• FRONTLINE: Battle for the Holy Land • Mideast Special Reports • World Section • Talk: World news message boards • World Live Online Archive • Live Online Transcripts

Middle East Crisis
With Stuart Tanner
Documentary Producer/Director
Friday, March 29, 2002; 4 p.m. EST

Filming on assignment for FRONTLINE's upcoming documentary "Battle for the Holy Land," documentary producer/director Stuart Tanner was with the Israeli army when they attacked Arafat's compound Friday morning ("Israel Storms Arafat's Compound, March 29.")

Tanner is a producer/director of international current affairs news and documentaries based in the United Kingdom. He has won numerous international media awards including the 1998 Amnesty International Press Award.

The FRONTLINE film "Battle for the Holyland" airs Thursday, April 4 at 9 p.m. EST on PBS (check local listings). Check next week's Live Online schedule for a discussion of this episode of FRONTLINE.

The transcript follows.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

washingtonpost.com: Mr. Tanner, thank you for joining us today. You were with Israeli troops this morning as they stormed Arafat's compound in Ramallah. How did you get such incredible access and how would you characterize the raid?

Stuart Tanner: Well, basically because of being already in Ramallah the night before -- I was there to interview Marlon Barghouti, the head of fatah movement. Basically that interview was dependent on what happened today. And then, late last night, I was in a hotel in Ramallah, where most of the journalists stay, and we were all watching and waiting for Ariel Sharon's news conference. We knew that that would signal the most likely course of events for the next day. I watched it, and when he described Chairman Arafat as an enemy of Israel who they were going to isolate, it was clear that the most likely event would be a large-scale invasion of Ramallah.

That's in fact what did happen. In the middle of the night we heard some explosions, and at first light this morning we looked out the window and saw these lines of tanks and armored personnel carriers coming into the city. So myself and the other group of journalists went off in armored vehicles -- you need to go with a group of journalists together in armored white vehicles, so it's very clear to the Israeli army that you're not a threat.

Then we drove through the city toward the compound of Chairman Arafat.

Sunnyvale, Calif.: How disciplined are the Israeli forces?

Stuart Tanner: I think that when the Israeli forces go into a Palestinian city, they minimize the risks to themselves. And that means that you will be shot if you are too close. Because whether you are carrying a gun or not carrying a gun, you can be seen as a threat. And therefore there are civilians who are shot who are not actually engaged in fighting the Israeli forces.

As we got close to the compound, we come close to the first group of tanks that are blocking the access roads to the compound. We got out and we filmed them. And as we were filming, there was the sound of gunfire, not that far away. We went around different roads to try to find a route to get us into the compound that's not blocked by Israeli tanks. Apart from our vehicles and Israeli tanks and APCs, the streets are pretty much deserted. Everyone hides and everyone stays away from the windows. Any shooting in the city is a tremendous threat. And you can be quite a way from the fighting and still a stray bullet can come your way.

Dallas, Tex.: What motivates the Israeli government to take such a dangerous step? Who is the rocket scientist really running this ship? Over 30 year of occupation shows that it doesn't stop the violence -- it only ensures that it will continue.

Stuart Tanner: I don't think actually it is that much of a dangerous step for the Israelis to go into Palestinian cities -- in a sense it's not dangerous for them physically, because they have such overwhelming military superiority. For instance, today there have been no Israeli army casualties. But there is a danger, and that danger is that it further humiliates Palestinian people, and deepens the cycle of violence. And in fact, that was demonstrated very clearly when, even during the raid, another suicide bomber exploded herself at a shopping center in Jerusalem.

Herndon, Va.: What if Arafat gets killed not intentionally, but by collateral damage? No one will believe it was not intentional. Has this gotten completely out of control?

Stuart Tanner: That's definitely a risk. And one has to say there is a sense that it is out of control. And the general feeling is that if it continues in this direction, it could destabilize the entire Middle East. And if Chairman Arafat were killed accidentally or on purpose, that would certainly be a major trigger to conflict breaking out across the Middle East. There would be a very severe reaction.

