Yasser Arafat accepts prime minister's resignation

[B_part]

Originally posted by Skunk: quote: Originally posted by B_part: There will never be peace in Palestine while Arafat is alive. He is too jealous of his power, and his power is based on terrorism. Let us all pray that he dies fast, and in a natural way. Making him a martyr would be a catastrophe.

This is not Arafat's fault. Arafat stayed out of the process - this is Sharon's fault.

In order for Abbas to have credibility amongst the Palestinian people, he had to achieve something, *anything* on the level that Arafat had done. Instead, all that happened was that he appeared to make concessions while receiving nothing in return except more military attacks on the Palestinian street. [/QUOTE]

IMO the Israel is at fault, but the Palestinians share a great deal of it: they didn't fulfill their part of the deal as well - disarming the terrorists. And also i recall some 30 civilian dead on a bus which I wouldn't ascribe to the Palestinian will to cooperate... And those were before Israel reactions, when the Raod Map was at its shinest shining glory.

Originally posted by Skunk:

And by the way, Arafat's power is not based on terrorism - it is based on democracy. The people voted Arafat there - they never voted for Abbas; Arafat chose and appointed him. If a certain Israeli prime mininister had allowed peaceful elections to take place in Palestine in January of this year, we might have seen a different political makeup to the PA today.

Arafat rose to power as chief of the PLO which was responsible for many terrorist acts in the seventies, including the attack on the Isaraeli olympic team in Munchen (what's the name of that city in English?). Arafat was in charge back then. In the eighties and nineties, for the sake of peace, foreign governments decided to ignore the fact.
Afterwards Arafat started the second intifada, hoping to gain something more than what had been gained in the peace "treaty" of 1992. He lost control of its own brethren, and this is the result.

Originally posted by Skunk

I doubt if there will ever be peace while Sharon is in power - and you may criticise Arafat; but of all of the potential leaders of the Palestinians (those with credibility amongst the populace), he is the least militant of all of them.

I strongly doubt there wil be peace while Arafat lives as well. I've already said that. He might be the least militant, but not least enough. His power among his people is based on him fighting. If he negotiates, he loses his power. He would rather kill his mother than lose power. Thus he cannot negotiate and is useless and a hindrance to peace.

Edit: spelling and grammar

[ 09-07-2003, 05:21 AM: Message edited by: B_part ]

[Azred]

I can't believe that anyone seriously thought that Arafat would ever surrender any control over Palestinian affairs.

The answer is simple: one spotter, one shooter, one minute, one shot.

[Bardan the Slayer]

Originally posted by Azred: The answer is simple: one spotter, one shooter, one minute, one shot.

One martyr, multiple retaliatory strikes, multiple civilian deaths.

Please don;t construe this as support for Arafat - all the bad things said about him, I totally agree with. I just am not convinced that assassination is the answer [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Skunk]

IMO the Israel is at fault, but the Palestinians share a great deal of it: they didn't fulfill their part of the deal as well - disarming the terrorists. And also i recall some 30 civilian dead on a bus which I wouldn't ascribe to the Palestinian will to cooperate... And those were before Israel reactions, when the Raod Map was at its shinest shining glory.

Oh be fair. Abaas *ordered the arrest* of Senior Hamas leaders - but within 6 hours of issuing the warrants, Sharon injured 25 innocent bystanders in a helicopter gunship attack on a Hamas political leader. With that, Abaas's authority was gone - he could no longer sell the arrests to the Palestinian people as a way to end the violence: in fact it made his arrest warrants look like (at best) as those of a stooge - or more uncharitably as those of a collaborator/traitor. This is the reason why abaas fell - how could the Palestinian parliament back him after that?

Arafat rose to power as chief of the PLO which was responsible for many terrorist acts in the seventies, including the attack on the Isaraeli olympic team in Munchen (what's the name of that city in English?).

Nonetheless, *no-one* doubts that both Arafat and Sharon (butcher of the Sabra and Shatila regugee camps) have the blood of many innocents on their hands from the 70/80's - that's unquestioned. But both were elected with the acceptance of foreign governments. If you attack Arafat for his past actions as a terrorist, then you must also attack Sharon for the massacre of 2,000 innocent civilians too. Be fair in your criticism.

I can't believe that anyone seriously thought that Arafat would ever surrender any control over Palestinian affairs.

What? Even after he surrendered *more than half* of his power as President??? Where have you been for the last 3 months???

The Palestinian Prime Minister has *ultimate* responsibility over the work of *all* public and governmental institutions, including the work of *every* ministry which now report to him rather than the President. The Prime Minister is also responsible for *ALL* internal security apparatus.

