If I were the head of the Palestinian Authority........

Great Debates
1

Assuming I could win the election to replace Arafat as Chairman of the PA, I would immediately go on television and make the following speech:

“I would like to say something to the young men of our community, those who feel despair and think death is the only road open for them. Possibly some of the young women, too. My message is this: there are many Israelis who are our friends and are fighting for us. Not with weapons, but by risking their lives in standing up to an unjust government. At this very moment, there are Israeli soldiers and reservists who are risking long terms in prison by refusing to come into our territory to oppress us. There are Jewish rabbis who plant olive trees when the Occupation Forces cut them down. Let’s not forget, there was an Israeli prime minister who was murdered for, essentially, treating us like human beings. Last spring, there were young Jewish Israelis who stayed in Chairman Arafat’s compound, suffering and risking death alongside our people every day. These young people are like our own sons and daughters, sacrificing themselves so that we may have a better future! How do you know that one of them is not sitting inside that café you are thinking of blowing up? You don’t. How do you know there is not an Israeli refusenik aboard that bus that you would like to bomb? You don’t. Beloved Palestinian people, it is time to stop the targeting of innocent Israelis. With every bomb that goes off, our friends in Israel are blown a little farther away from us. We must not let that happen any longer! Our Quran clearly calls us to protect women, children and non-combatants, and the Christian Bible says the same. The great commander, Salahudin the Kurd, did not harm the Jews and Christians when he took Jerusalem back from the Crusaders. Instead, he forgave them. I do not know if all the suicide martyrs have gone to Heaven; only God knows their fate. No one on Earth can say with absolute certainty who goes to Heaven: not the most devout scholar, nor the most humble laborer, nor the mightiest head of state, nor even CNN! But in this I place my trust: that those who risk their lives for peace have the best hope of Heaven. I trust that if we struggle against the Israeli state using ethical means, God will bless us during our lifetimes. Our dear friend Mubarak Awad, deported by the Israelis over ten years ago, showed us a way to struggle and win non-violently. Please also remember, there were many Muslims among Gandhi’s followers when he defeated the British Empire without shedding any blood or committing any evil. If we can unite in an ethical struggle, the world will praise us, God will favor us and we will WIN. By moral force alone, we will drive Israel back until we no longer have to consider her an enemy. And many Israelis, knowing their government is wrong, will help us! On that day, when we defeat Zionist apartheid, we will begin to construct a new state and a new society for ourselves, and the international community will aid us. We will build new homes, plant new orchards, found new industries, pave new roads, dig new wells, accredit new universities, and construct beautiful new mosques and churches everywhere. There will be jobs for all, respect for our faith, and trade and diplomatic relations with all the countries of the world – including Israel, no longer an enemy! Imagine what Palestine and Israel could do as equal nations, side by side. They could teach us about agriculture and irrigation, and we could teach them mathematics, architecture, physics and medicine. For the first time in thousands of years, the Middle East could be a garden once more, not quite as beautiful as Eden but more permanent. Young people of Palestine! Do not throw your lives away! Don’t you want to be around in the near future when we build our beautiful Palestinian nation? We will need you then! I will not lie to you, it will not be easy. We will have to take some measures to insure that misguided people of limited vision do not keep us from attaining peace and prosperity. Since we no longer have a police force, in the next few days we will be visited by some friends from the international community, all Arabs or Muslims, and all investigators or anti-terrorism experts. They will assist us in the search for lethal and illegal materials, the prevention of attacks across the Green Line and, if necessary, the detention of conspirators. None of these visitors will come from Britain or the United States; that would undermine our independence and our will. Certainly none will come from Israel! Do I even need to say that? Instead, they will come from Egypt, Turkey, Kuwait, Bahrain, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Bosnia, France and Russia. They will be here of their own accord and will not be supported by their respective governments, but rather by contributions from international organizations, and they will stay as long as necessary. Of course, it remains to be seen whether the Occupation Forces will allow them to enter, but the Israelis have to realize we will be saving their lives as well as our own. All Palestinians of good will are invited to apply to join the new peace force. Long live Palestine! We will win! A-salaam a-leyk’m.”

Well? Do you think this speech would work, or would you write a different one?

2

[cowardlylion]If I were King of the Forest, Not queen, not duke, not prince.
My regal robes of the forest, would be satin, not cotton, not chintz.
I’d command each thing, be it fish or fowl.
With a woof and a woof and a royal growl - woof…[/cowardlylion]

3

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

4

Sorry, the thread title just reminded me of that song from The Wizard of Oz.

