ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 10 TEL AVIV 006884

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA, NEA/IPA, NEA/PPD

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

SECDEF WASHDC FOR USDP/ASD-PA/ASD-ISA
HQ USAF FOR XOXX
DA WASHDC FOR SASA
JOINT STAFF WASHDC FOR PA
USCINCCENT MACDILL AFB FL FOR POLAD/USIA ADVISOR
COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE FOR PAO/POLAD
COMSIXTHFLT FOR 019

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
Sunday-Monday, 11-12 December 2005


-------------- --------------
SUBJECT COVERED IN THIS REPORT:
-------------- --------------

1. US Pressures Israel on Safe Passage Agreement

2. Sharon's Kadima Political Moves

3. Israel and the Iranian Nuclear Program

4. Defense Establishment Expected View of Egypt

--------------
Key stories in the media:
--------------
The Army Radio reported Sunday morning that Defense
Minister Shaul Mofaz quit the Likud and joined Sharon's
Kadima Party. The move was met with a host of
criticism. Haaretz reported Monday that senior Kadima
members said the move was unnecessary and damaging for
the new party, harming its image. Likud's Netanyahu
said Kadima is conducting a political horse-trade and
introducing negative norms to Israeli politics. Senior
Likud MK Steinitz said Mofaz is an opportunist, just
like Peres. Labor spokesmen, according to Haaretz,
said this shows Kadima is a Likud replica, which should
help Labor, and Labor Chairman Peretz said Mofaz's move
is in line with the fact that Israeli politicians have
long lost their values.
Following a Sunday Times report that Prime Minister
Ari'el Sharon has ordered the IDF to prepare for an
attack on Iranian nuclear facilities in March 2006, the
Jerusalem Post reported on Sunday, 11 December that
Israeli officials declined to respond to the report
directly, but Sharon's spokesman Ra'anan Gissin did
say, "Israel has no intention of launching an attack
against Iran, definitely not before all diplomatic
options have been exhausted." He stressed that those
suggesting Israel will bomb Iran weren't helpful, in
part because they "exonerate the Europeans" from taking
action, "which is something we don't want to happen."
He described the Europeans as "the ones who hold most
of the cards to influence Iran." Maj. Gen. (Res.) Amos
Gilad, head of the Defense Ministry's Foreign Policy
Department, told Israel Radio Sunday that while a
military operation against Iran's nuclear facilities
could not be ruled out, the Sunday Times article that
Israel planned to attack Iran in March 2006 is false.
Deputy Prime Minister Olmert is cited in Maariv on
Monday as saying that though Israel is concerned, the
issue should be addressed by the UN and the
international community. NSC head Eiland told Maariv
the report is a baseless speculation, and Foreign
Minister Shalom added this problem should be resolved
in the political ring.

The Jerusalem Post reported Sunday that as US envoy
David Welch wrapped up his visit to the region
Saturday, Israel maintained its stance that Palestinian
convoys between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank are
unacceptable due to security concerns. "This prime
minister is not going to repeat the mistakes of the
past," when Israeli leaders turned "a blind eye" to PA
transgressions, said Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's
spokesman Ra'anan Gissin. He said there was no change
in Israel's policy on the convoys.

Haaretz reported Monday that Israel has pledged not to
impose a siege on the Gaza Strip that would prevent the
import and export of goods regardless of the political
situation. This appears in writing in a World Bank non-
paper drafted ahead of the donor countries' conference
in London Wednesday. Israel also pledged not to close
the Karni and Erez crossings at the same time, except
for security reasons involving both crossings. The
report added that the defense minister reported
yesterday that the decision to freeze contact with the
PA on the safe-crossing convoys between Gaza and the
West Bank is still in force.

In a related report, Haaretz said Sunday the US and the
Quartet members last weekend increased pressure on
Israel to complete the commitments it had undertaken in
the crossings agreement that was signed last month. A
political source estimated Sunday that if the next few
days are quiet, the crossing would open Thursday, with
an initial trial bus going from Gaza to the West Bank.
Senior Jerusalem political sources expressed concern
that if the defense establishment violates this
agreement, the donor countries' conference will
criticize Israel. The paper cites a recent report by
the World Bank, drafted ahead of the donor countries'
conference, that blames Israel for much of the economic
distress in the territories.

On Monday, Haaretz reported that the Israeli Foreign
Ministry is accusing the EU of violating the
international law by conducting contacts with Hizballah
and intending to establish links with Hamas.

