“Why don’t we admit that he can neither lead, nor plan, nor take a single step that makes any difference except to him and his Oslo cronies who have benefitted materially from their people’s misery” Professor Edward Said, New Left Review.
And here's a weird one sent to me. Pokey's fave ;), Robert Fisk gave an interview - in America - expressing his distaste for Arafat:
Beyond Disappointment -The Middle East, according to Robert Fisk . For example:
...Question - So does Arafat now, for his own cynical reasons, encourage or support the suicide bombings inside Israel as the Israelis insist he does?The article is worth reading. It has other trenchant statements about Sharon and Arafat. It has fewer of his fantasy as fact items, though he pushes the Jenin massacre bit. And he only mildly pushes the Europeans as more knowledgable line.Answer - Arafat is a very immoral person, or maybe very amoral. A very cynical man. I remember when the Tal-al-Zaatar refugee camp in Beirut had to surrender to Christian forces in the very brutal Lebanese civil war. They were given permission to surrender with a cease-fire. But at the last moment, Arafat told his men to open fire on the Christian forces who were coming to accept the surrender. I think Arafat wanted more Palestinian "martyrs" in order to publicize the Palestinian position in the war. That was in 1976. Believe me that Arafat is not a changed man.
I think that if he ever actually sees a wounded child, he feels compassion like any other human being. But he's also a very cynical politician. And he knows that Sharon was elected to offer security to the Israelis. And Arafat knows that every suicide bombing, every killing, every death of a young Israeli, especially inside Israel, is proof that Sharon's promises are discredited.
On the one hand, he can condemn violence. He can be full of contrition. And in the basic human sense, he probably means it. But he also knows very well that every suicide bombing hits at the Sharon policy, and realizes how that helps him.
IMO it is clear that he knows his audience in America is less-sheeplike and more discerning about the Middle East than the sheep and apparatchiks in Europe whose bleats about superiority are self-delusions. It's funny, like the "what do they say in English, and what in Arabic" question, he plays a game like "what you say in Europe, and what you say in America".