FactsOfIsrael.com News, Comments and Links
Arafat is a partner for War
Found a good article on MSNBC.COM thaty describes how the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat is not a partner for peace, but more a partner for war.
"We [...] disagree with the murder of six people and the wounding of 30 others on Jan. 17 at an Israeli girl’s bat mitzvah in the town of Hadera. That is one of the many acts of terrorism directly linked to Arafat’s control in documents found by Israeli forces in Palestinian Authority offices. These documents were organized in a 103-page report released by the Israeli government this week to support Sharon’s position that Israel cannot proceed with partner Arafat"
I copied the full article below:
A partner for war?
WASHINGTON, May 8 — On June 6, 1967, the second day of the Six Day War, Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban laid before the United Nations Security Council Israel’s case for pre-emptively striking in a war sought and forced by the Arab nations.
AS THE historian Michael Oren describes in his first-rate new account of the conflict, “Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East,” Eban looked at each ambassador before him and said: “Look around this table and imagine a foreign power forcibly closing New York or Montreal, Boston or Marseille, Toulon or Copenhagen, Rio or Tokyo or Bombay Harbor. How would your government react? What would you do? How long would you wait?”
This remains Israel’s essential cry, and comes up again - pressingly - in the matter on the table this week, whether or not Israel must consider Yasser Arafat to be, in that quaint and archaic phrase, “a partner for peace.”
Officially, at least, the United States still believes this; and so, before Israeli prime Minister Ariel Sharon arrived in Washington, various senior Bush administration officials were taking to the newspapers and the Sunday public affairs talk shows to pressure Sharon to, as Secretary of State Colin Powell delicately put it, “recognize who the Palestinian people look to as their leader,” no matter “how disappointed we’ve been with him over time.”
A TRAIL OF DISAPPOINTMENTS
But Sharon and other Israelis have perhaps a closer relationship to this disappointment than does, say, Colin Powell. Our secretary of state can afford to pretend, as our media pretend, that it is still possible to believe the man in the keffiyeh remains our own little peace partner even though, noted the ever-mild Powell, “we all may disagree with what Mr. Arafat had done over time.”
Indeed. We may, for instance, disagree with the murder of six people and the wounding of 30 others on Jan. 17 at an Israeli girl’s bat mitzvah in the town of Hadera. That is one of the many acts of terrorism directly linked to Arafat’s control in documents found by Israeli forces in Palestinian Authority offices. These documents were organized in a 103-page report released by the Israeli government this week to support Sharon’s position that Israel cannot proceed with partner Arafat.
In media-world, this sort of thing is called balanced reporting. But Sharon and all Israelis live on a more real planet, and in that place, there is not the slightest doubt that the evidence proves that Arafat is architect and field marshal of the terrorist war against Israel.
Imagine that the government of the United States believed, on evidence, that a certain Islamic leader was responsible for directing a campaign of murder against Americans. To ask Abba Eban’s question, what would we do?
Actually, the answer doesn’t require much imagination, does it? We would mount an army against that leader and all his followers, and we would bomb them and shoot them and chase them and arrest them and ship them to Guantanamo Bay.
If we had the leader in question trapped in a room, we would not let him out and set him up again as a partner for peace.
Link to this page | Email this entry | digg this
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains some copyrighted materials the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.