Why is Israel threatening to murder Arafat?


moghrabi
#1
Why is Israel threatening to murder Arafat?
By the Editorial Board
16 September 2003


The Israeli government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has publicly declared its intention to murder Yasser Arafat, the popularly elected president of the Palestinian National Authority.

This announcement was not an emotional outburst by some out-of-control cabinet member. It was delivered by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Sharon’s closest ally and a man frequently mentioned as his likely successor. The threat was deliberate and calculated to serve definite political purposes.

The magnitude of this proposed crime deserves careful consideration. Arafat has been a major figure on the world stage for some 35 years. Whatever one thinks of his politics—and the World Socialist Web Site certainly differs with his nationalist outlook—he is unquestionably identified with the national strivings of the Palestinian people, to which he has devoted his entire adult life.

This is a man who just a decade ago was invited to the White House to sign an ill-fated peace treaty and—when it served the purposes of the major powers—was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

What is the purpose of publicly announcing plans for assassinating such a person?

The Israeli government claims that the murder of Arafat is necessary because the 74-year-old Palestinian president is an intolerable “obstacle to the process of reconciliation and peace.” This from a regime that has engaged in ceaseless provocations, from the assassination of leading Palestinians to such collective punishments as the demolition of housing and the lockdown of entire towns, as well as the bombing of crowded residential neighborhoods and the uninterrupted seizure of Palestinian land.

The complaint of the Sharon government boils down to Arafat’s having failed to function as its puppet and balking at launching a civil war against his own people.

There is, however, a deeper political logic to this depraved call for murder. The Israeli government is pursuing a definite political strategy that is aimed at scuttling the Palestinian national movement, annexing as much land in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip as possible and making the formation of a Palestinian state impossible.

It is pursuing a well-worn tactic to a qualitatively new level—staging a deliberate provocation with the intent of provoking a violent reaction that can in turn be used to justify further Israeli armed aggression and expansion.

The Sharon government shrugs off warnings that Arafat’s killing would provoke popular upheavals and even more acts of terrorism within Israel, because it welcomes such a confrontation. It sees an eruption of popular anger among the Palestinians as an opportunity to put an end to any possibility of a negotiated settlement and to realize its long-held aim of creating a “greater Israel” through the forced expulsion of millions of Palestinians from the occupied territories.

This is a regime that specializes in provocations and thrives upon violence. Sharon himself, it should be recalled, orchestrated the political campaign that led to one of his right-wing followers assassinating former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for signing the accord with Arafat. In September 2000, he deliberately ignited the last three years of bloodletting with his visit to the Temple Mount in a successful attempt to instigate a confrontation and make any discussion of a peaceful settlement between Israel and the Palestinians impossible.

The murder of Arafat would represent the ultimate provocation, calculated to provoke a violent response that the Israeli regime would use as a justification for a full-scale assault on the Palestinian people.

There is also an element of psychological warfare in this threat. It is designed to send a message to the Palestinian people: resistance is futile. It is meant to impress upon a population already subjected to occupation, roadblocks, constant harassment and humiliation that it is isolated, defenseless and without hope. The Israeli government is saying to its victims that there is no crime that it cannot commit against them, and no one can stop it.

This line of thinking was spelt out by the Jerusalem Post, Israel’s largest circulation English-language daily, in an editorial entitled simply “Kill Arafat,” published September 11. In language that can only be described as Hitlerian, the newspaper dismisses warnings that such an assassination will ignite upheavals throughout the occupied Palestinian territories and the entire Middle East:

“Arafat’s death at Israel’s hands would not radicalize Arab opposition to Israel; just the opposite. The current jihad against us is being fueled by the perception that Israel is blocked from taking decisive action to defend itself.... Killing Arafat, more than any other act, would demonstrate that the tool of terror is unacceptable, even against Israel, even in the name of a Palestinian state.”

It is worthwhile considering the ideology that gives rise to the Jerusalem Post’s stunning conclusion that the murder of an elected president is a means of demonstrating that “the tool of terror is unacceptable.” This language reeks of fascism and exposes the extent to which the Israeli right has absorbed the outlook of the Nazis.

Present-day Zionism and the Israeli state both justify their existence by invoking the legacy of the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews. The peculiar impact that this ideological justification has had upon the behavior and psychology of the Israeli state was noted by the Israeli historian Tom Segev, in his book The Seventh Million: the Israelis and the Holocaust:

“The assumption is that the Holocaust requires the existence of a strong Israel and that the failure of the world to save the Jewish people during the Second World War disqualifies it from reminding Israel of moral imperatives, including respect for human rights. The sense that the Holocaust was inevitable, in accordance with Zionist ideology, and the identification with the Jew as a victim are liable to lead Israelis to conclude that their existence depends solely on military power...”

