Israel has been responsible for the death of many Palestinans, no? It seems to me it might be desirable for both sides to work toward peace. Allowing Arafat to be buried in Jerusalem might cool down the passions of the Palestinians.
I can think of some Israeli leaders who I consider at least as deserving of such a fate.
Probably no more of a slight , if Sharon wanted to be buried in Mecca or Medina.
Declan
OK, the MidEast/Jewish/Israel/Palestine thing is all complicated, right? Nah, I don’t think so.
If either side wants PEACE in *this *world, then it really doesn’t matter WHAT they do with Arafat–bury him according to his wishes, show a little good will, some forgiveness, some humanity even toward a difficult human (Monsters only exist in middle earth and the spirit world, they have no place here).
If the real issue is RIGHT and God’s Will, then yeah, Israel owns the dirt and they can say what carcasses get buried there. And for God’s sake, let there be bloodshed to drive that point home!
But I don’t want Israel to deny Arafat’s dying wish and then expect the rest of the world to show any compassion when the Palestinians start blowing up all over the place. Israel needs to make up her mind about what she wants: Peace? Then act peacibly. A plot of land to call their own? Then fire up the ovens and get the genocide over with–I’m sure they know how it’s done.
All I know is that you have to be very careful about what you do with the dead bodies of rebellious figures in the Levant. It has caused a lot of trouble in the past.
While at the same time sending the passions of the Israeli public into thermonuclear mode. Trust me, it’s not going to happen; it’s barely even an issue. Any Israeli official who approves this wouldn’t be able to get re-elected to county dogcatcher, if Israel had dogcatchers, or counties.
While I was discussing this last night, someone said “it’s as if Osama bin Laden asked to be buried in New York City.” I think that’s an appropriate analogy, and may help some to understand why Israel might have a legitimate reason not to allow Arafat to be buried in Jerusalem, rather than being obstinate. First of all, deliberately asking to be buried in a controversial location creates a demand similar to that of a hostage-taker: bury me where I want to be buried, or there will be violence. Accepting such a demand would constitute negotiation with terrorists, which motivates further demands and justifies terrorism as a means to an end. The demand made, prima facie, does not seem all that outrageous, but consider the violence that would undoubtedly erupt around the gravesite between those wishing to defile it and those wishing to revere it. Consider the emotions of passers-by that had lost loved ones to attacks related to Arafat’s cause. Consider the fact that no matter how secure the location, no matter how careful the effort to respect the dignity of it, it will never quite be good enough, and that will always provide more excuses for more violence. Agreeing to the demand is not possible, but refusing it offers yet another excuse for violence.
Inigo Montoya: ‘They’ have shown sufficient goodwill, forgiveness and humanity towards Arafat for quite some time. ‘They’ gave him a Nobel Peace Prize to show what sort of forgiveness they could give him if he were willing to work on a compromise. Eventually, he responded by making it really quite clear that no compromise would ever be good enough. Now it is being insinuated that more people will be killed if he does not get his way. Is this the sort of person to whom one should show yet more humanity, yet more forgiveness?
Not the best of analogies, in that Arafat claims he was born in Jerusalem (admittedly where he was born is ambiguous), and in any case Arafat was born before the state of Israel even existed. A small plot of land to bury Arafat in Jerusalem seems worth it as a peace gesture.
Uh huh. Suppose he wanted to be buried in Arlington Cemetary between Ambassador Noel and George Curtis Moore. Is the United States, if it wants peace, then obligated to stick him between two of his victims?
Well, Arafat (Muhammad Abd al-Rahman ar-Rauf al-Qudwah al-Husayni) claims that he was born in Jerusalem for the same reason Kim Jong-Il is said to have been born at Mount Paektu in northern North Korea, rather than in the USSR.
And the small plot of land in Jerusalem would only be worth it as a peace gesture until the first time someone is killed at it, or at least until a number of deaths occurs that would be equal to the number of deaths that would be caused by not making the peace gesture. Try to think of other times that Arafat or his colleagues have made seemingly-reasonable requests, then decided that it wasn’t enough, or that something was happening that deeply offended them, and that someone had to die for it. Can you honestly see it working out peacefully if he is buried in Jerusalem, or anywhere else?
How about burying Arafat next to the mosque alongside the tombs of other famous Palestinians there?
That’s been suggested, but the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem claims reburial or any other disturbance of the dead after they’ve been planted is a violation of religious custom.
I have no idea if that is a widespread belief or not. I have run across one or two counter-indications, but nothing firm.
- Tamerlane
Letting him be buried there for the sake of peace would be great. However, the radical section of the Palestinians have refused to stay bribed.
Besides, people who use teenaged suicide bombers instead of nonviolent resistance can’t be trusted on their word.
_
_
Arafat himself probably has a better claim than anyone else to the ‘any little slight is the outrage of the century’ thing. This is a world where someone can write words that merit their death, or can make films that are worthy of their death, or where an insult to a family’s honor can be punished by death, or where being a Jew (or a Shia, by some very strange logic) is certainly worthy of death, particularly if said Jew is on Their Land. To a very large extent, Arafat and his organizations created the plight of the Palestinian people; he is responsible to a very large extent for their continued suffering, and has created an unendable conflict that will probably haunt the Earth for centuries to come.
I really can’t talk about what I’d like to see done about this. Suffice it to say that I think it’s rather dignified of them to consider burying him anywhere at all. Many of his victims’ families did not have the privilege of deciding where to bury anything more than a few pieces of charred bone. I should say I do not only include his Israeli victims. I also include the members of his own people who were killed in his cause, and the hundreds of young men and women that he and his organizations were able to convince, with delusions of oppression and false hope of freedom and empty promises of reward, to destroy themselves and thousands of human lives to advance his cause.
Not to be obtuse, but why not? Either those dudes are dead and won’t care or they’re not and they’ll box his ears beneath the lawn. I think it might actually be fitting to confirm the guy’s mortality by placing him among victims.
Jerusalem-
Bad idea. The IDF would indeed have to guard the sight very carefully non stop. While I’d like to think the number of Jews willing to defile a tomb or remove the remains is small, it isn’t zero. There would also be problems with those Palestinians who become frustrated with the Israeli guards. The site would also serve Arafat’s desire that any Palestinian nation would include Jerusalem-after all, that’s where the great patriot Yassir is buried.
Gaza- Good. Fine. I fail to see the problem.
BTW
As a Jew, I strongly disagree with any suggestions that the corpse should be mutilated or treated with disrespect. For one, the Talmud is very clear that a corpse must be treated with respect. For another, abusing Arafat’s corpse would only cause more violence.
When I raised the point, I figured that defilement was highly unlikely to occur to MOST Israelis (Jewish cemetaries, after all, have been subject to numerous defilements, worldwide) but I wouldn’t have expected Yitzhak Rabin to be assassinated by a Jew, either. It really only takes one extremist to cause a major problem (as Arafat well knows, since it’s the kind of thing he’s supported all these years) and since Israel is unlikely to let armed Palestinian guards protect the site, it would fall to the IDF and sooner or later some incident will occur.
I’m not an Israeli, but an American. So here’s my suggestion for what the USA should do about it. When Arafat dies, US forces should confiscate the body, then send agents to dig up Menachem Begin, grind their remains together into undifferentiable powder, then dump that powder on Israel/Palestine from an American aircraft.
In the end, Jew or Arab, we all turn to the same dust. :wally