Haaretz reported Monday that an armed Palestinian was
killed and two were wounded during an IDF operation in
Nablus. In a related story, Yediot Aharonot said
Monday that Hamas and the Islamic Jihad announced
yesterday they will not extend the cease-fire past
January 2006, having pledged to maintain it through the
end of 2005. Organization leaders are cited as saying
the move produced no positive results. PA Chairman Abu-
Mazen called on them to renew the cease-fire, while the
Israeli defense establishment estimates that the
Palestinian organizations will refrain from violence
only until the PA elections end and then resume their
terror attacks.
The Jerusalem Post reported Sunday that PA Chairman
Mahmud Abbas on Saturday criticized Palestinian groups
for launching rocket attacks on Israel, saying such
actions harmed Palestinian interests. However, Abbas
stopped short of promising to take any action against
those responsible for the rocket attacks. Abbas
reiterated his commitment to holding parliamentary
elections on time. Abbas's remarks came as Hamas
reaffirmed its adherence to the hudna, but on condition
that Israel halt its attacks. Egyptian intelligence
chief Gen. Omar Suleiman, who helped broker the first
truce earlier this year, was supposed to arrive in the
Palestinian territories last week, but has postponed
his visit because of the latest cycle of violence.
The Jerusalem Post reported Sunday that Palestinian
activists have filed civil lawsuits in the US against
former Shin Bet head Avi Dichter and former IDF chief
Moshe Ya'alon for alleged war crimes related to the
targeted killing of top Hamas terrorist Salah Shehade
three years ago. Both men are in the US at present.
A Yediot Aharonot report Monday said Israeli and Syrian
ambassadors in the UN offices in Geneva held direct
contact, with Pakistani mediation, in the wake of which
Israel withdrew its objection to having Syria become a
member of the "informal group of countries" that is
part of the World Trade Organization.
The Jerusalem Post reported Sunday that Egypt put its
installations along the Suez Canal on high alert over
the weekend after receiving warnings of a possible
terrorist attack by al-Qaida on ships in the strategic
waterway. The alert coincidentally followed a report
in The Jerusalem Post Friday that the Israeli Navy had
decided to avoid the Suez Canal out of concern its
vessels would be targets for Islamic Jihad terrorists.
Haaretz reported Sunday that hundreds of Golan Druze
and Israeli Arabs staged a demonstration Saturday in
support of Syria, due to the international pressure it
is under. This was the first stage operation by the
Golan-based National Committee for Identification with
Syria.


1. US Pressures Israel on Safe Passage Agreement

Summary
--------------
The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post
editorialized: "Israel entered into the Rafah agreement
with trepidation. But Washington's arm-twisting
convinced Jerusalem that cameras and computer data
streams would give Israeli security personnel
capability to monitor what was happening at the Gaza-
Sinai crossing. While the issue is disputed, Israel is
convinced that the PA is foot-dragging by not providing
the promised real-time flow, and that members of al-
Qaida and other Islamic terror groups have been allowed
to enter Gaza.. Having pressured Israel into a bad
agreement in the first place, Washington now insists
Jerusalem stick to it. It says Jerusalem is
exaggerating Palestinian non-compliance; that the video
and data issues are merely technical and anyway on the
way to being solved."

Bloc Quotes
--------------
"Unsafe Passage"

The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post
editorialized: "Israel entered into the Rafah agreement
with trepidation. But Washington's arm-twisting
convinced Jerusalem that cameras and computer data
streams would give Israeli security personnel
capability to monitor what was happening at the Gaza-
Sinai crossing. While the issue is disputed, Israel is
convinced that the PA is foot-dragging by not providing
the promised real-time flow, and that members of al-
Qaida and other Islamic terror groups have been allowed
to enter Gaza. The agreement also requires the PA to
prevent the movement of weapons and explosives into
Gaza. Yet large amounts of these have flowed in from
Sinai, at least before the crossing was formally
opened. On Saturday, the IDF uncovered a tunnel near
the northern Strip apparently intended for a terrorist
infiltration. On Friday a navy patrol boat intercepted
the third infiltration attempt by sea, in just 10 days,
from Egypt to Gaza. Part of the problem is the
agreement itself - which does not actually require the
PA to stop any terrorist just because Israel insists it
do so. Then there is the overall environment. Can
Israel abide by a paradoxical situation in which bus
convoys of Palestinians traverse the country even as
Palestinian missiles are being launched from Gaza, or
as Palestinian attackers stab soldiers at checkpoints
outside Jerusalem, or as suicide bombers slaughter
shoppers lining up to enter a Netanya mall? Sharon
told US envoy David Welch that if the Palestinians
persisted in their violent ways, Israel would not
permit the bus convoys and would even cease tariff
cooperation at the Karni and Erez crossings, forcing
the PA to pay for goods shipped via Israel. The US is
having none of this. Having pressured Israel into a
bad agreement in the first place, Washington now
insists Jerusalem stick to it. It says Jerusalem is
exaggerating Palestinian non-compliance; that the video
and data issues are merely technical and anyway on the
way to being solved."




