Abu Ammar
The life of a freedom fighter came to an end, but the struggle for a free and independent Palestine remains. Western media, especially US media, had painted Arafat as an obstacle to peace, a demagogue, corrupt, etc, but Arafat, with all his flaws, for those who believe in the Palestinian’s right to be free from Israel’s apartheid, remains a symbol of resistance, more than half a century of resistance against occupation and injustice.
In the US media, even in more liberal outlets, Arafat’s refusal to accept Israel’s offer in 2000, was shown as his failure as a leader. Israel’s offer was referred to as “generous” or “the best deal Palestinians could get”, and Arafat’s refusal was depicted as an irrational decision of an authoritarian leader oblivious to his nation’s aspirations. You never see any of the major media outlets in US really discuss the details of this plan and why it was not acceptable to Palestinians. If anyone cared to even take a look at the map of Palestine under the terms of this so-called generous offer, a bunch of isolated islands completely surrounded by settlements and access roads, it would become obvious why it would not be a basis for a viable Palestinian State.
Israel’s violence has radicalized Palestinians. The peace process is a dead-end. Unfortunately, many of them see violence as the only way out. Suicide bombing and violent acts against civilians will not lead Palestinians to a free Palestine, and only feed the Israel government's PR machine. We need not be reminded that those desperate acts are not the only acts of violence committed in that region. Palestinian civilians are subjected to violence and murder, torture, distruction of their homes and farms, grab of their vital resources like water, ever expanding settlements in Palestinian land, etc by the State of Israel. However, Israel's acts of violence are always characterized by US government and media as “retaliation”, “clashes”, “civilians caught in cross-fire”, etc.
In the past few years, Arafat, as a leader of Palestinians, did fail to unite them and channel their anger into positive non-violent struggle, the way Nelson Mandela was able to do under much similar apartheid state of South Africa. The allegations of financial corruption and personal bank accounts remain allegations at this stage, and it seems highly unlikely to be true. If it was true, why were these allegations not made so vigorously before his death when he had a chance to clear himself? I hope Palestinian leadership can get their act together, avoid divisive quarrels and unite the Palestinians under a common goal and strategy to realize their dream of a viable and independent State side by side and in peace with Israel.
In the US media, even in more liberal outlets, Arafat’s refusal to accept Israel’s offer in 2000, was shown as his failure as a leader. Israel’s offer was referred to as “generous” or “the best deal Palestinians could get”, and Arafat’s refusal was depicted as an irrational decision of an authoritarian leader oblivious to his nation’s aspirations. You never see any of the major media outlets in US really discuss the details of this plan and why it was not acceptable to Palestinians. If anyone cared to even take a look at the map of Palestine under the terms of this so-called generous offer, a bunch of isolated islands completely surrounded by settlements and access roads, it would become obvious why it would not be a basis for a viable Palestinian State.
Israel’s violence has radicalized Palestinians. The peace process is a dead-end. Unfortunately, many of them see violence as the only way out. Suicide bombing and violent acts against civilians will not lead Palestinians to a free Palestine, and only feed the Israel government's PR machine. We need not be reminded that those desperate acts are not the only acts of violence committed in that region. Palestinian civilians are subjected to violence and murder, torture, distruction of their homes and farms, grab of their vital resources like water, ever expanding settlements in Palestinian land, etc by the State of Israel. However, Israel's acts of violence are always characterized by US government and media as “retaliation”, “clashes”, “civilians caught in cross-fire”, etc.
In the past few years, Arafat, as a leader of Palestinians, did fail to unite them and channel their anger into positive non-violent struggle, the way Nelson Mandela was able to do under much similar apartheid state of South Africa. The allegations of financial corruption and personal bank accounts remain allegations at this stage, and it seems highly unlikely to be true. If it was true, why were these allegations not made so vigorously before his death when he had a chance to clear himself? I hope Palestinian leadership can get their act together, avoid divisive quarrels and unite the Palestinians under a common goal and strategy to realize their dream of a viable and independent State side by side and in peace with Israel.
posted by Mehrdad at
7:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home