ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 TEL AVIV 001870

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA, NEA/IPA, NEA/PPD

WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESS OFFICE, SIT ROOM
NSC FOR NEA STAFF

JERUSALEM ALSO FOR ICD
LONDON ALSO FOR HKANONA AND POL
PARIS ALSO FOR POL
ROME FOR MFO
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: IS KMDR MEDIA REACTION REPORT
SUBJECT: ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

--------------
SUBJECTS COVERED IN THIS REPORT:
--------------


1. Mideast


2. Israel-Chad Relations

--------------
Key stories in the media:
--------------

All media continued to report on the upcoming Knesset
votes on the issues of a popular referendum, which is
not likely to be adopted even if Shas party mentor
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef endorses the idea of a referendum,
and the state budget. The latter vote was practically
decided in an agreement reached between PM Sharon and
Shinui party leader MK Yosef (Tommy) Lapid on Saturday,
according to which Lapid guaranteed his party's support
for the budget in exchange for 700 million additional
shekels, notably for higher education.

Ha'aretz quoted Sharon as saying at Sunday's cabinet
meeting: "We can't expect to receive explicit American
agreement to build freely in the settlements. Sharon
reportedly said that large settlement blocs in the West
Bank "will remain in Israel's hands and will fall
within the [separation] fence, and we made this
position clear to the Americans. This is our position,
even if they express reservations." Sharon allegedly
said that the U.S. administration make a distinction
between his position on the matter and the issues of
continued construction in the settlements at the
present phase. Sharon further said that the publicity
about the plan to connect Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem
put the U.S. in a very difficult spot. Sharon was
quoted as saying in an interview with Ha'aretz printed
Sunday that the agreement with the U.S. on the
settlements bloc remains firm. Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice was quoted as reiterating in an
interview with Israel Radio on Saturday President
Bush's promises to Sharon and as saying that the
President "strongly supports" the Prime Minister's
disengagement plan. In the interview, Rice went
further than the vague wording of Bush's letter and
made it clear that the term "Israeli population
centers" refers directly to the "large settlement
blocs."

Israel Radio quoted GOI sources as saying that far-
right activists could try to disrupt Sharon's upcoming
trip to the U.S. through actions in Israel.

Jerusalem Post quoted Sharon as saying at the cabinet
meeting Sunday that the leak of Ambassador Daniel
Kurtzer's recent comment to Foreign Ministry cadets was
nothing less than an attempt to bring down the Israeli
government. On Sunday, Maariv cited similar remarks
Sharon made in an interview with the newspaper.
Leading media quoted Sharon as saying that the report
was an attempt to harm him. Jerusalem Post quoted
Sharon as saying at the cabinet meeting: "It saddens me
that, because of internal intrigue, diplomatic
relations are damaged." Israel Radio reported that FM
Silvan Shalom has asked for an investigation into the
identity of the person who leaked to Yediot information
from Ambassador's Kurtzer's meeting with Foreign
Ministry cadets. The radio reported that on Sunday,
A/G Menachem Mazuz ruled out a criminal investigation,
and quoted Civil Service Commissioner Shmuel Hollander
as saying that as long as the Foreign Ministry has not
lodged an official claim in the matter, there will be
no disciplinary investigation either.

Israel Radio reported that last night there were
exchanges of fire between the IDF and Islamic Jihad
militants in Jenin, eight of whom were arrested. The
station says that the group tried to manufacture high-
trajectory missiles. Leading media reported that
Israel suspects the members of the PA's military
intelligence service were involved in smuggling
shoulder-launched Strela antiaircraft missiles into the
Gaza Strip.

During the weekend, all media reported that on Friday,
around 100 residents of the West Bank settlement of
Yitzhar who celebrated Purim attacked Palestinians and
IDF soldiers.

On Sunday, Maariv cited the IDF's concern that less
than a week after Israel handed over security
responsibility of Tulkarm to the PA, it has become a
"city of refuge" for terrorists.

Maariv reported that Israel Military Industries (IMI)
and Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) signed an
agreement Sunday to jointly develop and market precise
artillery rockets with a 150-km range.

On Sunday, Maariv reported that a judge at the Tel Aviv
District Court ordered the operators of the Dimona
nuclear reactor to divulge classified information about
radiation levels from the reactor.

--------------

1. Mideast:
--------------

Summary:
--------------

Editor-in-Chief Amnon Dankner wrote in popular,
pluralist Maariv: "Whoever tripped up ... Yediot
Aharonot with this report had ... clear intentions: to
create a tremendous uproar in which Sharon would be
accused of having persuaded members of his party to
support disengagement on the basis of American
commitments that actually do not exist."
Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized:
"President Bush should do more than hint that it
'seems' that Palestinians have no right to move to
Israel; the sooner the U.S. starts saying so clearly
and unabashedly, the sooner Palestinians will start
abandoning such unacceptable positions themselves."

Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in
independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz: "Once again, Sharon
came out on top, and paid neither a domestic nor an
international price for his critical decisions to
strengthen the 'blocs.'"

Diplomatic correspondent Alexander Maistrovoy wrote in
popular, pluralist Russian-language Novosty Nedely:
"The 'tahdi'a's' durability seems to be dubious....
Should Israel decline the Palestinians' demands, Hamas
would definitely return to the track of war with ... or
without Abu-Mazen as a formal leader."

