An Emotional High, but Hardly a ‘Victory’ : Arafat: Can he go from revolutionary leader to head of state? Can he accept pluralistic politics? The signs are hopeful.

The return of PLO leader Yasser Arafat to the freed Palestinian areas was an emotional experience by all measures. What made the return most dramatic was that Arafat chose to come first to crowded and potentially dangerous Gaza rather than the more comfortable and contained area of Jericho in the West Bank. The people of Gaza rewarded Arafat by giving him a passionate hero’s welcome.

But was Arafat’s return a victory? Hardly. One doesn’t have to be a political scientist to realize that the deal that made it possible for him to return home is very much biased in Israel’s favor. Arafat, however, did succeed in embodying the long-sought right of Palestinians to return to their homeland and participate in the determining of their own future.

The possibilities that Palestinians will be able to convert this agreement into a stepping-stone for a viable state do exist, despite many inherent obstacles: The delay in tackling issues like settlements, Jerusalem and sovereignty of the territories dampens the potential of real progress. And the Israeli attitude of putting the Palestinians to the test before releasing prisoners or more territory is not the way to deal with prospective neighbors.

For Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as for many in the diaspora, the test of Arafat’s return rests more in attitude and actions than in circumstances. How Arafat and his national authority will deal with the economic and social issues of Palestinians will be the most visible barometer for everyday people. While some of this depends on outside aid, which has been slow in coming, much hope is pinned on the private sector.

Business, however, is not divorced from the political reality. You can’t operate a successful system based on free enterprise and the encouragement of entrepreneurship without a sound government and an open political system that respects human rights, pluralism and free expression.

Will the Palestinian leader respect such values? Judging by what he says, the answer is yes. But judging by the policies and actions of the past, the answer is not so positive. For nearly 30 years, Arafat has been the leader of a revolution, not a head of state. What was required of him as a revolutionary is much different than what is needed today. One-man rule, which is often tolerated in a period of popular revolt, is a formula for disaster, not for nation-building. The new role requires a change in attitude and way of operating, even a change in the personnel surrounding him.

Such changes can’t happen overnight and can’t be imposed. They have to evolve and develop and become institutionalized. For this to happen, concepts of collective decision-making, transparency and consensus-building have to become the rule.

Arafat’s first few days in Palestine have reflected some positive signs in this direction. He made a passionate appeal to those opposed to his policy to help him carry the heavy load. He extended a hand of reconciliation to the leader of the Islamic movement that has been opposed to the peace process, and he promised all that he will work for a democratic Palestine. Arafat went out of his way to reconcile any differences with some independent figures like Hanan Ashrawi and Haidar Abdel- Shafi, making sure they appeared with him in public events. He has told reporters that Cabinet posts still vacant in his national authority are reserved for leaders of opposition groups if they wish to join him.

Arafat also took special care to visit the poorest of the poor in the Gaza Strip, making his first stop at the overcrowded and miserable Jabaliya refugee camp, where the intifada started seven years ago. And unlike his many previous speeches, he made no grandiose promises to his people, speaking instead of the difficult road ahead and the hard work that needs to be done.

The overwhelming welcome that Chairman Arafat received is certainly a popular referendum for his policies. This public expression of support gives him a mandate to pursue his policies in the direction he chooses. But it would be wrong to interpret this genuine expression of love and loyalty as a blank check. Arafat will have a honeymoon of some months, but if changes are not seen and felt, and if the promises of a democratic Palestine are replaced by autocratic leadership, then the intifada generation will not spare even its own leader in the pursuit of independence, freedom and democracy.