Finally, Arafat gave Abaas the *full* authority to negociate the peace with Israel.

So what Security powers does Arafat have left? He's responsible for National security (ie, the army, navy and airforce) - which is the case with every President across the world. What army, navy and airforce do the Palestinians have then? None! The responsibility then, is largely symbolic...

Finally, bear in mind that Arafat does *NOT* control Hamas - it is a political party with a militant wing, and Arafat is not a member. That's not to say that Arafat's word does not carry weight - but in the end Hamas will and frequently does do what it wants despite orders to the contrary from Arafat. Note that Arafat's Fatah movement *has* maintained the cease-fire up till now.

[ 09-08-2003, 03:55 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

[B_part]

Originally posted by Skunk: Oh be fair. Abaas *ordered the arrest* of Senior Hamas leaders - but within 6 hours of issuing the warrants, Sharon injured 25 innocent bystanders in a helicopter gunship attack on a Hamas political leader [...] What? Even after he surrendered *more than half* of his power as President??? Where have you been for the last 3 months??? [...] The Palestinian Prime Minister has *ultimate* responsibility over the work of *all* public and governmental institutions, including the work of *every* ministry which now report to him rather than the President. Finally, Arafat gave Abaas the *full* authority to negociate the peace with Israel. So what Security powers does Arafat have left? He's responsible for National security (ie, the army, navy and airforce) - which is the case with every President across the world. What army, navy and airforce do the Palestinians have then? None! The responsibility then, is largely symbolic... Finally, bear in mind that Arafat does *NOT* control Hamas - it is a political party with a militant wing, and Arafat is not a member. That's not to say that Arafat's word does not carry weight - but in the end Hamas will and frequently does do what it wants despite orders to the contrary from Arafat. Note that Arafat's Fatah movement *has* maintained the cease-fire up till now.

"The Prime Minister is also responsible for *ALL* internal security apparatus".
That's wrong.

As you said Arafat has given up all power, but he has retained control of national security. And National security in Palestine means Al Fatah and Al Aqsa Marthyr brigades, its armed extremist wing. Those report to Arafat only and are the only militia/police/order force in Palestine. Internal security cannot be dealt with without commanding Al Fatah.

Abbas ordered the arrest of Hamas senior activists? who would he send to take them in custody? Arafat's Al Fatah militiaì
Why do you think Abbas had to wait for 3 months to issue arrest orders? because Arafat wouldn't approve, and without his go ahead, Al FAtah wouldn't move a finger.
Why do you think Abbas resigned? because the parliament, faithful to Arafat, didn't give him the only significant power he absolutely needed to carry on his duties, that of public security, that which Arafat wouldn't concede.

So, you see, Arafat did not give Abbas what he needed to fulfill his peace mission, and kept it for himself, to retain an unwritten, unsanctioned but nevertheless effective absolute veto power. And he availed himself of that power constantly hindering the peace process by wilfully choosing not to allow any action against Hamas.


As to Sharon, I don't like him, and I am saying he is as guilty as Arafat. But the topic started about Palestine government, not Israeli government, and moved in the direction of the Arafat guilty or not theme.


Also, would you mind not erasing the "Originally posted by" line in your quotes, please?

[ 09-08-2003, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: B_part ]

[Skunk]

"The Prime Minister is also responsible for *ALL* internal security apparatus". That's wrong. As you said Arafat has given up all power, but he has retained control of national security. And National security in Palestine means Al Fatah and Al Aqsa Marthyr brigades, its armed extremist wing. Those report to Arafat only and are the only militia/police/order force in Palestine. Internal security cannot be dealt with without commanding Al Fatah.

Well first of all the Al-Fatah and Aqsa Marthry Brigates are the armed wing of the political parties of the same name They are *not* part of the Palestian Authority nor do they report to it.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Sinn Fein handed over control of the Ira and Real Ira to the British Prime Minister? Because that is effectively what you are suggesting that Arafat does. What a wonderful concept! Unfortunately in the real world life isn't quite so utopian

Likewise, Arafat lacks the power and authority to hand over those Brigades (assuming that the members would agree to serve) to the Palestinian Authority. Remember that they are unpaid politicaly movitivated militant groups. This might help you to understand their relationship with Arafat a little bit more.

And finally of course, you do realise that both Brigades are considered to be terrorist organisations by both Washington and Israel??? How would it look if the Palestinian Prime Minister was suddenly the head of two 'terrorist' organisations? Sure would give Sharon an excuse for any breakdown in talks wouldn't it - "That Abaas is the head of *two* terrorist organisations! Of course he never wanted peace!" Sometimes you have to laugh!

