Yasser Arafat wants everybody to understand his plan. Almost every day he or one of his top men says it: On May 4, 1999, he will declare the creation of an independent state of Palestine covering the whole West Bank and whatever of Jerusalem he chooses.
We understand him, all right: He is trying to leap over the final round of talks with Israel. Nobody expects those talks to be finished and the boundaries settled by May 1999. The final talks deal with life-and-death issues like secure borders for Israel. Arafat wants to settle borders himself, for Palestine and for Israel.The man knows Israel would never accept a Palestine he prefabricates. He also knows that if he runs to meet his May 4 mirage and declares it real and alive, the chances for peace that had recently seemed likely would be replaced by the probability of war. Palestine in May could become Palestine never.
Is it bluff, a trick or a sick man's willingness to gamble his people's future against his last days of glory? Not likely. Israeli officials believe, and so do I, that he counts on most of the nations of the world, including America, to give silent or stated acquiescence to unnegotiated Palestinian independence, despite the repeated promise against change without full negotiation, despite what Arafat's self-chosen borders would cost in blood.
Most Israelis believe the past five years of negotiation will lead to an independent Palestine. It would have been guaranteed by the Palestinians' passion for nationhood, their willingness to fight for it, the enormous concessions of land and self-government made by the previous Israeli government, and the decision by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to accept land for peace on the condition of Israel's own definition of its security.
But the Palestinians are fatally underestimating Israeli determination not to have an Arab-drawn Palestine imposed on them.
At the United Nations last week Dore Gold, Israel's representative, said with total clarity that if Arafat went through with a unilateral declaration of independence Israel would be free to take all necessary steps, "including the application of Israeli rule, law and administration" to all Jewish settlements and security areas on the West Bank.
On Sept. 23, Netanyahu gave the same warning in one word. He paused so I could write it down: annexation.
In October came the U.S.-Israel-Palestinian conference in Wye, Md., and the agreement for an additional 13 percent withdrawal by Israel, to be followed by the final negotiations. They were supposed to deal with the gut issues of Palestinian nationhood -- secure borders, water, protection for Jewish settlers, Jerusalem.
Things seemed to be going along pretty well -- which meant Israel turned over more territory and Palestinians accepted it and waited for the other agreed slices. Total agreement to date: Arafat control of the Palestinian population and 40 percent of the land.
After Wye, the stepped-up drive started for a May 4 Palestine stuffed down Israel's throat before the end of the critical final talks. On Wednesday, Palestinian musclemen invited TV cameramen to a demonstration that turned into a near-lynching of an Israeli soldier.
The tape sickened all Israel -- including members of the Cabinet. They knew that if Israel accepted the public beating of Israeli soldiers on Israeli territory, the question would not be Palestinian sovereignty someday but Israeli sovereignty right now.
So Thursday, Israel said no more land transfers to Palestinians unless Arafat formally withdraws his May 4 plan and acknowledges Israel's statement at Wye that it will not release from prison the men Palestinians were demanding freed -- captured Hamas killers.
On Dec. 14 President Clinton will visit Gaza, a great triumph for Arafat. Israelis and Palestinians know that if Clinton remains silent or wobbly about Arafat's forced-birth plan, he will be siding with or rationalizing what Israel cannot accept.
The fruit of his visit would be a betrayal of all Israelis and Palestinians who will die because Yasser Arafat is already digging their graves.
New York Times News Service