PEACE NOW CHIEF SKEPTICAL BUT SUPPORTIVE OF PM'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 001291

SIPDIS

NEA FOR BURNS/SATTERFIELD
NSC FOR ABRAMS/DANIN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/26/2014
TAGS: KPAL KWBG IS GAZA DISENGAGEMENT ISRAELI PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS GOI INTERNAL SETTLEMENTS
SUBJECT: PEACE NOW CHIEF SKEPTICAL BUT SUPPORTIVE OF PM'S
DISENGAGEMENT PLAN

Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Richard LeBaron for reasons 1.4
(b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary: The head of Peace Now told Embassy econoff
that he welcomed the PM's initiative calling for the
unilateral dismantling of settlements in the Gaza Strip and
some in the West Bank. Peace Now is skeptical, however,
about the PM's seriousness and cautioned the U.S. to look at
the actions of this government rather than the words. The
organization does not foresee the imminent demise of the
government coalition despite the harsh rhetoric from those
within the government who oppose the plan. Peace Now
predicts those in opposition to the plan will wait until the
PM takes an irrevocable step before quitting the government,
such as the ordering of the evacuation of a settlement or
large occupied outpost. End summary.


2. (C) The General Secretary of Peace Now, Yariv
Oppenheimer, told Embassy econoff on February 25 that his
organization is taking a wait and see approach to the PM's
unilateral disengagement plan. Oppenheimer said the hallmark
of Sharon's settlement policy has been "positive rhetoric,
backed up by little action on the ground." Oppenheimer
remarked that had the PM taken already promised action
against the outposts there would be few outposts remaining.
Oppenheimer remarked that the government's unofficial motto
to the settlers is "see what I do, not what I say."
Oppenheimer speculated that the PM may have made the decision
to announce the unilateral disengagement plan for any number
of reasons, including: to divert attention from his ongoing
legal troubles; to staunch the negative tide of international
pressure caused by the seam-zone barrier; to appear to the
Israeli public as having a long-term strategy; or because he
really believes this is the best option at this time.
Oppenheimer suggested that the real answer is probably a
combination of these factors, but cautioned against expecting
action any time soon.


3. (C) Oppenheimer was upbeat about the effect that the
announcement has had upon the Israeli public. During last
year's election the Likud "successfully painted Mitzna
(former Labor party leader) as naive for proposing this
plan," Oppenheimer said. "Now, this same plan is being
introduced by Sharon." Oppenheimer highlighted the widely
reported poll in the nation's largest independent newspaper,
Yediot Aronoth, which claimed that three-quarters of the
Israeli population support a unilateral withdrawal from the
Gaza Strip settlements. According to Oppenheimer, it will be
very difficult for the national consensus to walk away from
the concept of withdrawing from the Gaza Strip settlements
now that their "architect is on board." Sharon, he said, has
made the idea of unilateral settlement withdrawal a centrist
philosophy again.


4. (C) Oppenheimer said he has been stunned by the low key
response to the initiative from settlement leaders. He
perceived the settler's march to the PM's office last week,
their current vigil outside the Knesset, and statements by
their leadership as perfunctory, lacking the fire and numbers
that were typical of protests at the start of the Oslo
Accords. Oppenheimer speculated that the reason for this low
key response could be three-fold; the Gaza Strip settlements
are small, holding little spiritual or historic value to most
Israelis; the majority of settlers in the West Bank have
resigned themselves to the possibility of Gaza settlements
being evacuated; and/or the settlers are skeptical about
whether Sharon is committed.


5. (C) When asked about whether the settlement withdrawal
plan could initiate the fall of the current government
coalition, Oppenheimer said that he believed it unlikely that
either the National Religious Party (NRP) or National Union
would leave the government before an irrevocable step was
taken. Only the dismantlement of a settlement or serious
action against large occupied outposts would cause these
parties to abandon their current posts. Oppenheimer
predicted that the leadership of these parties will denounce
a PM visit to the U.S. to gain support for the plan, but will
stop short of leaving the government. Oppenheimer stressed
that ministers Eitam, Elon, Lieberman, Katz, and other
settlement supporters in the government are being given a
virtual free hand to continue settlement activity, at the
mere cost of the PM's verbal statements to the U.S. These
ministers know that if they quit the government, their
replacements (probably the Labor party) will freeze most
settlement activity, Oppenheimer said. He concluded that
"they will wait until the last possible moment before leaving
the government."


6. (C) Comment: We agree with Oppenheimer's analysis,
despite Lieberman's threats to the contrary, that the NRP and
National Union will remain in the government as long as they
can still credibly claim to their constituents that they are
using their positions to foil the PM's disengagement
impulses. The GOI continues to provide funding and
assistance for settlement activity and drag its feet on the
removal of all outposts established after March 2001. NRP
and National Union can argue reasonably to their constituents
that this would not be possible if they left the government.
End comment.

********************************************* ********************
Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website:
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv

You can also access this site through the State Department's
Classified SIPRNET website.
********************************************* ********************
KURTZER