Amherst, N.H.: The Israelis claim that they are performing these attacks surgically and focussing purely on military targets, and not involving civilians. What are your observations?

Stuart Tanner: I think that that is half true, in the sense that the operations are intended to target what they consider to be non-members of Islamic groups or militias. But I think it's very clear that there are inevitable civilian casualties as a result of these operations, and in fact they cause more civilian casualties overall than casualties to their targets.

Washington, D.C.: Surely, the Israeli troops must have given some explanation as to why they were storming Arafat's headquarters; what was their stated mission -- what specific goals did they hope to accomplish by such a direct attack on Arafat, especially if (as Israel claims) they did not want to kill or capture Arafat?

Stuart Tanner: Well, I think that is difficult to understand strategically. And it has something of a sense of desperation to it. No one expects that the containment of Chairman Arafat and the ongoing destruction of the Palestinian Authority will result in a reduction of acts of violence against Israel. In fact, it's more likely to have the opposite effect, of reducing Chairman Arafat's ability to curtail the activities of the more extreme factions in Palestine.

Greenbelt, Md.: Sir, Please describe the extent of casualities. Do you have any idea if the U.S. was informed before the attack began?

Stuart Tanner: I definitely saw two casualties. One was an old man that was dead on the streets outside of the compound. And we were close to a group of militia who were fighting the Israeli solders when one was shot in the neck and killed. I understand that since then seven Palestinian casualties have been confirmed. I have no doubt that that number will go up.

What we understand to have happened was that the attacks were expected, most of the Palestinians had withdrawn from the compound. When the Israeli army arrived, there was some fighting around the compound. But basically they were able to take it quite easily. Chairman Arafat was confined to a couple of rooms with his close aides, and I understand that to still be the situation. It's a rather extraordinary situation of having taken 90 percent of the compound, but not actually, in a sense, physically, finally, arrested or taken Chairman Arafat. But he is confined to those two rooms.

Contrary to what people think, most of the time the armed Palestinian fighters withdraw when the Israeli forces move in, because they are so outgunned that they would just be cut down.

Clarksburg, Md.: What kind of resistence is the Palestinian Authority putting up? How are they combating tanks?

Stuart Tanner: The film will explain in great detail what tactics are adopted and what can be done by Palestinian fighters when Israeli tanks move into Palestinian cities.

The Palestinians withdraw from the oncoming wave of infantry supported by tanks, and usually Apache helicopters. But of course they know their cities quite well, and they do not want to just let the Israeli army move in without any form of resistance. So the fighters do take up some positions, and fire at the tanks and at the armored personnel carriers or any troops who they spot. But it is extremely difficult for them to inflict any casualties on the Israeli army. But what they can do, by their small arms fire, is restrict the movement of Israeli infantry. But in order to achieve even that, they expose themselves to tremendous risks, which we witnessed first-hand this morning when about a dozen fighters were stepping out from behind a building into the street to take a few shots at an Israeli position. Clearly, on the other side, a highly trained Israeli sniper was easily able to kill one of the fighters with a shot to the neck -- the second casualty of the day.

Santa Fe, N.M.: Yes Stuart,

In the news coming out of this event, the quote form Mr. Arafat was that he would prefer "to be martyred" As you were in the compound, had he been there, do you think that Israeli troops would have been obliging of his request, or would he have become a "detained leader" instantly? Thank you.

Stuart Tanner: I'm sure that soldiers were under orders to restrict Arafat rather than kill Arafat. And he would have risked death by moving outside the compound. But only in the sense that any Palestinian on the street of Ramallah today was risking death.

Our impression is that it is a highly unlikely proposition that it was the Israeli army's mission to kill Chairman Arafat. If one's looking for the logic for the Israeli strategy, it's one of grand intimidation. Because certainly it's harder to see what can be achieved other than intimidation. Even then, intimidation doesn't seem to have ever worked in the past.

San Ramon, Calif.: Did you get the impression that the military actions of the Palestinian terrorists, defending Arafat's headquarters, were directly coordinated by Arafat himself.

