The death of Yasser Arafat on Wednesday, the Palestinian leader who has been both idolized and admonished for his terrorist connections, has sent resounding reverberations throughout the world, with many world leaders pointing toward the gap in Palestinian leadership as an opening for peace in a region marred by bloodshed.

In Carbondale at the Egyptian Corner caf, on the corner of Main and Wall streets, Mohammad Awwad from Egypt, Redael al-Hayat Saida from Morocco and some of their friends sat discussing the future of the Middle East peace process during their first meals since breaking fast.

In the background on a mounted television played an Arab soap opera on Al-Jeezera as the men’s minds pondered how the death of one of the most visible Arab faces would play out in one of the world’s longest disputes over land.

Saida broke down the meaning of Arafat’s death in simple terms between drags of his cigarette and sips from his sweetened tea. The death, he said, is meaningless toward the final goal of peace.

“I believe that it will get better,” he said in his thick Arabic Moroccan accent. ” But that is in the future and that I cannot say.”

Awwad would interject occasionally, hinting that Arafat’s presence was something of a hindrance to a final goal of peace because his style of leadership, he believed, was flawed.

“He tried to be overly political,” Awwad said, “sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn’t.”

Arafat’s ineffectiveness was present during the last three years of his life, due in part to being confined to his headquarters in the Gaza Strip and the ongoing violence that had flowed out of the Intifada, or uprising, of 2000. Many leaders were beginning to question whether Arafat had the intention of ending the violence.

Bashar J. from Saudi Arabia, who refused to have his last name printed, said it was that ineffectiveness that characterized much of Arafat’s 40 years in power over the occupied territories. Without an effective leader, he said, many people turned to rival guerilla groups such as Hamas for guidance.

“Hamas has more power in Gaza than Arafat ever had,” he said. “Israel is sniping Hamas leaders. They had Arafat cornered and never killed him. What does that tell you?”

He added Arafat’s Palestinian cause was heralded and latched onto by terrorists feeding into the belief that a Palestinian struggle was in fact a religious struggle, hurting his viability as a leader determined for peace. But, he said, Arafat did not refute their insistence to use the Palestinian cause as an impetus for violence.

“He’s the cause for a lot of the terrorism,” he said. “Other terrorists are taking his reasoning and using it for terrorism.”

Asraf al-Beedh from Yemen thinks Arafat’s rule was stained by some deficiencies in leadership qualities, but he believes the 75-year-old icon was what many had pegged him as – a statesman.

” He won the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Beedh said. “He was not all bad.”

John Jackson, a visiting professor at the SIUC Public Policy Institute, believes that there can be a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict now if one of the sides can make a commitment under new leadership. Yet Jackson thinks that such a fresh start is unlikely.

“Clearly not with this administration,” Jackson said, of whether or not the death signaled a new beginning in the Middle East.

Saida, who sat and listened to much of what was happening around him, had one thing to say about the peace process and how it would ultimately be delivered in the Gaza strip – the United States.

“The future of peace in the Middle East and the future of peace in Palestine,” he said, “is all in the hands of America.”