ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 08 TEL AVIV 000752

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:
--------------

Mideast

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

All media led with reports that PM Sharon and PA
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) are expected to
issue separate statements at today's Sharm el-Sheikh
summit to put an end to over four years of violence.
The major newspapers' front pages are adorned in the
style befitting festive occasions. Banners in Yediot:
"New Hope," Maariv: "Summit of Hope," and Hatzofe:
"Summit of Declarations." Maariv highlighted Israel's
hope that the peace declarations would lead to actions.

All media quoted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as
saying at the close of her visit in the region that Lt.
Gen. William E. (Kip) Ward (whom a Maariv headline dubs
a "champion in the struggle against terror, and a
rookie in the Middle East") has been appointed the
United States' security coordinator, but not political
arbitrator, in the region, in which capacity he will
assist the rehabilitation of the Palestinian security
services, encourage greater Israeli-Palestinian
security coordination, and, if necessary, head
trilateral security coordination. Ward will also
remain in contact with Egypt and Jordan, both of which
will be involved in Israeli-Palestinian security
arrangements. Rice said that Ward's mandate was
security-related because progress on security is a
precondition for progress in other areas. Ha'aretz
notes that Israeli officials were pleased both by the
choice of Ward and by his limited mandate -- focused on
security only, and with emphasis on the Palestinian
side.

Ha'aretz reported that Secretary Rice delivered
invitations to both Sharon and Abbas during her visit
in the region, and on Monday expressed confidence that
the Sharm el-Sheikh summit would succeed. Ha'aretz
quoted President Bush as saying Monday that he hopes to
meet with the new Palestinian leadership in the White
House this spring to discuss ways of furthering Israeli-
Palestinian negotiations. Bush praised Abbas, who he
said received an electoral mandate from many
Palestinians and enjoyed his public's confidence.

Leading media (principally Ha'aretz) reported that on
Monday, the U.S. administration released details of the
increased aid that President Bush promised the PA last
week. The White House has asked Congress to release
USD 40 million immediately. Of this, USD 8 million
will be earmarked for assistance to the private sector,
USD 3 million for health care, and USD 13 million for
improving the PA's water infrastructure; the remainder
will be devoted to higher education, community services
and job creation. The White House is also requesting
USD 200 million for renovating houses in Gaza,
rehabilitating the Palestinian economy, facilitating
cargo transfers between Israel and the PA and improving
healthcare and welfare. The newspaper says that Bush
also plans to ask Congress for USD 150 million for the
PA in 2006.

Hatzofe reported that at the security talks with the
Palestinians, Israel rejected a Palestinian request to
resume the "safe passage" procedure between the Gaza
Strip and the West Bank. The newspaper reported that
the GOI is inclined to return VIP passes to senior
Palestinians, which Israel confiscated around four
years ago.

Ha'aretz reported that Egypt is offering to position
3,000-3,500 additional policemen at its border with the
Gaza Strip in order to prevent arms smuggling. The
newspaper cited Israel's suspicious attitude regarding
the proposal. Hatzofe reported that on Wednesday, the
Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee will
discuss anti-Semitic incitement in Egypt.

Ha'aretz reported that the government plans to employ a
parliamentary maneuver to get the disengagement bill
through the Knesset Finance Committee this week. All
media reported that Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv,
spiritual leader of the Lithuanian stream of ultra-
Orthodox Judaism, on Monday instructed Degel Hatorah
Knesset members within the United Torah Judaism party
to vote in favor of holding a referendum on the
disengagement plan. Maariv reported that an associate
of Rabbi Elyashiv hinted that he only wanted to avoid a
situation in which a UTJ representative would determine
the vote at the Finance Committee. However, Ha'aretz
noted that there is still no Knesset majority for
passing the necessary legislation.

Ha'aretz quoted a senior Israeli security official as
saying Monday that Israel will evacuate settlement
outposts in the West Bank only after implementation of
the disengagement from the Gaza Strip and the northern
West Bank.

Jerusalem Post quoted Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz,
following a meeting with Secretary Rice on Monday, as
saying that a military strike against nuclear targets
was not on the agenda. Mofaz said: "I think we see eye-
to-eye [with the U.S.] that the diplomatic path is the
correct one at this time. We did not speak of other
options."

Leading media reported that far-right militants failed
to get elected at Monday's elections for the Likud
secretariat, which is considered the party's most

SIPDIS
influential body.

A Yediot/Mina Zemach (Dahaf Institute) poll:
-"What is your position on the disengagement plan?"
Fairly positive: 21 percent; absolutely positive: 48
percent; absolutely opposed: 18 percent; somewhat
opposed: 9 percent.
-"Do you think Palestinian prisoners, including those
who murdered Israelis (those with 'blood on their
hands'),should be released?" Those 'with blood on
their hands' may be released, but only if they are old
or sick: 21 percent; prisoners yes, but not those 'with
blood on their hands': 46 percent; they should not be
released at all: 31 percent.
-"Is Israel headed for a period of security calm? Are
you optimistic?" Rather optimistic: 48 percent; very
optimistic 13 percent; very pessimistic: 27 percent;
rather pessimistic: 23 percent.
-"Abu Mazen proclaims that he intends to bring about a
halt to the terrorist attacks. Do you believe him?"
Tend to believe him 36 percent; believe him 24 percent;
don't believe him 27 percent; tend not to believe him
10 percent.
-"Should a referendum be held on the withdrawal from
the Gaza Strip and northernmost part of the West Bank?"
Think there is a need: 20 percent; certain there is a
need: 35 percent; certain there is no need: 27 percent;
think there is no need: 16 percent.