The Jerusalem Post “Kill Arafat” editorial provides a particularly grotesque expression of this tendency described by Segev. It states: “The world will not help us; we must help ourselves. We must kill as many of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders as possible, as quickly as possible, while minimizing collateral damage, but not letting that damage stop us. And we must kill Yasser Arafat, because the world leaves us no alternative.”

There is a murderous logic to this conception that the Holocaust was inevitable, and that the Nazis were merely an example of how the world works. Among right-wing elements of Israel’s founding generation like Sharon, is the idea that something can be learned from the crimes of the Nazis—principally, that anything is possible provided one employs sufficient violence.

These layers explicitly rejected the universalist, humanitarian, liberal as well as socialist ideals with which the Jewish people had been identified for generations, and which made them a target for the extreme right. Embracing an ideology of ethnic and religious nationalism, they found certain elements of the Nazi outlook deeply attractive.

Compounding the historic tragedy of the Holocaust, the Israeli state that claimed legitimacy as a response to the crimes of the Nazis has adopted methods that echo those of the Warsaw Ghetto and the concentration camps.

There was a very definite purpose behind the gratuitous bestiality of the Nazis. It was to demonstrate to those under occupation and to the inmates of the death camps that they were utterly helpless; that resistance was futile.

That the Israeli state uses this same approach in its attempt to demoralize and intimidate the Palestinian people is not an accident. Rather it is a cruel historical irony with which Israeli workers and youth must come to grips if they are not to become unwitting accomplices to another monstrous crime.

The criminal approach of the Sharon regime has been aided and abetted by the so-called world community. In the first place, Washington has provided all but declared support for the policy of targeted assassinations, branding any act of resistance to Israeli occupation as “terrorism” while excusing virtually every repressive measure carried out by the Israeli regime.

The response of the Bush administration to the threat to assassinate Arafat has been to publicly oppose it from the standpoint of expediency, not principle. Having relegated Arafat to the status of a non-person, Washington appears to quibble only with the timing of his murder, fearful that it will disrupt US attempts to win international support for its own illegal occupation of Iraq. Moreover, the Bush administration has itself made murder a tool of foreign policy on a level unprecedented in US history, further encouraging their Israeli client state.

Certainly, no one in Washington has gone so far as to suggest that killing the elected Palestinian leader would lead to any disruption to the billions of dollars in US aid that keep the Israeli economy and military afloat.

The United Nations, the European Union, the Arab League and similar international institutions have issued tepid protests at best in response to the assassination announcement. Governments routinely refer to the murder threat as a “serious mistake” or a “grave error,” rather than calling it by its right name: a monstrous crime.

It is a measure of the debasement of the political atmosphere internationally that such a threat is made and no international institution or government answers it by vowing to hold the Zionist state assassins responsible, subjecting Sharon or any other Israeli official to arrest and criminal prosecution the moment they set foot abroad.

The reactionary perspective of Zionism has found its finished and grotesque expression in the public proposal to murder Arafat. The Sharon regime has unleashed a bloody conflagration in the Middle East to pursue its expansionist aims. Only the emergence of a new independent political movement fighting to unite Jews and Arabs on a democratic, secular and socialist basis can stop it.

Meanwhile, mass protests should be organized internationally to defend Yasser Arafat and denounce the Israeli government’s depraved threats.
 
researchok
#2
The article is almost a year old.

So much for that theory.
 
moghrabi
#3
It still holds.
 
researchok
#4
Really?

Why?
 
researchok
#5
By the way, whats the source of this article?

Who published it and where?
 
moghrabi
#6
I think Israel is going to assasinate Arafat. This is why as of today they preparing for what happens if he dies. They will not his body to be buried in Jeruselem. They are taking measures about Hamas taking over power. It is in todays news. As for the source I'll try to find it for you, I missed to put a link t it as I usually do.
 
researchok
#7
Can you blame them for having plans?

I saw that article re his funeral.

Besides, they dont have to kill him.

They'll wait him out.

Then of course, there are the Egyptians and Jordanians who probably want him dead as well.