Abbas ordered the arrest of Hamas senior activists? who would he send to take them in custody? Arafat's Al Fatah militiaì

No - he would (and did) send both the police and the intelligence service to pick them up. Also, as head of the judiciary and prisons, he would have been responsible for their detention.

Why do you think Abbas had to wait for 3 months to issue arrest orders? because Arafat wouldn't approve, and without his go ahead, Al FAtah wouldn't move a finger.

Any move to arrest members of *the highly popular* Hamas movement would have to be a cautious one. Even in the relative peace of the opening moves of the negociations, it would be a heavy gamble. Remember that the people of Palestine have long viewed this group as the only thing standing between them and a holocaust. Abaas had to wait to build up a case against them - and he failed at the eleventh hour because some fool sent in a helicopter gunship...

Why do you think Abbas resigned? because the parliament, faithful to Arafat, didn't give him the only significant power he absolutely needed to carry on his duties, that of public security, that which Arafat wouldn't concede.

Parliament is far from faithful to Arafat. The appointment of Abaas was really parliament's choice not Arafat - indeed Arafat fought parliament tooth and nail against having the position of Prime Minister in the first place. Secondly, once parliament had decided to appoint a PM, Arafat attempted to weaken the powers of the PM - but again parliament over-ruled him. In the nicest possible way, you need to read the newspapers - the power struggle was widely reported at the time.

So, you see, Arafat did not give Abbas what he needed to fulfill his peace mission, and kept it for himself, to retain an unwritten, unsanctioned but nevertheless effective absolute veto power.

An 'unwritten veto power' is no veto power at all!

Also, would you mind not erasing the "Originally posted by" line in your quotes, please?

That is not my fault - if you simply use the 'quote' tag, then the "originally posted by" bit does not appear. Some forum boards have instigated a little bit of code to help out in this scenario using the tag 'quote="B_part"' to get around this - but alas Ironworks has no such code.

Obviously I wouldn't want to engage in the bad practice of quoting the entire item in full, as this makes it difficult to note which parts I am referring to with my arguments

[ 09-08-2003, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

[B_part]

Originally posted by Skunk: That is not my fault - if you simply use the 'quote' tag, then the "originally posted by" bit does not appear. Some forum boards have instigated a little bit of code to help out in this scenario using the tag 'quote="B_part"' to get around this - but alas Ironworks has no such code. Obviously I wouldn't want to engage in the bad practice of quoting the entire item in full, as this makes it difficult to note which parts I am referring to with my arguments

I agree with the partial quoting part, if everybody quoted full posts we would have 2 posts per page. Maybe you should manually write, at least in the first quote bit, where the qoute comes from.

That's because whenever I see partial quotes I tend to go back and read the whole post to check whether the quotes really reflect the sense of the post or are misleading bits. If the post is mine, as has been the case so far, I know what I have written. But if it's someone else's, one needs to skim every post to find where the quotes come from, and that's not so fun in heated, lengthy debates. It's not that I want to see my name after the originally posted by bit, just that I prefer to know who has posted.

[Skunk]

Fair comment - I'll try to mention the name of the poster in future - just don't complain if I forget every now and again...

[B_part]

Originally posted by Skunk: Fair comment - I'll try to mention the name of the poster in future - just don't complain if I forget every now and again...

Of course I will! I will not forgive you once [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Skunk]

The replacement PM has arrived:

Arafat nominee to be PM
Palestinian parliament speaker Ahmed Qurei has confirmed he will take over as prime minister following the resignation of Mahmoud Abbas during a crisis in the leadership.
"President Yasser Arafat asked me to be the prime minister and I have accepted," he told journalists in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Wednesday.

Mr Qurei, who helped negotiate the Oslo peace accords with Israel 10 years ago, was nominated as prime minister at the weekend after the resignation of Mr Abbas...

...Both the US and Israel have said the priority for the new Palestinian prime minister must be to "fight terrorism".

Secretary of State Colin Powell said the US hoped the new appointee would be given "the political authority of the security forces and financial assets needed".

Mr Qurei, a leading member of Mr Arafat's mainstream Fatah faction who is also known as Abu Ala, said he would form an emergency government of six to eight members.

He said he hopes to call the Palestinian Legislative Council into session on Thursday to endorse it.

Israeli officials have expressed concern about Mr Qurei's close relations with Mr Arafat, whom they accuse of thwarting Mr Abbas's efforts to halt the violence and implement the roadmap.

In Washington, Mr Powell said earlier he was waiting to see how much power Ahmed Qurei would be given by Mr Arafat to "deal with the terror that's kept us from moving forward".

Mr Qurei has also been seeking European Union guarantees of support and an EU spokeswoman praised him as "a man who believes in peace with Israel and has done a lot for that".