COLUMN: Understanding Yasir Arafat

From Seth Lasser's, "For Mass Consumption," Fall '97 From Seth Lasser's, "For Mass Consumption," Fall '97In the wake of the latest deadly suicide bombings, the already chilled relations between the governments of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Chairman Yasir Arafat have moved further away from amicable. Arafat responded to this political stress the way he always does: faking left, faking right and yet remaining in the same position. First off, he fired equally harsh words towards his supposed partner in peace. "The Israeli measures aim top humiliate our people and violate our peace agreement. We must confront them?" Arafat then met with the heads of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, two terrorist organizations responsible for the deaths of hundreds. Arafat made remarks at the meeting calculated to incur the wrath of Israel. "There is nothing far from us. All options are open to us," he stated, reminding both his constituents and foreign reporters despite official pronouncements to the contrary, the path of violence remained a viable option for the nascent Palestinian state. Before changing his tack, Arafat allowed ample time for the significance of his words and meetings to set it. The Palestinians -- understandably frustrated at the Netanyahu government's intransigence -- were given some opportunity to be hopeful. Arafat's meeting symbolized the unity of the nation, an indispensable factor in winning from the Israelis their due share of the land. To the best of his ability, Arafat indicated he would not be pushed around by the more powerful Israeli leader. On Tuesday, Arafat stepped to the right, instructing his security services to arrest some suspected Islamic militants. Reports indicate up to 200 people were taken in for questioning, with a few dozen spending the night in jail. At the same time, a school with links to Hamas was closed for an indefinite period. It remains to be seen whether those arrested were involved in terrorist attacks or whether they were merely political activists, but it will take a few days for the Israelis to come to a definitive answer. As usual, Arafat displayed an impeccable, if not perverse, sense of timing. U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright has arrived to try to jumpstart the obviously faltering peace process. Arafat can hold on to the prisoners as political poker chips: if the compromises worked out during her visit are favorable, he may keep those guilty of aiding and abetting terror behind bars. If he is unsatisfied, they will be released shortly after her departure. While few think Albright's mission to the region will lead Netanyahu and Arafat to a new found friendship, Arafat is apparently gambling that something tangible will be accomplished. His continued role as the leader of the Palestinians depends on it. The toughest question regarding peace negotiations since the end of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War has been who would negotiate with Israel on behalf of the Palestinians. Numerous proposals were batted back and forth between Arab nations, Israel and the United States to decide who would be the leader for a people logistically unable to decide for themselves. The Arab world always held that the Chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization was the leader of the Palestinians. Until 1990, Israel refused to recognize the PLO as a legitimate political organization, believing their constant terror attacks against civilians rendered them criminal. Israel tried for years to prop up alternatives to the PLO and tried to undermine their support wherever possible. Such efforts failed. The PLO consolidated its popular support through the provision of social services to Palestinians in refugee camps across the region and by attacking Israel and Israelis. Those that disagreed with their rule were tortured and murdered. Eventually, Israel relented and agreed to talk with the PLO on the condition Yasir Arafat renounce the use of terror and recognize the State of Israel. In some ways, the difference between Netanyahu and his more dovish predecessor Shimon Peres is their incongruous perspectives of Arafat. As a leader in the Israeli Labor Party for decades, Peres fought against the PLO. As the Foreign Minister and then Prime Minister in the 1990s, he realized Arafat was not the greatest threat to the State of Israel. Arafat is able to talk about Israel without calling for its destruction; the Islamists of Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not. There are many reasons to question Arafat's sincerity, but the goals of the other groups are impossible to hide. When Netanyahu's actions in the past month are considered, he seems to want to provide the pressure for a new set of leaders to emerge in the self-ruled areas. He behaves as if there are a multitude of options. Unfortunately, unless Netanyahu would prefer to move the Israeli Army back into Gaza to quell a new uprising, Arafat is the best of all possible options. For Netanyahu, this has always been an impossible pill to swallow. The irony is if Arafat his able to maintain his heavy-handed grip on power, he has other options. Netanyahu is unlikely to win re-election, and the opposition is trying hard to push elections forward. Though prime ministers normally serve for at least four years, Israeli pundits regularly predict his tenure will last no more than two. As long as the two sides keep talking, Arafat has little incentive to sign any major accord with Netanyahu when a candidate from the Left may well be in power within a year. Given the obvious political constraints, it is impossible for Netanyahu to monitor whether Arafat is doing his all to reign in terrorism. This task is better suited for the United States, a nation with at least some objectivity as far as the negotiations are concerned. The best results that could come out of this week's meetings between Albright and the region's leaders is for her to assert the United States' willingness to serve in this capacity. Given the way the political fortunes of Netanyahu and Arafat appear now, this might be the only way for Netanyahu to emerge from this latest fray with the upper hand.