No doubt that they have plans with Israel in the event of his death.
 
researchok
#8
The OTHER reason Israel and others are preparing for Arafats death: Anarchy

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...reaking_4.html





'Gang rule' in Palestine: Jericho only city with functioning police

SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
Palestinian Authority police are not on the beat in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

A United Nations briefing on the estimated 45,000 PA police and security forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip informed the Security Council that PA police operate in only one city.

UN Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said the PA police are on the job in Jericho in the West Bank. Jericho has been the scene of training of PA police by Britain and Jordan, according to reports by Middle East Newsline.

"Jericho is actually becoming the only Palestinian city with a functioning police," Roed-Larsen said.

The failure of the police has led to chaos throughout the PA areas, the council was told. Roed-Larsen warned of a collapse of the PA and said the worst-hit areas was Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip and Nablus in the northern West Bank.

"Clashes and showdowns between branches of Palestinian security forces are now common in the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian Authority legal authority is receding fast in the face of the mounting power of arms, money and intimidation," Roed-Larsen said.

"Lawlessness and gang rule are becoming common in [the northern West Bank city of] Nablus."

The UN envoy said the PA "has made no progress on its core obligation to take immediate action on the ground to end violence and combat terror."

Roed-Larsen also criticized what he called Israel's failure to remove unauthorized Israeli outposts in the West Bank.

"Despite a well-intended prime minister, the paralysis of the Palestinian Authority has become abundantly clear and the deterioration of law and order in Palestinian areas is steadily worsening," Roed-Larsen said. "The PA is in deep distress and is in real danger of collapse."

In an unrelated issue, Israeli AH-64A Apache attack helicopters fired missiles toward a suspected Kassam missile facility in the Gaza Strip. An Israeli military statement did not report damage assessment from the missile strike on late Tuesday.

On Wednesday, the UN reported that a food convoy came under fire in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanoun. Israeli military sources said the UN convoy entered Beit Hanoun as Palestinian insurgents opened fire on military forces. >
 
moghrabi
#9
Good opinion about Eygpt and Jordan but that DOES NOT MAKE IT FACT as you always say.
 
researchok
#10
Exactly

Same as the theory that the Isrealis want to kill Arafat.

If they kill him, hes a martyr.

If they let him die, in the end, he'll be recognized for what he was-- they guy who screwed tye Palestinians for decades.
 
moghrabi
#11
oh so now it is Arafat who screwed the pals not the zionists?

Nice theory...won't fly.
 
researchok
#12
ARE YOU KIDDING???

You think Arafat is a SAINT???

I wasnt referring to the conflict with israel-- I was referring to arafat himself.

There are HUNDREDS of articles, by Arab AND Palestinians on the subject!
 
moghrabi
#13
I never said that. But it wasn't him that screwed the Pals. The British and Americans support for the Zionist entity.
 
researchok
#14
LOL..uh huh.

Arafat had nothing to do with the Palestinian plight.
 
moghrabi
#15
did not say that either. But he is not the main person to accuse. There are a lot of factors involved in the plight of the PALs as I stated earlier.
 
researchok
#16
That I agree with.

Pals have been screwed by everyone.

Israel, Arafat, Arab regimes...

They need to finally do whats best for THEM.
 
moghrabi
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by researchok

That I agree with.

Pals have been screwed by everyone.

Israel, Arafat, Arab regimes...

They need to finally do whats best for THEM.


Agreed to the above plus the British and the Americans.
 
researchok
#18
Of course he is!

He has had on eopportunity after another...he blew his credibility so badly that he has virtually no support in tye Arab world anymore and ecven the EU has threatened to cut him off.
Cementgate is only the tip of the iceburg
 
moghrabi
#19
I agree with what you are saying. But I am going deeper into the cause of the Pal Flight. The Americans, British, Europeans, Arabs and of course Zionists all have to do with their plight. He is a fraction of the whole.
 
researchok
#20
There we disagree.

He was paid off not to deal-- and now, in the end, hes paying for it.

The tragedy is, the pals paid
 
moghrabi
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by researchok

There we disagree.

He was paid off not to deal-- and now, in the end, hes paying for it.

The tragedy is, the pals paid

Who paid him?
 
researchok
#22
Mostly, the other Arab regimes-- money he stole, money that never went to the Pals.

Those regimes never wanted a peace deal-- they needed that anger and frustration pointed outward, not inward.
 
moghrabi
#23
I diagree there. It would have been a lot better for arab states to have a peace settlementm between Israel and the PA. This way the arab states do not have to accomodate all the refugees.

