MID-EAST REALITIES - www.MiddleEast.Org - Washington - 3/20/2002: The Israelis, and the Americans of course, have Yasser Arafat right where they want him now. He either does as he is told and paid or he's a goner...one way or another. The main American-sponsored Arab "client regimes" in Cairo, Amman, and Riyadh are doing what they can to keep their man Arafat going; for they fear very much new, more independent, and more principled Palestinian leadership...especially Hamas. Meanwhile, the Americans are making all kinds of soothing noises to distract, divide, and tranquilize the "Arab leaders" as they head into the Arab Summit meeting in Beirut. There they will do as directed, passing a general statement that takes no serious actions against Israel; does nothing real to help the Palestinians or the Iraqis; says little that hasn't already been said before, many times in fact; and which essentially fronts for the Americans as they prepare to expand their worldwide crusade while the Israelis position themselves to deal even more brutally with the Palestinians.

[THE TIMES, UK, 20 March] YASSIR ARAFAT'S decision on whether to attend next week's Arab summit in Beirut was further complicated yesterday when Israel warned him that if he went he might not be allowed back.

Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister, confirmed that Mr Arafat could be given permission to travel abroad if he agreed to a ceasefire but attached blunt conditions to the offer. Asked directly whether Mr Arafat would be refused permission to return, after a wave of suicide bombings and shootings, Mr Sharon said: "If he goes to Beirut we are expecting to hear a speech that would address the importance of peace and stability in the region. But if there are bomb attacks here in his absence and there is a speech of incitement - and I hope that doesn't happen - then we will have to convene the Cabinet to decide and I can't rule out any possibilities."

The threat raises the intriguing possibility of Mr Arafat being exiled to Beirut by Mr Sharon, the man who drove him out of that city in 1982 when, as Defence Minister, he masterminded Israel's ill-fated invasion of Lebanon.

The operation proved near-fatal to Mr Sharon's career because he was widely blamed for the massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps, by Israel's Christian Phalangist allies.

Mr Sharon's warning provoked an immediate response, with Saeb Erekat, a Palestinian minister, declaring: "Sharon cannot put an obstacle on the movement of Arafat and cannot dictate to us what we should say or not say."

Palestinian analysts said last night that if Mr Arafat were refused permission to attend the Beirut summit it would have negative consequences for the Saudi peace plan, due to be discussed by Arab leaders. "There is an Arab and international effort under way to enable Mr Arafat to attend the conference. If he doesn't go the conference is bound to decide on harsher actions against Israel," said Zia Abu Amar, a political scientist.

Dick Cheney, the US Vice-President, confirmed yesterday that he was ready to meet Mr Arafat but only if he agreed to a ceasefire under the plan laid down by George Tenet, the CIA Director.

This lays out a series of steps involving the Palestinians arresting militants, seizing weapons and exchanging information with the Israelis, while Israel eases travel restrictions imposed on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and pulls its troops back from Palestinian population centres. Israel has already withdrawn tanks from Palestinian-ruled areas in Bethlehem and Gaza, a Palestinian precondition for the truce sought by Anthony Zinni, the US peace envoy.

Ending an 11-country tour of the Middle East, Mr Cheney said he "would be ready to meet with Chairman Arafat in the period ahead at a site in the region to be determined". But emphasising America's commitment to help both parties to achieve a ceasefire he also laid down a condition of compliance with the Tenet plan before any meeting, saying: "I cannot emphasise enough how important it will be this week for Chairman Arafat to take the steps to get the ceasefire started and to start implementation of the Tenet work plan: namely to speak to his own people, personally, about the importance of ending violence and terrorism."

His refusal to see Mr Arafat over the past two days, in which he has held three meetings with Mr Sharon, caused anger among the Palestinian leadership. It is also unlikely to have pleased Arab leaders.

The Palestinian security forces say that their task of persuading the street militias to respect a ceasefire has been made infinitely more difficult by Israel's recent tank, helicopter and F16 raids on refugee camps in which hundreds of Palestinians have died.

But Professor Gerald Steinberg, director of the Programme on Conflict Resolution at the Bar Ilan University in Israel, said that Mr Sharon had become strengthened by the Cheney visit.

"Sharon has taken a lot of risks by withdrawing the Israeli forces and making concessions to the Americans, and these could backfire if there is another outbreak of violence. But Cheney's visit has erased that criticism," he said. "Sharon has put Arafat in check, although not checkmate because with Arafat it is never checkmate."

Peace campaigners claimed meanwhile that Israel has created 34 new settlements in the 12 months since Mr Sharon's election. Peace Now, a left-wing Israeli protest group, accused the Government of allowing settlers to appropriate "to an unprecedented extent" new land within the West Bank and Gaza on territory claimed by the Palestinians.

"The creation of the 34 new settlements shows that either the Government is giving the settlers a free rein or it doesn't have control over what the settlers do," a spokesman said.

"Most of the new settlement sites are at least 700 metres or more from established settlements, and some are at least 2,000 metres away."

Israel denies that any new settlements have been built and says that no new building is authorised. A government spokesman said: "We have checked every one of these points and none of them is a new settlement. Someone puts an old unoccupied caravan on a hill and these people claim it is a new settlement."