5

And exactly how long would you expect to remain alive after you made such a speech? And how would you expect to remain alive long enough to win an election, if your views were known? And if you did remain alive, how would you expect to get elected, if your views were known? Don’t you think Hamas, or Islamic Jihad, or Hezbollah might have some views on what you said? And do you really think the suicide attacks on civilians would stop?

The thing is, the suicide bombings are done for the express purpose of making a peaceful settlement impossible. A negotiated settlement would mean the continued existance of Israel, and that is something the people who back the suicide bombers will never accept. The closer a negotiated settlement is, the more terrorist attacks you will get.

6

Lemur866: So sad, but so true :frowning:

7

**
I think you’d get many objections over this. Such a group would certainly seem biased to many.

**

Egypt-I remember a year or two ago, it seemed that Israel was about to go to war with an Arab country. Egypt’s response was to withdraw ambassadors but maintain diplomatic relations. The country’s position was a very clear ‘We don’t want to get involved’, I’m certain they’d want to be involved in this either.

Kuwait-Iraq invaded Kuwait. Then the USA attacked Iraq. Iraq withdrew. I don’t think Palestinians would accept Kuwaiti’s as inspectors.

 Russia-isn't Chechnya largely Muslim? Isn't Russia at war with it because Chechnya wanted to be an independent nation? Didn't the USSR(I realise that USSR and Russia are not the same. But, I believe this point holds)

**

I think the details need work. But, it has potential.

I’d definitely write a different speech.

"As a Jew and an American, I have no idea how I came to be head of the PA. But, as the singer Shakira once said to me, “I know we can come together!”.

8

Just as Lemur866 said, if you managed to replace Arafat, you would be promptly stoned to death or blown to small pieces, and then replaced by an even worse and crazy, militant leader than Arafat.

9

[ul]You may be underestimating,**“the whiskered one” **[/ul]

10

The four nay-sayers who have responded so far seem to be operating under two underlying assumptions:

  1. I would be killed for calling for an end to the targeting of civilians, and

  2. The speech would be ineffective in stopping or reducing attacks on civilians.

I think both assumptions are provably wrong.

Answer to #1: there is actually a debate about suicide bombings within the Palestinian community, and as far as I know no one has been killed merely for saying they should stop. Last week Mahmoud Abbas, a high PA official, called for an end to attacks on Israel proper. He has not been killed, nor, as far as I know, is he in danger. Furthermore, Arafat routinely denounces suicide bombings whenever they occur. He has not been killed for it. Furthermore, everybody seems to have forgotten that last December, Arafat went on television to denounce the attacks, using the word “terrorism” for the first time, and it seems to have worked for a while – there were no Israeli fatalities for over a month. (Before you ask – cites provided in other threads. Use the search program.)

Answer to #2: Arafat’s December speech worked temporarily, and his speech, dare I say it, was probably harsher and less inspiring than mine. While I agree that Hamas and Islamic Jihad would probably not give up their strategy of attacks on civilians, these groups’ effectiveness is dependent on the number of recruits they can get from the “lost generation” of Palestinian youth. If Palestinian youths became inspired and hopeful about the future, the supply of young people willing to commit suicide would dry up and H/IJ would find it harder to operate. There would also be less tolerance for their activities among Palestinian civilians, and more willingness to inform on them. There have been plenty of lulls in suicide attacks, and not all of it has been due to the effectiveness of Israeli security measures. At least part of it has been due to strategic decisions made by the Palestinian militias and shifts in Palestinian public opinion.

I am starting to be amused by the hard-liners who post in all the Israel/Palestine threads and keep repeating, almost dogmatically, that nothing will ever “work” in ending the violence. Negotiations will not “work,” peaceful methods will not “work.” What, one wonders, do these Dopers think will “work”? And even if something will not work, shouldn’t it at least be tried?

DocCathode
I wrote this speech to not only be inspiring and appeal to Palestinian patriotism, but also to be acceptable to Israeli and American moderates. I came up with my list of international advisers the same way: they had to come from countries that have long experience with battling terrorism, as well as being acceptable to Israel, the US and the average Palestinian.

Hence the Egyptian delegation: Egypt has been struggling against Islamic militants for years , and by now the country must have plenty of anti-terrorism experts who would respond to an invitation from the West Bank. While the Egyptian government may not want to get involved, remember I said that these experts would come without the support of their governments. I mean, do you think the Indian advisers would be supported by their anti-Muslim, Hindu-fascist government? But there must be plenty of Indians with experience in security matters who would like to help.