It is a well known fact if you read the history of zionism that the Great Israel must be from thr Euphrates river to the Jordan River. So, It makes sense to say that the zionist do not want to make peace since it will be against their overall plan that 'GOD PROMISED THEM".
 
researchok
#24
The real facts are that if the Arabs had really wanted peace, theyd never have signed the Khartoun Declaration.

They didnt give a damn aboutr refygees then and they dont now.

you cant change history.
 
moghrabi
#25
There is a UN resolution that says that Isreal must give the Pals the Gaza strip and all of west bank. Juresalem to ba the Capital. and return of all refugees. Until this is accomplished there will be no peace to talk about.

Now who's fault is it. The arabs who will not accept anything other than what the Un resolutions says or the Israels who will not implement the reolution.

Look at it now. They will give them Gaza because they have no use for it but they will keep part of the West Bank for the settlers. Jeresulam is not in the equation as well as the right of return

Today more than 500 US citizins who are Jews were welcomed in Israel to be citizens of the state. Noe I don't mind that. However why not give the same to the real owners of the land the same deal. Let the Pals who are out in refugee camps return to their land. That what they are asking for.
 
moghrabi
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by researchok

The OTHER reason Israel and others are preparing for Arafats death: Anarchy

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...reaking_4.html





'Gang rule' in Palestine: Jericho only city with functioning police

SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
Palestinian Authority police are not on the beat in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

A United Nations briefing on the estimated 45,000 PA police and security forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip informed the Security Council that PA police operate in only one city.

UN Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said the PA police are on the job in Jericho in the West Bank. Jericho has been the scene of training of PA police by Britain and Jordan, according to reports by Middle East Newsline.

"Jericho is actually becoming the only Palestinian city with a functioning police," Roed-Larsen said.

The failure of the police has led to chaos throughout the PA areas, the council was told. Roed-Larsen warned of a collapse of the PA and said the worst-hit areas was Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip and Nablus in the northern West Bank.

"Clashes and showdowns between branches of Palestinian security forces are now common in the Gaza Strip, where Palestinian Authority legal authority is receding fast in the face of the mounting power of arms, money and intimidation," Roed-Larsen said.

"Lawlessness and gang rule are becoming common in [the northern West Bank city of] Nablus."

The UN envoy said the PA "has made no progress on its core obligation to take immediate action on the ground to end violence and combat terror."

Roed-Larsen also criticized what he called Israel's failure to remove unauthorized Israeli outposts in the West Bank.

"Despite a well-intended prime minister, the paralysis of the Palestinian Authority has become abundantly clear and the deterioration of law and order in Palestinian areas is steadily worsening," Roed-Larsen said. "The PA is in deep distress and is in real danger of collapse."

In an unrelated issue, Israeli AH-64A Apache attack helicopters fired missiles toward a suspected Kassam missile facility in the Gaza Strip. An Israeli military statement did not report damage assessment from the missile strike on late Tuesday.

On Wednesday, the UN reported that a food convoy came under fire in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanoun. Israeli military sources said the UN convoy entered Beit Hanoun as Palestinian insurgents opened fire on military forces. >

This is biased opinion of Road-Larsen. Did you know that his wife Mona Juul, is Norway's ambassador to Israel. Huh. What do you expect.
 
researchok
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

There is a UN resolution that says that Isreal must give the Pals the Gaza strip and all of west bank. Juresalem to ba the Capital. and return of all refugees. Until this is accomplished there will be no peace to talk about.

Now who's fault is it. The arabs who will not accept anything other than what the Un resolutions says or the Israels who will not implement the reolution.

Look at it now. They will give them Gaza because they have no use for it but they will keep part of the West Bank for the settlers. Jeresulam is not in the equation as well as the right of return

Today more than 500 US citizins who are Jews were welcomed in Israel to be citizens of the state. Noe I don't mind that. However why not give the same to the real owners of the land the same deal. Let the Pals who are out in refugee camps return to their land. That what they are asking for.

There is no such resolution.
 
researchok
#28
Quote:

"Despite a well-intended prime minister, the paralysis of the Palestinian Authority has become abundantly clear and the deterioration of law and order in Palestinian areas is steadily worsening," Roed-Larsen said. "The PA is in deep distress and is in real danger of collapse."

This is not the case?

Quote:

This is biased opinion of Road-Larsen. Did you know that his wife Mona Juul, is Norway's ambassador to Israel. Huh. What do you expect.

[/quote]

When he criticized the Israelis, he was OK. Now, he states the obvious, and it's a conspiracy? Norway is now part of the conspiracy, too?
 
moghrabi
#29
Really? I should have said Resolutions.

