by Murray Kahl

 Today's bus bombing in Gaza demonstrates the gap between public rhetoric and private agreements.

We must first understand that the triumphant and ailing Yasir Arafat is too ill to remain as leader of the PA and wishes to leave office as the father of a Palestinian State and conqueror of Israel. According to the Middle East News Agency (MENA) today, October 29, Arafat told President Husni Mubarak of Egypt at their recent meeting, in the presence of Palestinian and Egyptian delegations, that he intends to hand over the chairmanship of the Palestinian Authority [PA] to any person acceptable to the PA and the Legislative Council to become in charge of the PA and continue the final status negotiations with the Israelis. Arafat informed President Mubarak that this would take place once Israel honored its obligations under the second redeployment agreement recently signed in Washington.

Arafat knows all too well the restrictions on Israel's actions placed there by President Clinton, and Israel's loss of effective sovereign rights due to the Wye agreement. Accordingly, Arafat on today's VOP (Voice of Palestine Radio) announced that a telephone conversation took place between him and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu today. He routinely condemned the bombing which took place at al-Matahin Junction in Khan Yunus this morning. 'Arafat described the bombing as a terrorist operation, whose perpetrators sought to cripple the peace process. Arafat added, "I emphasized to Mr. Netanyahu that the National Authority is committed to continuing and exerting all efforts to reveal those behind this terrorist action whose perpetrator tried to hurt school children. As you know, a short while ago, I held a security meeting to discuss this operation. We will follow it up."

Empty words as exactly what are the Palestinian commitments under Wye? Sa'ib Urayqat, Chief Palestinian negotiator, yesterday, Oct. 28, denied to the VOP that the Wye agreement stipulates that the Palestinians should present a security plan. He told the radio this morning that the agreement states that the Palestinians should brief the US Administration on its security plan at a meeting to be held after 3 November. He considered the clamor raised by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in this regard the beginning of attempts to avoid implementing the Washington agreement, to appease the extremist right wing in Israel and prepare for early elections.

Unfortunately for Israel, a deep reading of the Wye memorandum on public issues appear to favor the Palestinian interpretation and public pronouncements by Israel officials leave the readers baffled as to their sources.

Today, Oct. 29, Israeli government spokesman Danni Nave told Kol Yisrael in response to the bombing,

"Look, the Palestinians pledged to wage an all-out war on

terrorism, and they know perfectly well that they will get no territory without it. They pledged to complete their counter- terrorism work plan before the agreement goes into effect, and they know they have to honor this commitment. The Palestinian counter-terrorism plan has to unequivocally guarantee that the Palestinian Authority's [PA] territories are not still used as safe havens for the Hamas [Islamic Resistance Movement] and Islamic Jihad terrorists. The agreement stipulates in clear and explicit terms that counter-terrorism does not just mean words, it means action. It has to be comprehensive, it has to tackle the

terror-supporting infrastructure, terror-supporting atmosphere, and naturally, the terrorist organizations. It should be an ongoing, constant, long-term struggle."

Nave quoted PM Netanyahu who said, he is highly determined, as he has been in the past two years, to continue demanding that the PA wage an all-out war on terrorism.

This war on terrorism is more rhetoric than substance as yesterday, Oct. 28, the PA, under pressure by PM Netanyahu who threatens to halt ratification of the Wye Agreement, notified Kol Yisrael that with the return of Colonel Muhammad Dahlan from Europe, their security plan will be submitted to the US. Saeb Urayqat, Chief Palestinian Negotiator used the planned submission as a pretext on the VOP (Voice of Palestine) to respond to PM Netanyahu's demand that the plan be forthcoming as promised. However, unknown details surface when we examine an interview with Colonel Muhammad Dahlan given yesterday, October 29 in London to the London based Al-Quds Al-'Arabi.

** Security cover -- Dahlan opened the interview with a confirmation of a future Palestinian State and explained that while the Israelis are giving the plan a "security cover,"

He added,

"it is considered the first official recognition by the Netanyahu government, the extremists, and the settlers that it is a reinforcement of Oslo agreement and the determination of the Palestinian Authority to build a Palestinian state. They also signed the transfer of more lands to the Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority. This is the real substance of the agreement, even if the Israelis are giving it a security cover."

** Security Points Dahlan refused to discuss the details and said,

" It is just that we do not want to engage in any public arguments over the interpretation for one simple reason that we do not want to provoke the Israelis and give them an excuse not to implement the agreements. He added, "For example, we did not agree to Netanyahu's conditions on the delivery of what they termed murderers. There is no such provision in this agreement. I do not want to refer to the other provisions, but I can say that, in general, that this agreement is fair to both sides."

