Arafat's support for Geneva peace blueprint sparks protests

[bemildred]

Edited headline slightly to fit.

01 December 2003

Despite a crescendo of
protests from Palestinian
refugees, Yasser Arafat
yesterday threw his weight
behind an unofficial
blueprint for a two-state
solution, which is to be
launched in Geneva today
amid fanfare.

Two ministers
representing Mr Arafat's
Fatah movement had cancelled their trip to the
signing ceremony after the Palestinian leader
declined to give the accords his seal of approval.
But one of them, Kadoura Fares, told The
Independent they would go with three other Fatah
signatories. "There is a blessing and permission to
travel," he said.

At Mr Arafat's request, Jibril Rajoub, his national
security adviser, will join the Palestinian
delegation. Mr Arafat had encouraged the Geneva
negotiators earlier, but declined to commit himself
to the details, which include surrender of the
refugees' right to return to their old homes in Israel.
He is still not bound by them.

That will not satisfy the long-suffering refugees.
Palestinian police had to restrain dozens of
protesters who beat members of the Palestinian
contingent as they crossed from the Gaza Strip into
Egypt on their way to Switzerland. On the West
Bank, more than 100 armed members of the
Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, affiliated to Fatah,
marched in the Balata refugee camp in protest at the
accords.

Independent UK

[tinnypriv]

1. Clever move on Rajoub

Sending him undercuts any attempt by Israel to create any pretense that the PA is not serious about Geneva (would have been laughable regardless).

They can hardly claim Jibril Rajoub is good enough for the Sharon clan but not good enough for Jimmy can they? :D

[bemildred]

2. Eh, we will see.

Being consistent and making sense seem to be optional
when your "security" is at stake.

I thought the story was a significant addition to all the
babbling in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.org/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=35098&mesg_id=35098

[The Magistrate]

7. This Fellow, My Friend

Makes spring weather seem stable.

It is a welcome development that this limited endorsement is given, but it is a noncommittal one, that can readily be disowned.

This is a good illustration of the weakness of his leadership, and of warlord style leadership generally. He can maintain his position only by being all things to all men; he must woo his subordinates, rather than command them, lest he find, by issuing a command, that it is not obeyed, and his authority is collapsed like a shattered mirror.

Sooner or later, he must actually lead: he must commit his political capital to a course of action that will benefit his people, and make it popular, rather than simply trim. He is no earthly use to anyone but himself so long as he does not do this.

[bemildred]

9. I think Yassir is just keeping his options open.

Like any good bureaucrat he will never commit to any position
except when compelled, and never give up control execpt when
it is pried from his grip by main force.

The operation in Ramallah against Hamas is interesting in
this context, as it appears to me they will have to be
dealt with if the Geneva Accords are to be forwarded.

[papau]

3. the Palestinian leader declined to give the accords his seal of approval

and this means that Arafat and the PA is "serious about Geneva".

So if Arafat gives Jibril Rajoub permission to observe the signing with Carter present, this means Sharon has pressure on him to do what? -- send an observer? and this advances peace in someway?

I endorse and support Geneva.

But sometime threads at DU confuse me - but I hope you are correct the Jibril's trip will advance peace..

:-)

[bemildred]

4. Whatever pressure Mr. Sharon might feel,

it will not be coming from Yassir, or anything Yassir
might do.

It was Mr. Priv that thought that Jibril's trip would
prevent certain rhetorical ploys.

[papau]

6. Sharon rhetorical ploys prevented appears accomplished, but I'd

prefer a move such as acceptance of Geneva as the blueprint for peace - While that would make me wrong about Arafat, it would push peace so far Sharon could no longer ignore Geneva.

[bemildred]

8. See forthcoming reply to Mr. Magistrate. nt

[tinnypriv]

5. You're misinterpreting

FWIW, bemildred has already interepreted correctly, above.

I'm not much interested in ceremonies BTW. I hardly see the need (on this topic I mostly agree with the editorial board of Yediot Aharonot).