THE POST-ARAFAT QUESTION

THE POST-ARAFAT QUESTION
Los Angeles Times: After Arafat, what? The question is everywhere in the Mideast and in world capitals after a new round of suicide bombings in Israel and Israeli demands that Arafat arrest those responsible. It is a question with no clear answer. So Israel, the United States and other nations are forced to hope, mostly against the evidence of history, that Arafat is both willing and able to rein in the terrorists.
Arafat, the elected president of the Palestinian Authority, has ensured that he has no obvious successor, a classic tactic of authoritarian rulers. Cronyism, corruption and violence have marked his rule. Yet for decades he has represented Palestinians around the world and, though threatened, has clung to power.
Now he faces on one side the wrath of Israel and on the other a potential Palestinian civil war if he accedes to Israeli demands. Even if he lasts through this crisis, at age 72 and with his health not always the best, the outside world must do what Arafat has not: consider a succession scenario.
Peaceful election: The best solution would be for the Palestinians to choose their next leader as they chose Arafat, with a peaceful election rather than a violent, chaotic scramble for succession. The Palestinian Legislative Council passed a law six years ago that would put the parliament speaker, Ahmed Korei, also known as Abu Ala, into the presidency for 40 days after Arafat's death. Arafat unfortunately did not bother to ratify that law.
Korei would be a secular leader, as is Arafat. A new leader from a militant Muslim group like Hamas, which is pledged to the destruction of Israel, would put full-fledged terrorists at the head of government. Hamas has claimed responsibility for the suicide bombings that killed more than two dozen people in Jerusalem and Haifa a week ago, many of them teenagers.
Washington has designated Hamas a terrorist organization, and Israel rightly has demanded that Arafat cripple it. U.S. diplomats steer clear of Hamas members, so if someone from that group did take power he would be a question mark to Washington. The United States at least has had some contact with the secular members of Arafat's entourage.
Ariel Sharon's hawkish government has escalated the rhetoric against Arafat, even equating him with Osama bin Laden. It has offered little or nothing in return if Arafat does manage to halt the violence. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the destruction of Palestinian Authority offices and police stations, the bombings that also accidentally kill civilians have blasted holes in the peace process and increased the fury among Palestinians.
The Oslo agreement of 1993, subsequent meetings at Camp David and the mediation earlier this year led by former U.S. Sen. George J. Mitchell have produced blueprints for peace in the Middle East, with Israel and the Palestinians living in separate states with secure borders. Whether it's Arafat or someone else, Sharon or someone else, the leaders of Palestinians and Israelis have to transform the blueprints into reality.