The building of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory began soon after the 1967 War. That policy has accelerated since the beginning of 1990. The Israeli Government encourages settlers to make their homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem. The establishment of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has been the subject of various resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. For example, in its resolution 446 (1979) the Security Council determined that the Israeli policy and practice of establishing settlements had no legal validity and constituted a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. That position was reaffirmed in Security Council resolution 465 (1980) which determined that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Tenth Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly in February 1999 recommended in an overwhelmingly adopted resolution the convening of a conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, and to ensure its respect in accordance with common article 1.


the right to self-determination without external interference; the right to national independence and sovereignty; the right of Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they had been displaced and uprooted -- General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX)

Jerusalem (Al-Quds in Arabic, Jerushalayim in Hebrew) is the site of the Western (Wailing) Wall, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the Passion of Crucifixion; and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the first kibla and third holiest sanctuary of Islam. The City has been the object of conflicting claims by Jews and Palestinian Arabs, both peoples consider it the embodiment of their national essence and right to self-determination. The UN adopted in 1947 the Partition Plan for Palestine (Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947) which retained the unity of Jerusalem by providing for an international regime under UN control. That formula, however, did not materialize. With the all-out war between the two communities in 1948, which was joined by the neighboring Arab States, Jerusalem was placed at the heart of the conflict. The Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement of 1949 formalized the de facto division of the City into the eastern sector, including the Old City, controlled by Jordan, and the western sector, or the new City controlled by the new State of Israel. The 1967 war, which resulted in the occupation by Israel of East Jerusalem, reopened the debate over the two competing claims. Israel, which annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, considers that "Jerusalem, whole and united, is the capital of Israel", and wants the City to "remain forever under Israel's sovereignty." It invested vast resources into changing the physical and demographic characteristics of the City. The Israeli claim has not been recognized by the international community which rejects the acquisition of territory by war and considers any changes on the ground illegal and invalid. On the other hand, the Palestinians have claimed East Jerusalem as the capital of a future independent State of Palestine to be established in the territories occupied since 1967. The status of the Holy Places has a special significance in that debate and proposals have been made for their internationalization. With the developments in the peace process since 1991, there is great concern that the evolving de facto situation on the ground should not prejudge the outcome of negotiations on the status of the City. (DPR Study - The Status of Jerusalem)

In 1947, the United Nations proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized (General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947). One of the two States envisaged in the partition plan proclaimed its independence as Israel and in the 1948 war it expanded to occupy 77 per cent of the territory of Palestine. 750,000 Palestinians, over half the indigenous population, fled or were expelled. In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control. The war brought a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at more than half a million. (DPR study: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: 1917-198 General Assembly resolution 194 of 11 December 1948 states that: "...The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible." 50 years later, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) continues to provide education, health care, relief assistance and social services to the 3.6 million Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, the Syrian Arab Republic, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Living standards in refugee communities remained poor throughout the area of operations, and were characterized in some fields by high unemployment, falling household income, overburdened infrastructure, and restrictions on employment and mobility. (Report of the Commissioner-General of UNRWA A/54/13) See also: The Right of Return of the Palestinian People - a DPR study

In the region, characterized by an arid and semi-arid climate, scarce water is increasingly considered crucial for the welfare of its countries and peoples. The Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially the elevated areas of the West Bank, is endowed with an abundance of renewable water resources compared to the rest of the Middle East. However, Israel's severe restrictions on drilling for water, planting and irrigation placed on the Palestinians have maintained at a low level the amount of water made available to the Palestinian population. Israeli policies ensure that most of the water of the West Bank percolates underground to Israel and that Israeli settlers are provided with preferential access to water resources. As a consequence, a "man-made" water crisis undermines the living conditions of the Palestinian people. A comprehensive and fair allocation of the water resources of the Jordan River basin, West Bank aquifers and the Gaza aquifer remains to be negotiated by the relevant parties. Water is one of several issues which are being dealt with at the multilateral talks. See also: DPR Study: Water Resources of the Occupied Palestinian Territory
 
moghrabi
#30
No Norway is doing well. I am taking about the position of his wife as an ambassador to Israel.
 

Similar Threads

8
Arafat calls on Canada for help
by Cyberm4n | Dec 9th, 2018
3
Arafat
by vista | Nov 21st, 2004
18
Why are ouija boards so threatening?
by peapod | Oct 11th, 2004
10
Don't blame Arafat
by moghrabi | Jul 19th, 2004