I suppose it's one of life's ironies that Shiekh Zayed of the United Arab Emirates and Yasser Arafat of Palestine - two of the more notable leaders in the Middle East - died a little more than a week apart from one another.

We were already well into a government-mandated period of mourning for Sheikh Zayed, who passed away on the 2nd, when Arafat was flown to France for "emergency treatment," or maybe just "tests." Reading the headlines, I was struck by the contradictory statements - it seemed as though some of the people were preparing for the worst (or the inevitable) while others were holding onto their illusions, and hoping that reality was not coming to pass before them.

But reality took its toll, as it always does. And that, I think, is as good of an obituary for Chairman Arafat as any: a failure wrapped inside the illusion of hope.

The "leader" of the Palestinian people had been a dried-up, old tent of a man for years. His failure to secure peace - both before and after 9/11 - speaks volumes about the true worth of his leadership. Israel's "leadership" of late must also bear responsibility for their part in the debacle, but a real leader would have found some way - any way - to turn the situation back around to an advantage, or at least keep things from getting any worse.

But Arafat didn't.

It's debatable whether he was in cahoots with the murdering bastards, and speaking with a forked tongue when he talked of peace, or too terrified of being replaced by those bastards to actively pursue it. But either way, the man stands exposed by history as a failure. And the fact that I once said that I'd rather live under Arafat's rule than Hillary Clinton's should be taken as a sign of how little I respect her, rather than a sign of much respect for him.

I will credit Arafat with not taking his money and running for the border when things got too hot - which is pretty much what Hillary would have done if people were ever to shoot bullets in her direction. But in the end I'm wondering how much of his staying in the face of such danger was a calculated gamble against losing his position as a "world leader."

Once you get into that heady, rarefied circle of power people, it's not an easy thing to dislodge yourself. And those powers all turned out for him, in the end. Everyone weeped and wailed over the loss of a man who has - arguably - done the least good for a people who need the most good sent their way.

Were they really mourning him, then, or just showering more love from afar on the Palestinian people? If so, then maybe the best trick Arafat ever pulled was getting himself so entangled with his people's past, present and future that it's all but impossible to imagine them without him.

And if that doesn't scare you, then you haven't been paying attention.

But it all came down for me, one night, when a friend of mine wondered aloud why everyone was beating their breasts over a failure like Arafat, but there was so little recognition outside the Gulf for Shiekh Zayed?

A damn good question. Other than the obituaries - some of which were fairly laudatory - there were comparatively few tributes worthy of the man, and most of them came from Muslim countries. Even President Bush's remembrance of the man, who was the architect of the model of the Middle Eastern ally state, seemed forced and perfunctory.

And that is a massive shame, when you consider that, of these two leaders, Shiekh Zayed was worth far more attention - both during his long, amazing life, and then when it ended, so that he might be given his proper due.

You can find a summary of the man's life and works here. And while the article is clearly biased in his favor, there's nothing in there that's too far off the mark.

So let's contrast these two leaders, one of whom has the Pope publicly praying for him, and the other of whom might not have existed, to hear such little fanfare.

Zayed took what he'd been given and turned it into an amazingly prosperous state, in spite of a lot of early resistance from the Shah of Iran. Arafat had numerous chances to work with Israel and create a Palestinian state, but squandered what little credit he'd gotten with Rabin, and let the chances go away.

Zayed was wise enough to know that he had to work with people in order to get what he wanted. Arafat was "in charge" of the whole show, and made dissenters disappear.

Zayed made progress, bringing a bright future to his people. Arafat made excuses, ushering in an age of cronyism, fraud and disenchantment.

Zayed created a peaceful country where business can flourish, tolerance means something and violent crime is a rare thing. Arafat presided over the creation of a living hell where business is a joke, hate is strength and violence seems the only solution.

Zayed used his millions to help people - both his own and others, notably including the Palestinians. Arafat, on the other hand, squirreled his donated millions away, especially from his own people.

Zayed spoke of the need for pan-arab unity on the issue of Palestine. Arafat helped foster a climate that made this impossible to achieve.

Zayed worked for peace in the region, right up until the last, however questionable some of his solutions may have been. Arafat... well, I think you've got the idea.

But one more observation seems highly pertinent, and I will quote at length from the summary I linked to earlier:

"...when all is said and done, Zayed's greatest achievement, perhaps, was that he made himself dispensable. Having built institutions and allowed a whole new generation of leaders to form and come forward, he was able to gradually script himself out of the UAE's decision-making. He had never tried to turn the UAE into a one-man show that disintegrates as soon as the "strongman" is taken away. This means that the succession will be as smooth as in any modern state. Zayed is one of few Arab leaders whose death does not trigger civil wars, coups d'etat or palace intrigues."

Contrast that with the utter mess that took place as Arafat lay dying, in Paris, as those he'd blocked from having any real power tried to figure out what to do next - other than tell his wife, Suha, to shut up. Time alone will tell if these men who've been handed, rather than earned, the reins to Palestine can salvage something from the horrid mess Arafat has left behind, but I have to confess to pessimism.

Meanwhile, here in the UAE, the Ruling Council has already elected a new President, with plans to meet - and get back to business - on the 20th of the month. And I can think of no better monument to the late President than to see the great country he built continue on without him.