** Will Israel see this plan? The interviewer asked,

" The Israelis wanted to get this plan, but you refused to give it to them.

Why did you refuse to acquaint them with the plan? Dahlan responded,

"First of all, this is a Palestinian plan to safeguard internal security. This is its real nature. But, the Israelis call it the Palestinian plan for combating terrorism. Well, there isn't a security organ in any country in the world that does not have its own security plan. This is our security plan. The Israelis tried to get it and secure a role in it, but they failed. We rejected such logic completely. In the end, the President prevailed in the Americans having a role in the plan by training our men. He also said a copy of the plan will remain with him only."

Dahlan added,

"We came out of this crisis with minor casualties. If the Israelis were to have a role in this plan -- in the sense of participation, supervision, or even acquaintance with it -- that, I believe, would pose a big danger. So, thank God, we succeeded in preventing any direct Israeli relationship with the details of this plan."

** Israel's commitments as explained by Dahlan --

"But the responsibility of the Israeli side is just as important. It is reciprocal under the agreement. There is a commitment by the Israeli side to stop any planning or carrying out of acts of terrorism by Israeli extremists. Under the agreement also, there is an Israeli commitment to stop acts of terrorism or any other similar acts, whether by settlers or armed Israelis. This commitment exists in a provision in the agreement. We fought hard to include it, because the Israelis would not admit the existence of acts of terrorism by the settlers. In the end, US President Clinton settled this issue by emphasizing that the provision is fair, and settlers will not be encouraged to repeat the crimes that they committed in the past."

"The Israelis used to claim that no acts of terrorism were launched from their side. But, following the repeated acts of terrorism by the settlers, I believe that it was only fair to include this provision. And so it was included with the help of US President Bill Clinton."

** Israel's commitments with respect to settler actions The question by the interviewer:

"Does this mean that if a settler kills a Palestinian, you will make sure the Israelis arrest and try him appropriately?"

Dahlan responded,

"Certainly. I raised this issue in all our meetings with the Israeli prime minister. It also took place several times in the presence of the US president and Secretary Albright. I asked: What would happen if a settler killed 10 Palestinians? Their replies were positive in the interest of the Palestinians. They said what applies to the Palestinians must apply to the Israelis, otherwise there will be problems."

"As for the implementation, there will be interpretations of course. But, we will fulfill our duties. Whoever carries out a military operation or act of violence will be subject to the usual legal proceedings. But, the Israelis were not convinced in the past."

" I may not be able to arrest a Palestinian for killing an Israeli, although I am against killing in principle. At the same time, however, I cannot give an Israeli a free hand to carry out acts of terrorism against Palestinians for the simple reason that my security duty, which I assumed since the first day of the Gaza-Jericho agreement, is to safeguard internal Palestinian security from Israelis, agents, and even merchants who sell rotten goods. It is my duty to protect Palestinians in all fields, as well as the peace process. This means that there must coordination and cooperation between us and the Israelis to maintain the peace process in the interest of both peoples."

** When asked about an Israeli pledge to seize arms in the hands of Israelis, especially settlers, Dahlan responded somewhat unclearly, "This subject was discussed in detail, but the Israelis consider their settlers in a state of constant threat. I will not go into this subject now, but the coming days will show the positive steps taken by both sides. We will begin with restoring mutual confidence. For a suspension of 17 months of security coordination is not something to be dismissed lightly. There are mutual demands."

"We have pledged to begin with a positive atmosphere. But, unless this atmosphere is reciprocated by the Israelis, we might return to the post-agreement period. I hope that this will not happen."

** Who in the Israeli delegation supported the agreement? Dahlan answered,

"I felt during my meeting with Israeli officials in this delegation, especially Defense Minister Yitzhaq Mordekhay, that they are determined to make a new start and give a new push to the peace process. But, there are also extremists in the Israeli delegation, who only had a negative effect on the talks. Still, we overcame them and reached an agreement."

** Who will verify Israeli compliance? Dahlan answered,

"If and when we have a complaint about the performance of the Israelis, we are going to report them to the Americans. President Bill Clinton has undertaken to keep track of things on the understanding that he is expected to be even-handed."