I am not sure you can take it for granted that Palestinians would find the Kuwaitis unacceptable. Just because their government was restored by the US, that wouldn’t necessarily be a black mark against Kuwaitis in the Arab world. Last spring, at the Arab League conference in Beirut (which Arafat was not allowed to attend), everybody was so lovey-dovey, the Kuwaiti and Iraqi ambassadors even hugged.

Russia: I am assuming there are still Muslims in Russia who are not trying to secede. For instance, the Tatars and Dagestanis. Many of them must have security experience, either in Russia or with the old Soviet state.

By the way, did you know Shakira is of Arab descent? Her family name is Mubarak.

:slight_smile:

11

There are many problems in the world, of breath-taking scope, which simply may not have a solution to them. This would seem to be one of them.

Logically, the problem is incredibly simple to solve: “You guys, stop blowing up their malls, and you guys, get the heck out of their territory”.

But nope, the situation has gotten worse, it seems, over the years.

And lets assume Israel decides to completely pull out of the disputed regions tomorrow. That *may[/y] give us a few weeks of peace, until the issue of connecting the West Bank to the Gaza strip is brought up. Should Isreal be forced to surrender territory to form a land bridge? Should the PA be forced to accept a split ‘country’

And even if that is solved, I am sure something else will come up. It may just be that we have a situation on our hand that will not go away, ever.

12

Try it and see.

Not because those solutions have failed, but because those solutions have not been tried.

Not only assume it, let’s try it and see what happens.

How do you know until all solutions have been tried?

The failure to risk means the triumph of despair.

13

Much simpler solution:

“We are going to change tactics. Violence hasn’t worked; from now on we will practice civil disobedience and non-violent resistance, much like King and Gandhi.”

Within a year, they would get everything they were offered at Oslo and more. Half of Jerusalem, the West Bank w/o settlements, etc.

Won’t happen, as the PLO charter makes it clear that they regard it as axiomatic that violence is the only route to a Palestinean State.

14

Hey, that’s what I said in my speech!

I think it would take a lot longer than a year. Resistance from the Israeli hard-liners would be fierce. Even in a civil dosobedience campaign, there are often deaths and casualties! Look at Amritsar in British India; look at Birmingham and Selma in the USA. And these are examples from the most enlightened Western democracies. The IDF and the settlers won’t necessarily be more gentle with non-violent resisters.

I have referred in this thread and other threads to Mubarak Awad, who was instructing Palestinians in non-violent resistance tactics but was deported by the Israelis. Bad move, you guys.

Cite or quote the section, please?

Anyway, this is simplistic and deterministic. Parts of the PLO Charter have been changed or disregarded before, and at any rate one document cannot predict the future actions of an entire people. I think this is another post from the “we’ll-never-try-it-because-it-won’t-work” school of thought.

15

I know; but I think it’s the main point. Everythiung else should be secondary.

I don’t think that the hardliners are in the majority, and the international political pressure would be overwhelming. If CNN airs footage of IDF shooting / beating completely 100% peaceful marchers a handful of times, the settlements would be gone in months.

I agree about Awad. Unfortunately, as a Christian, I doubt he would be accepted as a leader anyway. Still, his exile is a very bad sign.

Article 9.

http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm

I am all in favor of trying anything. I am merely pointing out that the charter of the main Palestinian organization specifically advocates violence. Yes, they could change it; they haven’t yet.

My own feeling is that Arafat and his generation will likely never be peacemakers. They simply doen’t know how. The same is true of Sharon, but he at least has to stand for re-election, and the large majority of Isralis want peace. Nonviolent resistance would energize the Israli left.

16

Thank you for the Article 9 cite. Are you sure that the PLO never changed, dropped or amended any part of their charter? I thought they had to do that in the early 90’s for the United States to start negotiating with them. “Recognizing Israel’s right to exist,” and all that.

I pretty much agree with the rest of your post, except for “the settlements would be gone in months.” It takes years for even the most ethical struggle to win.

17

Yes and no. They said that all the parts that contradicted peace process agreements were invalid. Here’s the letter:

http://www.efreedomnews.com/News%20Archive/Israel%20Palestine/PLO%20Charter%20Amended%201996.htm

But they never spelled out which articles those were, and they never actually offically voted to change anything.

http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1998/12/10/p1s3.htm

18

I think it is an excellent speech. And I think that saying similar things often would help to calm unsteady nerves. However, there will always be politicians (or terrorists) whose eyes are not on the prize of peace, but on the prize of power. Your speech will have no effect on them.

19

**
You’d have to change some of the language then. Apartheid and some of the other words are very charged. Always remember Goodwin’s Law.

That was my point. I believe the correct term is “whoosh”.