Erratum: In the Feb. 7 Media Reaction report, the
findings of the Tel Aviv University's Peace Index poll
conducted among Israeli Jews on January 31-February 1
should have read:
-77 percent support negotiations with the Palestinians;
51 percent (not 31 percent) believe they will lead to
peace in the next few years.

--------------
Mideast:
--------------

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

Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized: "U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's visit to Israel

SIPDIS
and the Palestinian Authority brought with it a renewal
of U.S. involvement in the effort to solve the
conflict, after a long period in which it was absent
from the region."

Liberal op-ed writer Ofer Shelach commented in the
editorial of mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot
Aharonot: "Are the two peoples, intertwined in a bloody
100-year conflict, capable of starting a process toward
an agreement without ... a 'leap of faith'?"
Senior columnist Nahum Barnea wrote on page one of
Yediot Aharonot: "Everything that is happening and will
happen in the months ahead between Israel and the
Palestinians, between Israel and the Americans, between
Israel and the world, is dependent on Ariel Sharon."

Diplomatic correspondent Ben Caspit wrote on page one
of popular, pluralist Maariv: "This [summit] will be a
light, distilled sample of peace. One moment of
sanity. A small promo of normality."

Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized:
"Showering Abbas with 'help' will have the opposite of
the intended effect if such help is not made
conditional on concrete results."

Security and intelligence affairs commentator Amit
Cohen wrote in Maariv: "The question is whether the
Israelis and the Palestinians are going to Sharm el-
Sheikh to bury their differences or only to build up
their strength for the next round of violence."

Nationalist columnist Emuna Elon wrote in Yediot
Aharonot: "The only problem is that Palestinian logic
remains different from ours, and so on and so forth
until we wise up."

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


I. "Rice Adopts the Disengagement"

Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized
(February 8): "U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice's visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority
brought with it a renewal of U.S. involvement in the
effort to solve the conflict, after a long period in
which it was absent from the region.... The U.S. will
avoid mediation at this point, but will help find
solutions for problems that arise. Rice also made
clear the determined support of the U.S. for the
disengagement plan.... In her talks with the political
echelon in Jerusalem, Rice emphasized the importance of
sticking to the timetable set for the disengagement and
called for it not to be delayed.... Rice's statements
are an important message to the Israeli public and
political arena. In U.S. eyes, the disengagement plan
is not an internal Israeli affair but a far-reaching
international commitment by the government that bears
within it a chance for a historic change in the history
of the region, and for relations between Israel and the
Arabs. This opportunity must not be missed.... Sending
Lt. Gen. William Ward to the region as a security
coordinator to accompany the Palestinian security
reforms and monitor the activities of both sides is
proper and appropriate. One of the lessons of the Oslo
process and the Intifada was the need for a critical
eye, which could demand of the Israelis and
Palestinians that they keep their promises. At
Israel's request, the envoy's mandate will focus on
security arrangements in this current prologue period
before the start of the road map. One can expect that
the monitoring mechanisms will expand in the future,
but for now the Americans preferred to accede to the
Israeli request to help Sharon successfully accomplish
the disengagement."

II. "A Leap of Faith"

Liberal op-ed writer Ofer Shelach commented in the
editorial of mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot
Aharonot (February 8): "Ever since the Sharm el-Sheikh
summit was declared, the leaderships in Jerusalem and
in Ramallah have been careful to paint it in shades of
gray. Israel depicts it as a ceremony that it has
practically been forced into, without the American
boss.... Israelis and Palestinians have remained, even
in the days filled with the greatest hope, suspicious
of each other.... But at this time, as the leaders
meet, the question if there is any other way still
hovers in the air. Are the two peoples, intertwined in
a bloody 100-year conflict, capable of starting a
process toward an agreement without such a 'leap of
faith'?.... Sharon will not give a moving speech today,
like those that Yitzhak Rabin would make. The
Palestinian leader will not talk about a 'peace of the
brave.' Sharon and Abu Mazen are not great orators,
who can move people with their vision. Their peoples,
whose wounds are still bleeding, do not want to hear
about a tomorrow in which the army removes its uniform
and our hearts stand at attention [words from a Hebrew
song]. But even so, it is still not just another day.
And despite this unwillingness, it is very unlikely if
it will ever be possible to bridge the abyss in one
leap, high above the lack of trust."