** What role did George Tenet, Head of the CIA, have in the negotiations? Dahlan answered,

"He played an extremely positive role. I must give him credit for his being fair. Sometimes, when we and the Israelis came to an agreement about one point or other in the security realm and they happened to back off their commitment, the American president would sit with the Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhaq Mordekhay and then with us. George Tenet unfailingly proved an honest broker testifying that the Palestinians were being serious and faithful. That happened more than five times over the 10-day duration of the negotiations. George Tenet had always taken the side of the truth."

** What is the CIA's involvement? Dahlan responded,

"The involvement of the CIA will be of a political nature, which is to satisfy themselves that we are complying with our obligations. How can we have brought the CIA into the region? We are the last people on earth to have made the acquaintance of the US security services. I take the view that it is in our interest that the CIA is going to play the role of arbiter between the Israelis and ourselves."

** What are the mechanics of CIA involvement? Will they have offices? Will they be referees? Dahlan's answer,

"No. They will monitor Israel's and our actions on the ground and in the end act as referees. Let's say Netanyahu makes a charge against the Palestinians, the Americans will investigate that and the same principle holds if the accusation comes from the Palestinian side. We are the party that has been aggrieved over the years by the Israelis. We hold that whoever is called upon to settle dispute between the Israelis and ourselves is bound to judge in our favor Not just the CIA; any third party at all, even if that happens to have a grudge against the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people."

** Did the PA commit to cut back the number of weapons in the hands of the Palestinian police force?

Dahlan responded,

"To start with, we are already under-armed. We made it clear to the Israelis that we were bound by the number of the weapons stipulated in the interim period agreement. As of now, Israel detains 1,000 guns that are, by rights, the property of the Palestinian people. We demand that these be handed back to us. Some of these arms, mini-Ingrams and Kalashnikovs, are now held at the Rafah Crossing and al-Karamah Crossing [Allenby Bridge]."

"Dahlan added, "We are the aggrieved party. The Israelis claim Palestinian police have more weapons than the number specified in the agreement. We made clear to the American president that even some of the weapons that are supposed to be in our possession are now held by the Israelis, which astonished him."

"As for explosives, agreement had been reached that these be destroyed, which we have been doing for the past four years in the presence of Americans and Israelis. We do not want explosives in residential areas. We have no use for explosives; we have taken the road to peace."

** How did Dahlan resolve the issue of smuggled weapons to areas under the control of the PA?

Dahlan answered,

" We raised the subject and made the point in the presence of Americans that the weapons were being smuggled primarily by Israel. That had left the Americans convinced that weapons entering our areas originated in Israel. We cited facts and figures and specific examples to prove our case. I think that we scored a point there."

** Will there be a cutback in the number of the Palestinian police force?

Dahlan's answer,

"The issue has been left for President Yasir 'Arafat and the American president to work out with the enemy. We are bound by the figure as stipulated previously."

** Will groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad be declared illegal?

Dahlan's answer,

"In essence, the decision said that the political organizations may engage in political action as they wished in line with the ground rules that we had worked out with those groups. But Netanyahu refused to believe us; the Israelis demanded that we outlaw Hamas and the Islamic jihad Movement and other opposition forces. That issue takes up a substantial space in the Wye agreement. In the end, both sides came to an agreement under which illegal organizations would be the military ones, which is the line now in force in the Palestinian Authority areas."

** This means that Hamas not an illegal organization?

Dahlan responded,

"Absolutely. As a political group, Hamas is not outside the purview of the law and as security services we have no right to decide otherwise. This is a political issue that must be decided by President Yasir 'Arafat; it is an issue over which he fought a tough battle at the negotiating table. He cannot nor is he convinced that he should ban a political organization. President 'Arafat made his position to Mr. Clinton quite clear and the latter was quite understanding. 'Arafat told the Israelis: You want me to combat terrorism. Yes, I will, but there is no way I am going to outlaw political groups; I will ban only military groups; that is the limit of what I am prepared to do in that regard."

** What are the specifics of how the PA will destroy the terrorist infrastructure?

Dahlan answers,

"There is no specific formula; the ideas was couched in general terms. We have not spelled it out, and we won't."

** Does that mean the PA will not meet Israel's demand to crack down on certain institutions and close down some mosques?

Dahlan responded,

"Exactly. We are bound to the letter to the text that we signed without bothering to be bound by Israel's interpretations. There are clear texts and we have a witness. They have their own interpretations and we have ours."

"If the text is adhered to by the Israelis that would be a Palestinian gain, but if they were to put their own interpretation on clauses of the Wye agreement, we too have our own interpretations. In principle, though, we are bound by the agreement's text."