It appears that the country and the present Administration is on the brink of several enforced changes in domestic and foreign policy that will be brought about by the deaths of just four individuals. Three of those deaths are imminent or probable, the fourth is more than likely. Each of them represents the opportunity for a substantial change in the direction of the country on the issues that each death represents. Whether that will occur is yet to be send.

At the top of the list is Yasser Arafat, President of the Palestine Liberation Organization. His health has not been good for months. He finally succumbed to unexplained or undefined illness in the last week of October and from the beginning of November has been confined to a hospital, possibly near death. There has been no successor officially named to take his place in the PLO leadership, perhaps because no one could replace at least the image that many Palestinians have of Arafat as a liberator and freedom fighter.

The opinion held of him by Western Europe and the United States is quite another matter, and that dichotomy is among the clearest examples of the deep divisions that continue to plague attempts by the United States to broker any sort of lasting peace between Israel and Palestine leading to the true emergence of a Palestinian state--in a way that will not cause outright war. Be that as it may, the United States will have to deal with someone else now, when it comes to the PLO. Arafat's death may be, in fact, the starting point for a revived peace process, since the most recent effort, the "Roadmap to Peace," quickly reached a dead end.

Second on the list is Fidel Castro. He either fell or collapsed at a public appearance in
October, and required a brief hospitalization during which he refused to be put under full
anesthesia so that he could remain in full control of his faculties--and Cuba--during medical procedures. But the end is near for Fidel, and the situation is similar to the situation that the United States will face with Arafat's death, only worse. Castro has not indicated any sort of recognized successor. His death could result in a relatively peaceful transition of power within the Cuban leadership or could be a flash point to internal strife.

Although it is doubtful that there would be civil war in Cuba over Castro's death even in a worst case scenario, Bush owes much of his Florida victory to the militant anti-Castro expatriates in Miami, now into their second or even third generation of Castro-bashing. That constituency is being eclipsed to some degree by other Hispanic groups from other areas of Central and Latin America who are not as single-minded or as myopic about the problem of human rights in the region and the significance of Castro's rule in Cuba. But on this issue, it matters not.

The anti-Castro population in Miami is vocal and violent and will not be reasoned with, and they are still smarting over the Elian Gonzalez fiasco. Bush will have to give them something. What Castro's death will mean toward American policy toward Cuba, beginning witt the ridiculous economic blockade that even Canada has rejected, will be a defining moment for Bush Administration policy in the region.

Third on the list is Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The announcement in October that he had thyroid cancer (and, it appears, a rather severe type) was the real "October surprise" of
the election. But everyone was shouting too loudly over Iraq and the minimum wage, to notice.
One of the most serious aspects of the 2004 election was that the President to be elected would likely be appointing two if not three Supreme Court Justices. Now, that's not just an academic discussion. Rehnquist might be on this earth for only another three to six months.

A very possible nomination by Bush to the Chief Justice seat is Antonin Scalia--young, tanned, healthy, bright, brash, and as conservative as they come. His dissents in the recent "war on terrorism" cases gave the whole issue of Guantanamo Bay detainees and of "enemy combatant" designations by the Administration (even of United States citizens), completely over to the sole authority of the President as Commander in Chief. As far as Scalia is concerned, what the Administration does with those people is none of the federal courts' business. There is much more to be said, but space prevents a full review here.

If Scalia indeed becomes Chief Justice--not outside the realm of possibility--and Bush
nominates another Justice to fill that vacancy, and if Sandra Day O'Connor retires as she keeps
hinting that she will, that makes three out of four Supreme Court seats to be appointed in less
than a year. A fourth is likely, if Justice John Paul Stevens retires as he very well might. With
Clarence Thomas as a conservative swing vote, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court
would be achieved. By the time the Court opens its term in October, 2005, it could look very
different than it does today.

The fourth funeral, although less likely than the first three, is President Hamid Karzai of
Afghanistan. This is a man with more lives than a cat. He has survived any number of assassination attempts, and is universally despised by the remaining Taliban forces in the country as well as by the warlords who he has pledged to take on, as part of the democratization of Afghanistan and as part of his promise to do "something" about the tremendous opium market there (a substantial portion of the opium that makes it way as heroin into Europe and the United States, comes from Afghanistan). Although the "elections" in Afghanistan has confirmed his role as the hand-picked civic leader of the country, his power to govern is hampered by dissention, division, and still-ongoing war. There is a price on his head, and if he lives another year, someone should give him a medal. Karzai's potential demise will mark another turning point in United States policy in that area, which also will affect Pakistan and India.

So there it is: four funerals and a President. Bush had better get a number of a good florist on his speed dial.

C. William Michaels is an attorney in Baltimore, Maryland and the author of "No Greater Threat: America After September 11 and the Rise of a National Security State" (Algora, 2002). "No
Greater Threat" is the only book containing a review of the entire USA PATRIOT Act.