Time to reform

by Hassan A. Barari

In a bid to gain or maintain legitimacy, most Arab regimes tend to identify their interests with those of their countries. This thinking has hardly helped these countries face genuine challenges. Take the most recent example of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and the just Palestinian cause. The view that "Arafat is not a partner for peace" is gaining ground. This should prompt genuine reform within the Palestinian polity. Unfortunately, the Palestinian leadership appears disinterested in reform.

The Palestinian people, suffering from the last colonial occupation on earth, are struggling to achieve liberation and national independence, but the allegations of corruption among the leadership only helps the anti-peace government in Israel to shirk its obligations towards peaceful resolution of the conflict.

It should be emphasised that reform is in the best interest of the Palestinians. The argument that reform is demanded by Israel and the United States should not deflect the Palestinians from seeing the benefits of reform. Instead of appreciating the recent comments by United Nation envoy to the Middle East Terje Roed-Larsen as candid, constructive criticism, the Palestinian leadership rejected a "friend" of the Palestinians. Larsen was on record for criticising Israel's lethal use of force against the Palestinians, so his credibility and professionalism are beyond doubt. Furthermore, he was widely seen in Israel as pro-Palestinian. Therefore, it is bizarre to see the Palestinians waging a campaign against a man who really helped them in different ways.

The last thing the Palestinians need is to clash with the United Nations, the only international body that backed them in all possible ways. After all, what Larsen said reflects the thoughts of many Palestinians. The only difference is that the UN envoy is free from fear as he is independent.

It is also terrifying to see that the level of tolerance on the part of the Palestinian leadership is very low. What would Arafat have done if these sharp remarks had come from a Palestinian? Would he have sanctioned his liquidation? This mind-set is self-destructive.

Understandably, in times of crisis, the nation should be united behind its leadership. Indeed, Israel presents a classic example of a nation united behind its leadership in times of distress. Yet, when the leadership systematically fails to deliver, people should look for a viable alternative. The Palestinians should not insist on defending a failed leadership while they keep on losing their land. Now that the International Court of Justice has ruled against the separation wall, they should capitalise on the success and feel strong enough to introduce reform.

The Palestinians cannot afford to lose this time. Implicit in Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw from Gaza is the design to force the Palestinians into anarchy, thus proving that the Palestinian state would be a failure. This would only support his claim that the Palestinians do not deserve their own state.

What is at stake is more important than leadership; it is the Palestinians' right to self-determination and an independent state on their land.

This article was published in the Tuesday, July 20, 2004 edition of the Jordan Times. It is used here with permission.