2. Sharon's Kadima Political Moves

Summary
--------------
Independent, left-leaning Haaretz carries a commentary
by political analyst Yosi Verter saying: "Sharon wants
to smash the Likud, rip it apart, and leave nothing
behind. His resentment for the party he established
and had a hard time leaving knows no boundaries.
Mofaz' defection crumbled yet another stone. From now
on, it is the rebels' party (except for Foreign
Minister Shalom and MK Michael Eytan),which is exactly
how Sharon wanted it. He wished to shove the Likud to
the most extreme corner, to send it back to the times
when Herut under Menachem Begin was a marginal and
ridiculed party."

Bloc Quotes
--------------

"The Bulldozer's Revenge"

Independent, left-leaning Haaretz carries a commentary
by political analyst Yosi Verter saying: "Having been
immersed in a murky quagmire of denials, excuses, lies,
defections, and skips and hops, the Israeli political
system went out of its way yesterday to condemn Mofaz
[for quitting Likud and joining Kadima], but he took it
like a man. His political conduct over the past few
weeks was unprofessional. Following someone's advise,
he lashed at Sharon in front of every microphone and TV
camera, thus distancing himself from Sharon's
supporters among the Likud voters. Once he started
blabbering himself to death on the media, he turned
overnight from a practical and professional defense
minister, a natural Sharon ally, into just another
politician. Mofaz, however, is not the only problem.
Sharon and his big appetite is another major problem.
On Saturday night, three hours before Mofaz called
Sharon's ranch, one of the prime minister's aides said
there will be no more additions to the party. 'That's
it,' he said, 'we should make do with what we have and
move on.' The aide thought so, but his boss had
different ideas. Sharon wants to smash the Likud, rip
it apart, and leave nothing behind. His resentment for
the party he established and had a hard time leaving
knows no boundaries. Mofaz' defection crumbled yet
another stone. From now on, it is the rebels' party
(except for Foreign Minister Shalom and MK Michael
Eytan),which is exactly how Sharon wanted it. He
wished to shove the Likud to the most extreme corner,
to send it back to the times when Herut under Menachem
Begin was a marginal and ridiculed party. Sharon is
headed for that goal like a bulldozer, ignoring the
environmental damage.. Was Mofaz' joining Kadima too
excessive? Probably not. Kadima was not established
on his move and it would not make it fail. But Sharon
must learn some table manners. This is no way to
behave. It is not so terrible to leave something on
the plate."


3. Israel and the Iranian Nuclear Program

Summary
--------------

Ofer Shelach, liberal op-ed writes in Mass-circulation,
pluralist Yediot Aharonot:
"The army has never hidden the fact that it has a
response prepared to meet the Iranian threat. The IAF
has been training at long-range flights for years, and
a great deal of money has been invested in building the
long arm of the Air Force. To that end, the IAF
purchased special planes, espionage systems and
electronic warfare, while methods were developed and
acquired to allow for heavily protected sites to be
attacked. This process has been underway for more than
a decade... The Americans take a more realistic point
of view, which posits that it will take the Iranians
longer to complete the process. With that having been
said, the United States and Israel fully agree on the
severity of the Iranian threat, an agreement that
expressed itself in the annual strategic dialogue that
was recently held in Washington....The US
administration is troubled by the statements made by
Israeli officials about a possible attack."

Block quotes
--------------

"A Clear American Message"