Stuart Tanner: No. I think what one has to realize is that there are quite separate groups within the Palestinian territories. And this is not a formed state with a trained army and well-established lines of command. They're much more informal and irregular structures. Of course, this is not the fault of the Palestinians, in the sense that they're hardly likely to be able to achieve those levels or organization while they are still in this stage of being an occupied territory.

Israel always accuses Chairman Arafat [the Palestinians] of not having a democracy. But I think it's important to realize: is there any country in the world that has had a democracy while being controlled by another nation? I don't think so.

Baltimore, Md.: First of all two IDF soldiers have been killed so far. But your statement about how the operation will curtail Arafat's ability to curtail the extremist factions strikes me as curious. After 18 months of fighting, where is the evidence that Arafat is inclined to or has the ability to curtail their actions? This morning's bombing in Kiryat Yovel was perpetrated by the Al Aqsa Brigades, which is part of Arafat's Fatah. Maybe Israel is just trying to do what Arafat cannot or will not do.

Stuart Tanner: That's a very reasonable point. My response to that would be it's quite simply that Chairman Arafat is not able to control either all the elements within Fatah, such as the Al Aqsa Brigades, or the Islamic groups such as Islamic Jihad or Hamas. He is able to make arrests of people who are put on the wanted list by Israel. But he cannot possibly arrest and suppress all of the people who are or may be responsible for acts of violence against Israel. He is in an extremely difficult position. If he cracks down too hard on his own people, he will be seen as acting on behalf of Israel too much. Whilst at the same time, Israel is the occupying power. At the same time, if he does nothing, or a limited amount, he of course will inevitably accused of not doing enough.

Chicago, Ill.: Given that Sharon had publicly said he regretted not killing Arafat in 1982, why would Arafat talk with him? Isn't Sharon himself the biggest obstacle in the peace-process?

Stuart Tanner: Yes. In my opinion, he's a great obstacle to the peace process.

Washington, D.C.: What is the mood amongst the Israeli soldiers? Do they believe that this action is a positive move, or do they see it as not really changing the situation?

Stuart Tanner: I think that there are two kinds of emotion that run side-by-side in Israeli soldiers or even the Israeli people. One is that you cannot possibly not make a response to the loss of life of your own people, and there is in a sense an emotional need for vengeance. But at the same time, I do believe that both soldiers and many Israeli people know that further military action and those acts of vengeance will not lead to a reduction of violence.

Guelph, Ontario: Are Israeli troops entering private homes? And do you know what's happening in other areas?

Stuart Tanner: Yes, Israeli troops do take over private homes and use them as forward positions for their troops. Families are often kicked out of their homes when they are taken over.

I think probably other people are better informed about what's happening in other cities.

washingtonpost.com: Mr. Tanner, is the raid continuing even at this hour or has there been a break in the fighting?

Stuart Tanner: As far as I am aware, there will continue to be sporadic fighting as long as the Israeli army are in Ramallah or in any other Palestinian city. And it will inevitably trigger more attacks against Israel.

Washington, D.C.: If it's true that not even the Israeli government believes that actions such as the one this morning will reduce the Palestinian attacks against Israel, do you think the attacks are meant to provoke more bombings against Israel, so that the Israeli escalation becomes self-justifying?

Stuart Tanner: Of course, what's interesting about spending some time in the area is that you become aware of deeper and in some sense darker aspects of the conflict. To give you an example, the suicide bombing on Wednesday, the "Passover massacre," as the Israelis call it, whose interests did that serve? I'd say it certainly undermined the whole Arab summit and peace proposal. It strengthened Sharon's claim that Palestinians are not interested in peace. And it further damages the image of Chairman Arafat. And therefore sometimes you get darker currents of conspiracy theory, whereby people begin to think that maybe these attacks are allowed, because the timing of them would suit Israel politically so strongly. Or that there are elements within the Palestinian side that want to damage Chairman Arafat themselves, and in fact provoke the Israelis into crushing him. The most likely result of which would be the strengthening of the Islamic groups, like Hamas. And it becomes very dark waters in which it's not impossible that either of those things are true, and certainly you could say that people get involved in that kind of thinking.

