2008 Woodie Awards
Which road leads to peace in Middle East?
Steve Campbell--Arizona Daily Wildcat (U. Arizona)
Issue date: 2/12/03 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
(U-WIRE) TUCSON, Ariz. - While everybody is focusing their sights on Saddam Hussein and Iraq, another world figure that harbors terrorism is quietly staying in power. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat remains at the helm, relishing the fact that the spotlight no longer is focused on him. It should be noted, however, that his days in power are numbered.
As soon as the situations in Iraq and North Korea are settled, the peace process in the Middle East will again take center stage, and as a result, Arafat will take his familiar position on the hot seat.
With the Israeli elections having just taken place, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is in the process of forming a coalition government in an effort to control the majority of the 120-seat parliament. In a move that opposes a United States-led peace plan, Sharon is leaning toward merging with the smaller, ultra-nationalist and ultra-orthodox parties.
This is sending a clear message to Arafat and the rest of the world that the Israeli people are now endorsing the conservative stance of a harsh military crackdown on the Palestinian uprising and a much tougher response to terrorist acts against Israeli civilians.
Peace in the Middle East will be achieved through one of three avenues of approach.
First, the Palestinians and Israelis wait it out. While Sharon has made it clear that he will not negotiate with Arafat, recent reports have surfaced over secret meetings being conducted between Sharon and Ahmed Qureia, widely believed to be Arafat's successor. The bottom line is clear: Waiting it out won't work. It provides no immediate solution and no basis for future peace.
As long as the Israelis and Palestinians are taking no action, suicide bombers, funded by Arafat and groups in Iraq, will continue their reign of terror in the region.
The second option falls in the category of negotiations. This process was introduced under the Clinton administration. While it had some initial success, in the end, negotiations failed. Depending on who is asked, the collapse of the negotiations could be blamed on either side. Israel's policy of building settlements in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank provoked the Palestinians into fighting back in what is evidently the only way they know how to: Terrorism. On the other hand, Israel would say that they were in the process of completely withdrawing from the disputed regions when the Palestinians continued their terrorist ways by sending in suicide bombers.
As soon as the situations in Iraq and North Korea are settled, the peace process in the Middle East will again take center stage, and as a result, Arafat will take his familiar position on the hot seat.
With the Israeli elections having just taken place, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is in the process of forming a coalition government in an effort to control the majority of the 120-seat parliament. In a move that opposes a United States-led peace plan, Sharon is leaning toward merging with the smaller, ultra-nationalist and ultra-orthodox parties.
This is sending a clear message to Arafat and the rest of the world that the Israeli people are now endorsing the conservative stance of a harsh military crackdown on the Palestinian uprising and a much tougher response to terrorist acts against Israeli civilians.
Peace in the Middle East will be achieved through one of three avenues of approach.
First, the Palestinians and Israelis wait it out. While Sharon has made it clear that he will not negotiate with Arafat, recent reports have surfaced over secret meetings being conducted between Sharon and Ahmed Qureia, widely believed to be Arafat's successor. The bottom line is clear: Waiting it out won't work. It provides no immediate solution and no basis for future peace.
As long as the Israelis and Palestinians are taking no action, suicide bombers, funded by Arafat and groups in Iraq, will continue their reign of terror in the region.
The second option falls in the category of negotiations. This process was introduced under the Clinton administration. While it had some initial success, in the end, negotiations failed. Depending on who is asked, the collapse of the negotiations could be blamed on either side. Israel's policy of building settlements in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank provoked the Palestinians into fighting back in what is evidently the only way they know how to: Terrorism. On the other hand, Israel would say that they were in the process of completely withdrawing from the disputed regions when the Palestinians continued their terrorist ways by sending in suicide bombers.