Block Quotes:
--------------


I. "A Pure Fabrication"

Editor-in-Chief Amnon Dankner wrote in popular,
pluralist Maariv (March 27): "Never before has anything
like this happened: On the eve of one of the most
fateful political weeks in Israel's history, a large-
circulation newspaper threw out a main headline that
made a huge noise, but which principally was all just a
pure fabrication. Whoever tripped up Shimon Shiffer
and Yediot Aharonot with this report had, by all
indications, clear intentions: to create a tremendous
uproar in which Sharon would be accused of having
persuaded members of his party to support disengagement
on the basis of American commitments that actually do
not exist. Fact: U.S. Ambassador Kurtzer claims that
there are no understandings between Israel and the U.S.
on the matter of settlement blocs. Some of the top
Likud officials who were persuaded, already have
announced in the wake of this false report that they
are reconsidering their support. The person who leaked
the information achieved his goal. But what is the
truth? The truth is that in the transcript of the
statements made by Ambassador Kurtzer, the very same
transcript Yediot Aharonot flaunts and says 'we have
the full version,' shows that Ambassador Kurtzer made
no reference to that matter. Plain and simple. No
settlement blocs, no understandings or
misunderstandings about them, no commitments or the
lack thereof.... This quote ... created an enormous
political tempest over nothing.... Is it conceivable
that because of an incorrect report that is dealt with
irresponsibly, a stick will be stuck in the spokes of
the disengagement plan?.... The uproar ... was over
nothing. We can move on."

II. "The Kurtzer Flap"
Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized
(March 28): "There is no reason to believe that [U.S.
Ambassador to Israel Daniel] Kurtzer, a careful
diplomat, contradicted existing presidential
understandings. Since the Yediot [Aharonot] report,
both Kurtzer and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
have strongly reaffirmed Bush's April 14 letter. Yet
confusion remains, and it arises from the Bush letter
itself.... What is striking about both of these
statements is that the U.S. was careful not to take a
firm position on what it emphasizes are final-status
issues. In other words, the U.S. is saying to Israel
and the Palestinians, it is up to you to negotiate on
borders and refugees, but if anyone asks us, we will
probably back Israel on not returning completely to the
1967 lines and on not settling Palestinians in
Israel.... If Israel cannot show a tangible diplomatic
reward for disengagement, then disengagement can only
be perceived as a reward for four years of terrorist
attacks. Is it in the American interest, let alone
Israel's, to fuel such a perception, much less such a
reality?.... Israel, obviously, could not go to a final-
status negotiating table denying the Palestinians right
to a state. Yet the Palestinians are openly doing just
that to Israel when they claim a 'right' to move to
Jaffa, Acre and elsewhere in Israel. President Bush
should do more than hint that it 'seems' that
Palestinians have no right to move to Israel; the
sooner the U.S. starts saying so clearly and
unabashedly, the sooner Palestinians will start
abandoning such unacceptable positions themselves."

III. "Sharon, Bush and the Settlements"

Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in
independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz (March 27): "Sharon
is in a bind. He needs to show he is holding onto the
settlement blocs to avoid further desertions to the
Likud rebel camp. Yet on the foreign policy front, he
has had to keep a low profile on construction. But
according to statements by U.S. Ambassador Dan Kurtzer
to the mass-circulation Hebrew daily Yediot Aharonot,
there is no understanding between the U.S. and Israel
concerning the settlement blocs. Both left and right
rejoiced at the report -- here was the proof that
Sharon had lied and had received nothing from Bush in
return for the disengagement. Kurtzer subsequently
denied the report, reiterated the president's promise
regarding the settlement blocs, and praised Sharon's
credibility. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also
backtracked on her harsh criticism of the E-1 plan, and
in a Washington Post interview returned to ambiguous
requests for clarifications. Once again, Sharon came
out on top, and paid neither a domestic nor an
international price for his critical decisions to
strengthen the 'blocs.'"

IV. "The Price of a Cease-Fire"

Diplomatic correspondent Alexander Maistrovoy wrote in
popular, pluralist Russian-language Novosty Nedely
(March 24): A conditional Tahdi'a -- a cease-fire
limited in time ... declared by PA President Abu Mazen.
One can only guess what will be follow it.... IDF
Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon is not hiding his
suspicions about Hamas using the 'tahdi'a' for
regrouping and strengthening its forces before a new
twist in the conflict.... The 'tahdi'a's' durability
seems to be dubious. The terror will most probably
stop in the short term -- the period of disengagement
from Gaza and [withdrawal] from northern Samaria [the
northern West Bank], making Ariel Sharon's task much
easier. The question is for how long the current cease-
fire would make Israel's life easier.... Obviously,
the pressure on Israel for a final resolution [of the
conflict] would grow significantly after the
disengagement is completed. Should Israel decline the
Palestinians' demands, Hamas would definitely return to
the track of war with ... or without Abu Mazen as a
formal leader."

--------------

2. Israel-Chad Relations:
--------------

Summary:
--------------

Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized: "It's
important to renew relations with Chad.... Chad's
action might have a ripple effect."







Block Quotes:
--------------

"Chad As a Parable"

Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized (March
27): "Chad -- a majority of whose territory is desert
and about half of whose population of 9 million is
Muslim -- does not in and of itself constitute a
particularly important objective for Israeli foreign
policy. Nevertheless, it's important to renew
relations with Chad. If it goes through, Chad will
join Mauritania as a nation in the Sahara region that
maintains good diplomatic relations with Israel.
Chad's action might have a ripple effect. First of
all, its intention shows that its neighbor Libya --
which has tremendous influence over it (President Deby
came to power in 1991 with the support of Muammar
Qadhafi) -- is not opposed to ties with Israel. Until
now, the Foreign Ministry and the Mossad have been
greatly frustrated that recent positive signals from
Qadhafi have not resulted in concrete political action.
Relations with Chad could send a message to other
African countries, particularly those in the Maghreb,
to follow in Chad's footsteps. Important countries
outside Africa, too, might display interest in renewing
ties: the Foreign Ministry has been making a great
effort in recent months to persuade Muslim countries
such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia and Malaysia
to establish diplomatic relations."

KURTZER