Arafat’s PLO Rebellion
Yam Arafat who has led the faction ridden Palestine Liberation Organization for over 14 years has apparently survived an attempt by the radical element in the organization to oust him Arafat whom many Israelis consider their terrorist enemy number one is considered to be too moderate by the Syrian backed rebels in his organization The dissidents reject Arafat s willingness to accept negotiation as an alternative to their all but hopeless holy war against Israel
Although the rebels are in the minority in the PLO they have the backing of Syria s President Hafez Assad the arch rival of Arafat for control of the PLO Assad who sees leadership of the PLO as a step toward increasing Syrian influence in the Arab world is backing rebel leader Abu Musa who was deputy chief of operation in the PLO before the revolt and now wants to resume attack on Israeli forces in the south of Lebanon
In Israel the hard liners are said to be jubilant at the turn of events which removes the need to negotiate about the West Bank and Gaza Other Israelis, however, look with apprehension at the stepped up terrorist attacks that would result from a win by the rebels
Arafat meanwhile still wields a great deal of influence among the financial leaders of the Arab states and some observers think that without his leadership support for the PLO would dwindle Arafat is very popular among the Palestinian people themselves especially on the West Bank Pro-Arafat demonstrators in Jerusalem recently clashed with Israeli riot police when their flag waving and chanting demonstration got out of control
The Soviet Union has been supportive of Arafat in the past and has invited him to Moscow in response to his appeal for support in the present conflict Some observers feel the pressure from Syria may cause Arafat to move closer to Jordan’s King Hussein and join him in negotiation with Israel over the future of the West Bank. Another view is that Syrians may gain control of the PLO but leave Arafat nominally in control but with much less power than he formerly had. In any case a solution to the Palestinian problem is not likely to be reached soon since neither Israel nor the Arab states really want the solution that would be imposed on them.
A New Title for Andropov
Just seven months after Yuri Andropov assumed leadership of the Communist Party on the death of Leonid Brezhnev he has been elevated to chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. The post, although largely ceremonial, is considered an indication that Andropov is firmly in control of his party.
But even as this endorsement of his leadership is conferred upon him there are ominous indications that the state of Andropov’s health is not good. When he expressed his thanks to the Supreme Soviet he did so not from the rostrum but from microphones placed at his chair. During West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s recent visit to Moscow meetings had to be postponed and at a reception for a Finnish delegation the guests were requested not to shake hands with Andropov. Just turned 69, Andropov has had major health problems for years and these now seem to be worsening but his mental powers remain as keen as ever.
Given the state of Andropov’s health and the age of other members of the Politburo, western observers have been speculating as to which of the younger Politburo members might become future leaders. Two relatively young men by Politburo standards have been moving up the political ladder recently, 60 year old Gregory Romanov and 52 year old Mikhail Gorbachev. Romanov, a politburo member since 1976, came up from the ranks as a tough, hard-driving industrial manager from Leningrad who always met his quotas. He was recently transferred to Moscow and made a Central Committee secretary. His foreign policy views strictly follow the party line and he holds the United States to be the cause of all the trouble in the world. Gorbachev on the other hand, the sophisticated and urbane law school graduate, presently holds the post of agriculture secretary. He has grown in prominence since Andropov came to power and his reputation does not seem to have been hurt by the dismal harvests the Soviets have been having.
If Andropov’s health should force him to move from the scene either of these men will be in a position to move toward top political leadership. Both men hold positions on both the Politburo and the Communist Central Committee Secretariat, a power base from which all Soviet rulers since Lennin have risen. Will either of these men be the one who makes the decision for the fateful southward march into the land of unwalled villages ?
An Impasse in Lebanon
The security that Israel hoped to gain from the Lebanon war has so far not materialized. Although a U.S. sponsored agreement has been signed by Israel and the Lebanese government under which Israel would withdraw from Lebanon, the withdrawal is contingent on a Syrian withdrawal. The Syrians have remained adamant in refusing to withdraw their forces from the Bekaa region. Israel and Syria face each other along a 60 mile front with the armies only 600 yards apart in some places. Several tense incidents have taken place such as exchanges of small arms fire on the ground and a Syrian attack on an Israeli reconnaissance plane. Shuttle diplomacy by U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz has so far failed to persuade Syrian to withdraw from Lebanon and the hope of the U.S. administration that other Arab states such as Saudi Arabia would be able to influence Syria has been disappointed.
In Lebanon the agreement between Israel and the government of President Amin Gemayel was denounced by the leader of the Druse community as the start of partition with Israel in the south and the Syrians in the Bekaa valley. The well armed Druse who inhabit the northern mountain region plan to resist the peace agreement with the hope of working out a deal for more power in the government.
Most observers hold little hope for a peaceful united Lebanon free from foreign domination and see instead a more less permanent partitioning of the country unless a major breakthrough in negotiations takes place. Israeli defense minister Moshe Arens has been quoted a being of the opinion that the Soviets will eventually persuade Syria to pull back. He is said to feel that the Soviets are reluctant to risk the loss of the more than $1 billion in new equipment they recently installed there. Whether this view has any validity only time will tell, but the present trend of events seems to be moving in accordance with the interpretation of Bible prophecy that calls for Israel to occupy much of present Lebanon when the Kingdom age is ushered in.