Poulsbo, Wash.: Does that appear that Israel is preparing for a drawn out occupation of Ramallah?

Stuart Tanner: Yes. The sense is of pretty much unprecedented scale of military action, and it will continue for a while.

Arlington, Va.: Mr. Tanner, how long were you and the Israeli forces in the compound this morning. When were you able to get out?

Stuart Tanner: You don't spend hours and hours that close to the action on either side, or Israeli tanks and so on, for obvious reasons. But I suppose we spent about an hour around the compound. I've been here for a week, updating [the film], since there had been some major incursions [since it aired in February on the BBC].

Generally, when it's actually fighting, journalists move around in groups. You're just too much of a target to be just one or two of you. In a group, it's very clear that you're journalists. Actually a journalist was shot this morning.

Boston, Mass.: How hostile are Israeli troops toward western journalists like yourself who are there covering what's going on?

Stuart Tanner: Generally, not very hostile. But occasionally there is hostility.

Sarasota, Fla.: What's next, in your opinion?

Stuart Tanner: My personal opinion is that a change of leadership on both sides of the conflict will be a good thing. And I think probably interestingly, there's quite a few people on both sides who think that too.

But if you talk about the Palestinian side, it's difficult for them to, in a sense, change leadership. Because they need more freedom in order to go through that process, and whilst they are in a sense a downtrodden people, it's quite understandable that the person who has been at the forefront of their struggle, literally and figuratively, for independence, remains so fundamentally important to them. But at the same time I think quite a few Palestinians think it would be good to have a new leader. But it would absolutely have to be on the basis of choices that were made under much freer circumstances.

On the Israeli side, personally I don't think Sharon has much to offer other than military strategies and crackdowns against the Palestinians. He's deeply unpopular with the Palestinians, and distrusted, and you have to say that his history does not make him an ideal leader to be instrumental in bringing peace. I think it would definitely enhance the chances of peace if there were a much more moderate leader of Israel.

Reston, Va.: Hello Stuart, in the past suicide bombers primarily targeted soldiers and other such VIPs. But the new trend aims more at women and children. In your opinion, what has caused this shift?

Stuart Tanner: Soldiers are very difficult targets. And first of all, if we think of it just simply in terms of tactics, if you cannot fight in the sense of army-to-army, then suicide bombing becomes the most effective way to instill the same fear and sense of terror in the Israeli people that the Palestinians experience day in and day out. From their side, they know they cannot make an Israeli citizen feel afraid by attacking soldiers. They're very difficult to attack anyway, and it wouldn't create that sense of fear. So how can they make the Israeli people feel the same sense of fear, to suffer the same sense of terror that they experience? What is the most effective means? Of course, the tragic answer is the suicide bomber.

Because suicide bombing was the domain of the Islamic factions like Islamic Jihad and Hamas, which because they are Islamic and more traditional, would not have women at the front line of the conflict anyway. Once you cross over to the Al Aqsa Brigade, which is part of Fatah and not Islamic organizations -- therefore is room being created for women to be on the front line as well as men. And it it relatively new.

Bellevue, Wash.: This appears to be a very serious escalation of the violence. Are the windows for a peaceful resolution quickly closing, or is there still a peaceful way out of this?

Stuart Tanner: I think that it's clear that the escalating violence leads to more entrenched views from both sides. I personally believe that there is quite a strong role for outside mediation, although you will never see the UN or American troops getting involved; that's just not going to happen. And in a way, America has played that role. I think that one can clearly see as the wider context of world events at the moment, as in the war on terrorism, is having a negative impact on the Middle East situation. In that the rhetoric of military action against the Palestinians becomes the same as the rhetoric in the war on terror. It just creates a deeper divide between Palestinians and Israelis.

washingtonpost.com: That was the last question for today. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion. Watch for Stuart Tanner's footage of today's fighting on the Frontline Web site for the April 4 show, "Battle for the Holy Land."