Amin Hewedy* recalls his thoughts while watching Arafat's funeral I am watching the funeral on the small screen. It is the last Friday in the month of Ramadan and the Quran is being recited at Al-Galaa Mosque in Heliopolis. Arab leaders and dignitaries from all over the world are in attendance. A horse- drawn carriage bears the remains of Yasser Arafat, aka Mohamed Abdul-Rahman Abdul-Raouf Al-Qudwa, aka Abu Ammar. He died in Paris and is soon to be entombed in Ramallah. Perhaps one day he will be reburied in Jerusalem. The great crowd I see on the screen indicates that the future Palestinian state has a place on the world map, all thanks to the struggle and sacrifice of a nation led by a man in a chequered kuffiya, the traditional Palestinian headdress. The event proves to all that Palestine is a land with a people, not a land without people, as Theodor Herzl wanted the world to believe. When I was head of General Intelligence we formed a committee in the late 1950s to discuss the Palestinian issue. Hajj Amin Al-Husseini used to occasionally attend the meetings. Arafat died only hours earlier. But the three most senior Palestinian officials (the interim president of the Palestinian Authority, the PLO leader, and Fatah's leader) are in Cairo accepting condolences. This shows that the revolution has institutions and will be able to hold elections and uphold legitimacy. Abu Ammar has died but the Palestinian issue lives on. The funeral is in Cairo because Cairo is the centre of pan-Arabism, just as Prussia was central to German unity and Rome was to that of Italy. The creation of a Palestinian state is not just a Palestinian affair but an Egyptian one. Palestine is our neighbour. Along with Sinai, Palestine constitutes a vital line for the defence of Egypt, indeed of pan-Arabism. Arab kings and presidents are present at the funeral, signalling to the world that Palestine is an integral part of the fabric of Arab society. Arab leaders endorse what Arafat stood for, a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. What would happen were the Arabs to join hands, from the ocean to the gulf, and aim their weapons in the right direction? I will tell you. The world would respect us. Were we to stand together no one would dare invade Iraq, destroy Falluja, attack Gaza or set Darfur on fire. Were Arab leaders to speak out against the carnage in Iraq and Palestine, were they to approve assistance to the thousands who fell victim to cruel aggression, things would be different. And they had the time to do just that between Arafat's illness and death. But they did not. Hit the one who's tied up and you'll scare the one who's free, runs the proverb. Perhaps our leaders are scared. I and many Arabs wished for action but not all wishes are granted. Silence denotes acceptance, just as it denotes impotence and fear. African and Asian heads of state attend, as do representatives from over 60 countries. This indicates that the Palestinian issue is international. The world supports the right of the Palestinians to a state of their own. Arafat was not a terrorist, as President Bush claimed, but a man struggling for the rights of his people. The international consensus, however strong, does not seem to stop Israel from oppressing the Palestinians, with full US support. Palestinian rights are rooted in international law. But geographical ambition, brute force, and unbridled hatred don't take much notice of legitimacy and rights. Arafat died without achieving his dream. But he emblazoned that dream on the world's conscience with such force that it is only a matter of time before the dream turns into reality. Countries act in a way that befits their civilisation. Let's tip our hats -- rhetorically, for we no longer wear hats or fezzes -- to France and President Jacques Chirac for all they have done since Arafat fell ill. France is a great country, a country that buried Napoleon Bonaparte at Les Invalides despite his defeat at Waterloo. Compare this conduct with that of Ariel Sharon, who refused to let Arafat be buried in Jerusalem, and who imprisoned the Palestinian president for three years. Compare Chirac with President Bush who regarded Arafat as a terrorist and refused to pay homage to him even after his death. And yet the American people re-elected Bush for a second term, as if to prove to the world that, centuries after they exterminated the Native Americans, they still cannot get a civilisation going. The Israelis imprisoned Arafat yet they were afraid of him even when he was under siege. A lion remains a lion whether in the wild or in captivity. Arafat toured the world looking for the peace of the brave. He never ignored a gesture, nor did he waste chances as some claim. Capitulation is not a wasted chance. The transgression of red lines is not a wasted chance. Arafat was placed under siege so that Bush and Sharon could claim that no Palestinian partner exists and press ahead with unilateral withdrawal. But the Palestinians had someone to speak on their behalf, a president that they had elected. Yet those who speak endlessly of democracy would not acknowledge Arafat. The Palestinian leader did not capitulate; he held his head high till the end. The two planes take off and disappear beyond the horizon. And I am left with my thoughts. What will Bush and Sharon do now that the man they called an obstacle to peace is no more? What will the brothers in Gaza and Ramallah do? And what of the Arabs? * The writer is a former minister of defence and chief of General Intellegence.
