“not through warfare – but through acts of diplomacy”
Not what he said, not what he did.
Arafat agreed not to allow Goebbels-like anti-Semitic propaganda.
This is in the Oslo accords, but it didn’t need to be.
It should have been self-evident,
to anyone who was planning to establish a peaceful country
which would take its place among the nations of the world.
Arafat agreed to “one rule – one force”.
This is in the accords, but it didn’t need to be.
It should have been self-evident,
to anyone who was planning to establish the rule of law in his country.
Arafat agreed to criminalize terror but instead created
a new concept in justice, the “revolving door”.
Joint Israeli – Palestinian patrols are part of the Oslo agreements.
They ended after too many Israelis were murdered by their ‘partners’.
These agreements were not kept.
The reason is self-evident,
to anyone who’s objectivity and impartiality
don’t change sides at the Green Line.
The Oslo agreements were carefully staged
in order to test Palestinian intentions as the plans went into operation.
It didn’t work out because Arafat never had any intention of keeping
his part of the agreements.
He said (in Arabic only, of course) we will accept
whatever Israel gives us now, later we will *take* the rest.
“to re-unite the Promised Land, under a fair-to-all”
Although that’s not in the agreements, I would accept it, but I don’t trust them.
Contrition and honesty about their share of the blame
for the nakba and its continuation would certainly help.
Germany did it, you can do it too.