|
Trending Topics
|
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26838-2004Nov4.html
After Arafat, What?
(Washington Post)Dennis Ross - Arafat always succeeded far more as a symbol than as a leader. As a symbol, he had only to excite passions; as a leader, he had to make hard decisions and choices, and in that he was far more a decision avoider than a decision maker. He was the lone figure of authority, and even if he chose to do little to prevent chaos and anarchy in the West Bank and Gaza, he was the one person who could have done something about it. It is the absence of a figure of authority that invites a power vacuum and is almost certain to trigger a struggle for power in Arafat's aftermath. The problem with any collective leadership arrangement is that it would mask the leadership vacuum and not resolve it. It would provide no legitimacy for making difficult decisions.