Well this is going somewhat off topic but I think it's important to note that Arafat had a very tenuous hold on power amongst Palestinians. While the Israeli side was strongly divided over the Oslo Accords, the situation was even more stark on the Palestinian side. Hamas and the more extreme elements wanted nothing to do with it while the more moderate factions were mostly optimistic. To say that Arafat was the ultimate authority over all of these groups is not very accurate. Arafat mostly had support from the moderates as a strong leader who wouldn't be immediately denounced by the more extreme elements and he was tolerated by the rest. Unfortunately the moderates alone do not form a majority (as was shown when Hamas took power in the recent elections). I firmly believe that without Arafat, the situation would have been significantly worse than it was. As unlikable as he was, he managed to keep some of the worst elements in check and his death was a very tense moment in the politics of the area. The fact that the Palestinians almost universally took a much harder line immediately following his death shows fairly clearly just how much he moderated the extremes even if he couldn't control them entirely.
And yes, warlord is a good way to describe him, but this is the realpolitik of a tribal culture without formal borders or sovereign land.

