T Nation



Couldn't find a thread about this... tell me if there is one

Does Arafat dying scare anyone else?

What do you think will happen?

Do you think he has a good succession plan in place?


From what I can gather, the Palestinians have no contingency plans in place to deal with Arafat's passing. That is why the news about him is so scatter shot. His family doesn't want anything coming out about his condition.

Rumor has it that Arafat has $2-3 billion in Swiss accounts that no one knows the account numbers to - except Arafat himself.



Scare me? Not at all! While I wish harm on no one I think that his passing may very well further peace in the middle east.

He has always been a roadblock to peace.


There are few people in the world I would celebrate the death of. Arafat is one.

He is a terrorist, which was proven in a past Olympics.

He was a hate filed bigot, which is shown by his ordering of people to blow themselves up to kill Jewish children.

He was a crook, and a traitor to his own people. He was offered 98% of what he requested, in the name of peace. That would have given his people the land they wanted, and, if he would have followed through, could have brought peace to the Israelis, and the Palestinians, but instead he preferred war and destruction to the offer of peace, resulting if the deaths on both sides.

And the crook part is about the millions if not billions donated to the Palestinians to help build their homeland. It ended up in his pocket. Spent on himself and on the destruction of many people including his own.

Anyone who praises this man is praising Hitler. Realize this now before responding to this post.


Oops I forgot to say I hope his replacement does not follow in his footsteps, and actually works for peace.


That is what scares me. What are the chances of that happening? To me it seems more likely that he will be replaced by something or someone far worse. Kind of a "better the devil you know" thing.


Well there is the chance, even if it is a small one. Even the wrong person could decide working for peace is better then the war they have been fighting.

I disagree with the "devil you know" idea. It is an excuse not to change for the better. I believe that if you know not changing is bad, then there at least is a possibility that the change is better, and that is worth it. This is the reason many people get stuck in jobs they hate. Fear of the unknown.

On this issue, I don?t think it could get worse, but it could get better. But that might depend on where the money is.


Shed no tears for him- he was one of the worst terrorists in his day.
A new leader determined to seek a peaceful road to a Palestinian state would have huge implications for peace in that region, and probably lessen world terrorism.
However there is no clear successor, which leaves the way to a Palestinian state in a kind of limbo.


The only thing that I am thankful for is that his death will be from natural causes (not that he deserves it). If an American made Isreali missle had brought about his demise our experience with terrorism so far would pale in comparison to the aftermath. I agree with Mage though. He was nothing but a terrorist. Palestine needs a Ghandi-type to immerge from their midst to help bring an end to violence. In my own agnostic way I pray for such an event. I've had enough of these fundamentalist thugs. Not that I hold Sharon in a much higher position. He seems to be making a weak attempt now though, so maybe there is hope.


Well I can agree with Roy on most parts. (Oh no, shoot me now.)

It is politically better if Arafat dies of natural causes. But I am worried about the theory of a poison being spread around. You know who will be blamed for that.

I just hope for a slow painful death.

But if the belief of a possible civil war actually comes true, I could see one side getting the support of Israel. If that happens, while not perfect, it could have half of the Palestinians agreeing to peace with Israel. While not the perfect scenario, it is still better then a united war.

I should say I do disagree with comparing Sharon to Arafat. Sharon may be using harsh tactics, but is that because he must? He is not targeting innocent children unlike Arafat, and I find that to be a big fundamental difference.


youve got a toss up, either u get a younger and more pregressive leader (good) or a fanatic muslim (bad) i read an interesting article saying that the only way for the next palestinian leader to resist the hamas agenda is if he is elected, so itl be interesting not only to see who takes over but how they attain power, if hes appointed itl probably be from an extremest front. guess we all gotta watch and see


I got an uneasy feeling about Arafat right at the beginning -- well, at the beginning as far back as I remember him on the world stage.

Did he not start out as a "bad guy" who rose to some type of uneasy leadership status and became "acceptable" in the process?

I always had the impression that he was playing good cop bad cop with us. He would appear to be the "reasonable" element, while at the same time tacitly allowing or agreeing with more radical or fundamental elements because it boosted his bargaining power or importance.

I never felt that he had any useful combination of power or sincerity with respect to any peace process.

As for the future, I think we are on a cusp. It can certainly go either way here.


Being the leader of the Palestinian Liberation movement, Arafat naturally ascended to power once Palestine was granted a place to call home.

Through his own actions (eliminating power threats) and those of Israel (elimination of Hamaas leaders), the field of possible leaders has grown quite thin.

I don't think you will see an 'independent' rise to power. He will be placed there by the urging of the U.S./Israel. The palestinian people have been in a revolution far to long, and are ready for peace - just as the Israeli people are.

That was Arafat's problem - he only knew the struggle of attaining independence, never being independent. Peace might have been possible years ago had it not been for Arafat's need for 'struggle'.