Here’s Lynn on speculation that Arafat’s death will bring an immediate opportunity for peace:
There seems to be a broad assumption among the pundits these days that the (acknowledged) passing of Arafat will open the door for peace.
[ . . . ]
Allow me to rain heavily on this parade. The poison that Arafat has implanted, at the behest and with the able assistance of every Arab government in the Middle East, will not dissipate with his last artificially induced breath. It’ll linger on for a long, long time. In fact, I’d say that one significance of the passing of Arafat may well be this: that when and only when his memory becomes a curse among his own people, when the palestinians cringe at hearing his name, when they spit on whatever grave he ends up in — only then will that door to peace begin to come ajar.
Imagine, just for a moment, a Germany in which Hitler remained a universal symbol of pride and honor after WWII. Would the Allies have been able to fashion a sustainable peace with such a Germany?
Let’s see where this goes. Will the Arabs/’Palestinians’ new leadership be able to disconnect from Arafat’s (and their own) corruption, or will the the corruption continue? Sure the Arabs have the greatest chance coming up to show the world that they are serious about peace, will they also be successful at missing this oppurtunity to play in sheep’s clothing as usual and keep using the blame-Israel line?
Just back from miluim in that area and the consensus in the security services is that all hell is about to break loose within the Arabs/’Palestinian’ areas. The weapons buildup has been continuing and it hasn’t been pointed lately, in general, in the direction of Israelis. We might be about to witness massive civil strife in the territories. Hopefully, this time it won’t be rechanneled towards us like it was ‘successfully’ done four years ago to start the Oslo war.
Hopefully this time, the world will stop giving them a ‘free lunch’ and start expecting real progress from them, and not only pressure Israel to make more unilateral ‘confidence-building’ concessions.