III. "Good-Bye Intifada, Good Morning Conflict"

Senior columnist Nahum Barnea wrote on page one of
Yediot Aharonot (February 8): "The four leaders who
will pose for a joint picture in Sharm el-Sheikh today
will convey, by the fact of their presence there, the
following message: the old Intifada, the Intifada of
terror, is over. The new era will be a lot more
complex. It will include unilateral steps along with
the signs of negotiations and along with outbursts of
violence and terror.... Sharon does not intend to bring
gifts to Sharm el-Sheikh. He will bring the news of
the release of 900 prisoners that was approved by the
security cabinet, and will suffice with that. From the
Palestinians' perspective, this is a disappointment.
The gap between Sharon and Abu Mazen is not just over
the size of the gestures. It applies to almost every
issue on the agenda. The battlefield is the U.S.
administration, international public opinion and public
opinion in Israel. The big question is whether it will
be possible to wage this battle over time without
falling into the trap of violence. There are a number
of positive signs on the ground. First, the drastic
drop in terror. Even if this is temporary, it allows
both sides to gather strength.... The absence of
[Israeli] ministers at Sharm el-Sheikh highlights just
how much disengagement, and everything that is
happening and will happen in the months ahead between
Israel and the Palestinians, between Israel and the
Americans, between Israel and the world, is dependent
on Ariel Sharon. This is an enormous burden. He
prefers to bear it alone."

IV. "In Front of Everyone"

Diplomatic correspondent Ben Caspit wrote on page one
of popular, pluralist Maariv (February 8): "This
[summit] will be a light, distilled sample of peace.
One moment of sanity. A small promo of normality. It
is not yet clear whether Abu Mazen is capable of doing
something real against Hamas.... It is not clear
whether Abu Mazen has a chance, but what is clear that
positive energy is building up from people in all
quarters who want a little peace and quiet. Today
Sharon will try to give it a chance, even though he is
skeptical, apprehensive, suspicious and quick-tempered.
A huge wave of expectations is rising up in front of
him. Sharon will be happy to splash about in it, to
quench his thirst. The real test will begin on the
morning after, when he will have to match reality [with
the expectations], to coordinate the intentions, to
overcome the obstacles and cross the canals. All that
still lies ahead of us.... The road will still be hard.
But it too has to begin with one small step."


V. "How This Summit Could Be Different"

Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized
(February 8): "Why are we asked to believe this time
will be different? Two reasons, presumably: the death
of Yasser Arafat and general Palestinian exhaustion.
These fundamental factors should indeed provide some
basis to build something new. Yet there are some
lessons from past hopeful moments that should be
learned to help ensure that this one is not
squandered.... It is not enough to let the terrorists
take a break, while leaving intact the moral and
physical infrastructure that supports them....
Terrorists will not be stopped by throwing money at the
Palestinian Authority, or by 'helping Abu Mazen' by
releasing prisoners.... This time, as in the past,
Israel will doubtless release prisoners, pull back its
forces, stop running after wanted terrorists, release
funds, remove checkpoints and welcome more Palestinian
workers. But if this time is to be different, the
Palestinian claim that Israel has not done enough of
all these things should not be accepted as an excuse
for the PA not doing what it can and must do.
Showering Abbas with 'help' will have the opposite of
the intended effect if such help is not made
conditional on concrete results."

VI. "Enough Blood Has Been Shed"

Security and intelligence affairs commentator Amit
Cohen wrote in Maariv (February 8): "If all the hopes
of the past few days are realized in full, and if there
is no last-minute hitch, it will happen today: the two
sides will announce a ceasefire. This time, it is to
be hoped, it will be genuine and durable.... But after
such a long conflict, the mutual distrust between the
two sides still poses a serious problem. This will not
be solved at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit by a mere
declaration that the violence is over. In return for
the things which Israel is demanding, the Palestinians
are demanding the ultimate gesture -- release of
murderers. Every time the issue is raised, the
Palestinians cite what happened in Northern Ireland and
South Africa, to show that the policy contributes to
genuine reconciliation. But the question is whether
the Israelis and the Palestinians are going to Sharm el-
Sheikh to bury their differences or only to build up
their strength for the next round of violence."

VII. "And So On and So Forth Until We Wise Up"

Nationalist columnist Emuna Elon wrote in Yediot
Aharonot (February 8): "To evaluate whether something
good is indeed about to happen this time, we must
examine why nothing good came out of the previous 'new
eras,' and the answer, 'Yasser Arafat,' is not enough.
Arafat did not destroy the Israeli dreams of peace on
his own, and his death did not disarm the battalions of
terror who control Judea, Samaria and Gaza [i.e. the
territories]. Sharon's withdrawal from Gush Katif and
from northern Samaria [i.e. the northernmost part of
the West Bank] is also not enough: the present Intifada
in fact broke out, let us not forget, when Ehud Barak
was about to withdraw from much more territory....
Western logic led to the conception of 'land for peace'
and to the vision of a Palestinian state on both sides
of Israel (in Judea and Samaria and in Gaza). Today
Israeli logic contends that terror will stop if we only
stop annoying the Palestinians and getting them to hit
back at us, if we only release more murderers, if we
just stop 'occupying' our land. The only problem is
that Palestinian logic remains different from ours, and
so on and so forth until we wise up."

KURTZER