Ofer Shelach, liberal op-ed writes in Mass-circulation,
pluralist Yediot Aharonot:
"We can safely venture that there is a group of unit
commanders in the IDF at large and in the IAF in
particular, flight squadron commanders and combat
troops who, if you were to wake them up in the middle
of the night and were to whisper the right code word in
their ear, would be on their way to Iran in no time.
The army has never hidden the fact that it has a
response prepared to meet the Iranian threat. The IAF
has been training at long-range flights for years, and
a great deal of money has been invested in building the
long arm of the Air Force. To that end, the IAF
purchased special planes, espionage systems and
electronic warfare, while methods were developed and
acquired to allow for heavily protected sites to be
attacked. This process has been underway for more than
a decade. The natural assumption is that the best
model for comparison's sake is the attack on the Iraqi
reactor. That is the model of action that appeared
yesterday in the Sunday Times. However, the IDF planner
would have to be a real amateur to believe that the
attack in Iraq could be reenacted-and the IDF planner
is no amateur. In 1981, all it took was eight F-16s
that made a surprise attack and destroyed a single
target. Israel issued no ultimatum, issued no warning;
and when it acted, it acted alone. Even its American
allies didn't know about the attack.... One of the
reasons that Israel has kept a low profile with regard
to military activity is so as not to dismantle that
coalition. That way an operation against Iran will not
be perceived as a "Zionist plot," but as a solution to
a world-wide problem. Nor will there be a strategic
surprise: any attack will be preceded by condemnation,
sanctions and ultimatums by the member countries of the
anti-Iranian coalition. Moreover, the attack in Iran
will not be aimed against a lone target, since Iran's
nuclear facilities are spread out all over the country.
The uranium is not being enriched in the nuclear
reactors but by means of well-hidden centrifuges. It
would be easy to rebuild those sites quickly, so that
attacking them might miss the mark and only encourage
the Iranians to seek revenge and to continue to pursue
their nuclear program with redoubled effort.... For
the time being, the Iranians have not reactivated their
centrifuges. Irrespective of whether the reason for
that is technical problems or international pressure,
it is only a matter of time before that equipment is
put back into use. From that moment on, the countdown
to the "point of no return" will begin-the point from
which Iran will be capable of manufacturing nuclear
weapons. Israeli officials say that the point of no
return is just a few months away from the moment the
centrifuges are reactivated. The United States says it
will take approximately two years. The disparity in
assessments stems from the fact that the Israelis opt
for the most extreme case scenario, in which the
Iranians quickly overcome all of the limitations and
technical difficulties they have encountered to date.
The Americans take a more realistic point of view,
which posits that it will take the Iranians longer to
complete the process. With that having been said, the
United States and Israel fully agree on the severity of
the Iranian threat, an agreement that expressed itself
in the annual strategic dialogue that was recently held
in Washington. That agreement notwithstanding, the US
administration is troubled by the statements made by
Israeli officials about a possible attack. For
instance, administration officials have heard formal
Israeli officials say that the diplomatic effort has
failed, and intuit that the second, unstated part of
that sentence comes in the form of a military
operation. In the current state of affairs, what with
the Iraqi house of cards on the verge of collapse, the
last thing the administration needs is an independent
Israeli operation in Iran. As such, it is safe to
assume that the messages the Americans have conveyed to
Israel about a possible Israeli military strike have
left no room for any misunderstanding. "


4. Defense Establishment Expected View of Egypt

Summary
--------------

Liberal op-ed columnist Ofer Shelah writes in
pluralist, mass-circulation Yediot Aharonot: "Although
the peace agreement with Egypt has been stable for a
quarter of a century, we are about to hear a lot of
warnings about Egypt. Why is that? Because our
traditional enemies, certainly those who had an army
that could have been presented as posing a threat to
Israel, are gradually vanishing. There is a fear here
that on the day we realize that we have built a massive
military force, at an enormous cost, one that has
excess force that faces zero-probability threats but
cannot guarantee a victory in the real campaigns --
because if the goals of wars are not defined, you can
never win them -- we will start asking too many
questions. It is much simpler, natural, and almost
obvious to warn us against the old devils. So, get
ready: you are going to hear a lot about Egypt next
year."

Bloc Quotes
--------------

"Get Ready for the Next Enemy"

Liberal op-ed columnist Ofer Shelah writes in
pluralist, mass-circulation Yediot Aharonot: "In the
coming year, you will hear a lot about Egypt. Despite
the surprising friendship between Prime Minister Ari'el
Sharon and Egyptian President Husni Mubarak (and some
speakers say because of it),despite the fact that
Egypt played a crucial role in the unwritten agreements
between Israel and Egypt that allowed for the current
lull, and although the peace agreement with Egypt has
been stable for a quarter of a century, we are about to
hear a lot of warnings about Egypt. Why is that?
Because our traditional enemies, certainly those who
had an army that could have been presented as posing a
threat to Israel, are gradually vanishing. Very few
Israelis believe the propaganda maneuvers concerning
Syria.. Although the defense establishment is bragging
a lot, we are gradually acknowledging the fact that an
Iranian threat exists, but its solution would not be
military.. And the Saudi threat is really not making
an impression. So only Egypt is left.. This is not a
conspiracy devised by the budget-thirsty defense
establishment. It follows from a worldview that is
fundamentally based on suspicion.. There is a fear
here that on the day we realize that we have built a
massive military force, at an enormous cost, one that
has excess force and faces zero-probability threats,
but cannot guarantee a victory in the real campaigns --
because if the goals of wars are not defined, you can
never win them -- we will start asking too many
questions. It is much simpler, natural, and almost
obvious to warn us against the old devils. So, get
ready: you are going to hear a lot about Egypt next
year."
JONES