LET’S SEE THE G.A.O. STUDY OF P.L.O. WEALTH BEFORE FORKING OVER HALF A BILLION IN U.S. TAX DOLLARS TO ARAFAT

(Washington, D.C.) American politicians know one thing about
their constituents: They do not like foreign aid. This attitude
is not a function of an ungenerous spirit on the part of the
American people or any indifference to suffering overseas,
however. Their animus stems from deeply held suspicions that: we
are spending too much abroad; like most government activities,
the money is not being well spent; and the recipients are
substantially indifferent to U.S. interests.

Fortunately for those who believe that well-crafted,
disciplined and targeted foreign assistance programs, can be
important and very cost-effective instruments for advancing
American policy objectives, these concerns are not always
justified. And, where the public can be convinced that there is a
genuine need, that the aid is proportionate and properly
administered and that it is producing desirable results,
political support is not lacking. On the other hand, where those
criteria cannot be satisfied, the American people are entirely
justified in their opposition to foreign aid.

Where’s The GAO Report?

It is for that reason that the truth about a half-a-billion
dollar scandal involving the Palestine Liberation Organization is
apparently being suppressed. If the electorate finds out what is
really going on, it would not only be a show-stopper for this
particular instance of governmental waste, fraud and abuse. It
would also certainly undermine bipartisan efforts to unblacken
foreign aid’s bad name.

The fact is that Yasser Arafat doesn’t need U.S.
money. According to a 1994 report issued by the British National
Criminal Intelligence Service, the PLO is estimated to have $8-10
billion in hidden assets and $1.5-2 billion in annual income.

Incredibly, even this staggering sum may be understated.
Congress has recently received a report by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) that reportedly reveals the net worth of Arafat’s
empire to be billions higher than the earlier British
estimate. In what appears to be a quintessential misuse of the
classification system, the GAO report was stamped
“Secret” once it became apparent how politically
sensitive its findings were. The man who requested this study
over a year ago — Rep. Benjamin Gilman, Republican of New York
and Chairman of the House International Relations Committee —
has thus far declined to share it with interested colleagues.
This potentially explosive report is similarly locked up in the
files of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence
Committees. ⁽¹⁾

Clearly, few — if any — of the secret funds are being
invested to address the practically non-existent infrastructure
or desperate poverty of those now being ruled PLO’s rump
government, known as the Palestinian Authority (PA). Instead,
Palestinian Arab squalor is once again being exploited to extort
urgent, large and unconditional aid flows from international
donors.

Money, Money, Who’s Got the PLO’s Money?

But there is now tangible evidence of what is happening to
such international resources: Members of Congress have their
hands on fourteen pairs of letters between Arafat’s Minister of
Finances, Muhammad Nashashibi, and a representative of the
Palestinian Economic Council for Development and Reconstruction
(PECDAR). PECDAR is an ostensibly independent entity established
to ensure the distribution of foreign donations so as to jump
start the Palestinian economy free of any political machinations.

According to a 28 June statement in the House of
Representatives by Rep. Jim Saxton — a Republican from New
Jersey who has proven to be one of the most unstinting and
courageous monitors of developments in the Middle East
“peace process” — this correspondence demonstrates
that Arafat is making use of funds in PECDAR accounts to enrich
himself, his cronies or otherwise to advance the PLO’s agenda.
That agenda includes undesirable activities like buying up land
in Jerusalem (“in order to solidify our foothold there and
increase our activities there in an active and strong
manner”) and underwriting covert political operations in
Israel. It seems safe to assume, moreover, that these letters
represent but the tip of the iceberg; international aid is almost
certainly underwriting portentous PLO military activities, as
well.

The Bottom Line

As noted in the Center for Security Policy’s recent Decision
Brief entitled The Saxton Solution:
No PLO Compliance, No U.S. Taxpayer-Underwritten Aid,
the abuse of international resources is hardly the only area in
which the PLO is failing to honor its commitments to Israel. The
breaches include: the PLO’s failure to disarm, extradite or even
condemn terrorist groups; its continued cooperation with one of
the most notorious of such groups, Hamas; its failure to change
the PLO Covenant to remove that document’s explicit call for the
destruction of the State of Israel; and a systematic failure to
refrain from anti-Israeli propaganda.

The Center observed in that analysis:

“No ‘peace process’ worthy of the name can withstand
the persistent violation of obligations assumed by one of its
parties. Continuing U.S. aid to the Palestine Liberation
Organization and/or the Palestinian Authority under such
circumstances amounts to rewarding those who fail to honor
freely assumed responsibilities, debasing the value of the
accords signed with the PLO and encouraging others to believe
that their agreements — whether extant or prospective —
with Israel can be selectively observed, as well.”

If the Clinton Administration insists on misleading the
American people about the true nature of PLO activities now being
supported by U.S. tax dollars, it is incumbent on the Congress to
come clean. Senator Alfonse D’Amato and Rep. Michael Forbes, both
Republicans of New York, have introduced needed legislation to
cut off further funding for the PLO/PA, directing that future aid
flows for the Palestinian Arabs be channeled instead through
discrete, transparent and easily monitored — but unofficial
— programs. Such an approach would enjoy the public’s
overwhelming support. It would also avoid a further discrediting
of essential foreign aid programs when the voters finally find
out what Washington knows about Arafat’s hidden hoard.

(1) The closely held nature of this
General Accounting Office analysis is in marked contrast to the
treatment being accorded another GAO product — one sharply
critical of the B-2 bomber. Administration officials evidently
felt this report was so helpful to their campaign against a
needed congressional initiative to build more B-2s that they
leaked it before the document was even finished, securing
an exceedingly sympathetic article on the front page of
Saturday’s New York Times.