arafat - the man, the myth, the loser

yasser, originally uploaded by John Barleycorn.

Today, the 11 november, Yasser Arafat was officially declared dead. Most swedish newspapers focused on his bad sides. Like the corruption and his lack of interest in democracy. I agree with both of those. He was not a great leader and he was not a good leader. But I disagree with one of the newspapers most common accusations and that is that it was Arafat's fault that the peace process ceased and then died. That he had had the chance to say yes to peace - but choose to say no.
The background of those accusations are the failed Camp David 2000 Summit which was meant to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ehud Barak and US president Bill Clinton put the blame of the failure on Yasser Arafat. Barak claimed he exposed "Arafat's true intentions". Later, Barak was blamed by Israeli left wing politicians that he killed the Israeli peace movement by presenting Arafat as a "peace refuser". After this both neo-conservatives, neo-liberals and other right wing groups have tried to re-write history. And you really have to re-write history to make that offer the bargain of a lifetime. I quote wickipedia: "Palestinians claim that accepting the offer would have the effect of reducing the Palestinian state to what they characterized as "Bantustans:" scattered pieces of territory separated by highways for Israelis, security checkpoints and Israeli settlements. In addition, under the Israeli proposal, Israel would control the Palestinian state's water resources, borders and customs, and a further 10% of the West Bank under nominal Palestinian sovereignty (chiefly along the Jordanian border). Israelis counter that these terms were necessary to preserve Israeli security. Palestinians said this was not an offer of peace but a demand for complete surrender, that they were not offered a state but a prison camp". You can find more details here. It would have been totally suicidal by Arafat to agree to that "peace offer". Almost no Palestinians would have accepted it and then the whole point with the "peace offer" would have been lost. It would have been absolutely impossible to create a stable Palestinian democracy under those conditions. Extremist groups would have gained tremendous in force and ruined all dreams of a lasting democratic state and a lasting peace with Israel.
I think it's hard to find any reasons for promoting such a deal - it was bound to fail. Maybe Barak and Clinton actually believed in it. But I have a hard time understanding why. The offer was way to lame. Arafat is not to blame for the collapse of the peace process. He just refused to accept a really bad deal and had nothing better to offer himself. He was just one of international politics sad losers. May he rest in peace.