he would have wished.

Freedom Fighter, definitely. I agree Arafat did pass up opportunities ( esp with Clinton and Bharak in the 90s) but ultimately he could not settle for anything less than a full restoration of pre 6 Day war territories.In this way he symbolised resistance and no compromise, although some would view this as a weakness.I feel very sad about his death.

Uhu you have said it very well so I don't need to add anything other than my agreement with what you have said.

Well written.

I heard him speak at a rally in Gaza in 1993. It was incredible. People next to me were crying. It was a really hopeful time.

I was hoping someone would start a thread about this. I'm afraid I don't know enough to contribute but will be reading with interest.

I wouldn't view it as a weakness donnie. At the end of his life, Arafat lost support among the Palestinians for giving too much to Israel, not for being too militant.

If it hadn't been for Arafat, most people in the West would have been completely unaware of the cause of the Palestinian people. The Intifada made those of us who had been brought up to believe that that part of the world was empty desert before the Israelis got there, aware of the tragedy of the Palestinian people. Until the massacres of Sabra and Chatila, I hadn't even been aware that such beings as Palestinians existed - I thought they were people in the bible. Now nearly everyone in Europe knows about them. That's down to Arafat. Whether you agree with his methods or not.

What saddens me about Arafat was that he was unable or unwilling to complete the transition from being an armed fighter to a political statesman. He saw the Palestinian situation in absolutes and because of that, negotiating a peaceful settlement with the Israelis became impossible. I think the other Palestinian leaders recognised this and that is why Arafat became marginalised in the last few years.

He will certainly be remembered as an icon who brought to the world's attention the plight of the Palestinian people. I doubt he will be remembered as a truly great leader, even amongst his own people.

Both. Depends on whether you're the relative of someone he/the Palestinians blew up, or whether you're the relative of someone killed by the Israelis. I hope that his death marks a postive turning point for the middle east. These are worrying times.

Terrorist, terrorist, terrorist. Hopefully, now that he has died, negotiations can start again between Israelis and Palestinians and there will be peace.

as someone said on Question Time last night .. he was still wearing his uniform when he was supposed to be a diplomat negotiating for peace

says it all to me

I hope to god someone takes his place who will negotiate and achieve peace

I pray for peace in the region and justice for the Palestinians and also agree with Uhu, that in the end, Arafat was not the man for the job.

Arafat wasn't the man for the job, no.

But to be honest I don't think that man/woman exists.

The peace process in Northern Ireland would not have been possible without the help of militant ex-terrorists - and I'm not sure it could happen in the Middle East either. A leader needs the support of his/her people as well as diplomacy etc. Sharon is not exactly a moderate and I can't see the palestinians supporting anyone who is seen to be more compromising than he is.

I'm quite pessimistic about the whole thing really. I hope I'm wrong.

Caligula I agree with everything you said and feel that Arafat's refusal to compromise is exactly what made him such a hero to so many.And yes, he has made people aware of the Palestinian struggle whereas Bush, Blair etc would rather forget about it as far as I can see.
I was watching the funeral cortege in Ramallah on the tv earlier today and it was just amazing.The level of fervour and emotion was staggering.
There have been a lot of comments on the news etc about Arafat's refusal to completely denounce violence, but I would go back to UHU's first post when she drew a partial parallel between Arafat and Mandela. The ANC was a violent organisation just as the PLO embraced violence to fight against the Israeli occupation and theft of Palestinian lands.And as for wearing his uniform, he saw himself as someone who fought for a dispossessed people and as a resistance warrior.Why should he not wear it? he wasn't exactly an ordinary civilian.

I also agree with Senora Postrophe when she says that there isn't a man alive whose right for the job. People talk a lot about Arafat's refusal to compromise, but the Israli's are building a Berlin wall on Palestinian territory. And they're not allowing Palestinians who can't get to Ramallah to go through to pay their respects to Arafat. Does that look like a bunch of diplomats who are easy to do business with? I don't think so!

At one time, one could not envision an apartheid-free South Africa but that is now a reality. It is a reality because the leaders of the whites understood that the situation was untenable and that they had to compromise. Botha was not the right person for the job but de Klerk was and that's why the peace process moved forward when he became the leader of the country. Mandela realised many years before that, that armed struggle would alienate him from international diplomats and hence, he decided to eschew violent tactics. That's why, in my opinion, he is so revered today and honoured as a great, noble statesman.

The other great leaders that realised freedom and change for their people include Gandhi and Martin Luther King - they used peaceful means to undermine their tormentors. It's a shame that Arafat was not statesman enough to do the same. Being right is not what leadership is about and does not always get you what you think you are entitled to. How many Palestinians have unnecessarily loss their lives because Arafat could not or was unwilling to comprehend this basic fact?. Lets hope that the new leader will use diplomacy, ingenuity and a bit of guile to secure a peaceful resolution for the Palestinians.

I haven't noticed the Israeli's using peaceful means against the Palestinians. And Likud started off a terrorist organisation, like many political parties in the world.

The examples you mention Uhu, are extraordinary precisely because they are exceptions. In most other conflicts in the world, self-determination has in the main been won by armed struggle, unless it became economically unviable for the nation being struggled against to hold out against the wish of the people for self-determination (I'm thinking of the colonies of the British empire which passed peacefully over from British rule - but there may be other examples.)

I agree and that is the tragedy about this conflict. There was a chance for a real move towards peace when Arafat and the Israeli leader (whose name I forget) met in Washington with Clinton. As I understand it, it was Arafat who sabotaged the peace accord (but I could be wrong) and I think this is one of the main reasons why the other Palestinian leaders lost patience with him.

Arm struggle usually gives way to peaceful negotiations when both parties accept the futility of war. I hope that Israel will genuinely acknowledge that they have to leave the occupied Gaza strip and that the Palestinians will stop attacking the Israelis. Somebody has to make the first move and if the Palestinians did this, they would hold the moral high ground over Israel. That would gain them a lot of extra credit from the international community and that is currency that Israel can ill-afford to ignore.

However, I've just seen a troop of pigs flying outside my window.

it's not just the Gaza strip though is it? the Israeli government has systematically stolen more and more land since the 6 day war in 1967, ( in which they annexed parts of Jordan and Lebanon also). As for peaceful means, it isn't really a likelihood is it? What is the point of ' peaceful means' against a state which has broken more UN resolutions than any other, who is building a wall to steal yet more land while pretending it is a defence measure,who send in the tanks in dead of night to demolish the already impoverished refugee camps and bomb women and children, who deliberately prevent ambulances from having quick access through Israeli checkpoints to hospitals etc etc....the reason South Africa was forced to embrace racial equality was because of massive political pressure from just about every other nation in the world as well as boycotts and trade embargos.There are currently no such pressures exerted on the Israelis and thus they abuse the Palestinians' human rights with impunity on a daily basis.When Bush was re-elected, Sharon said 'Bush is the best friend Israel has ever had', so that tells us something. And as for those who call Arafat a ' terrorist', well look who invaded Beirut in the 80s - Ariel Sharon. And who was a member of the Stern Gang, a Zionist terrorist group which blew up hotels in the 70s/80s ? Menachim Begin, former Israeli Prime Minister. So really, I have every sympathy for the Palestinians and I find it astounding how the Israeli government is able to call itself a 'democracy' in any shape or form.