Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06TELAVIV1315
2006-04-03 14:46:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Tel Aviv
Cable title:  

GOI MAY PLAN TO RETROACTIVELY APPROVE SOME OUTPOSTS

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 001315 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/03/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV KWBG IS SETTLEMENTS ISRAELI PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS
SUBJECT: GOI MAY PLAN TO RETROACTIVELY APPROVE SOME OUTPOSTS

REF: A. TEL AVIV 1163

B. TEL AVIV 1065

C. TEL AVIV 0940

Classified By: Ambassador Richard H. Jones for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 001315

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/03/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV KWBG IS SETTLEMENTS ISRAELI PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS
SUBJECT: GOI MAY PLAN TO RETROACTIVELY APPROVE SOME OUTPOSTS

REF: A. TEL AVIV 1163

B. TEL AVIV 1065

C. TEL AVIV 0940

Classified By: Ambassador Richard H. Jones for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (U) This message contains an action request. See
paragraph 7.


2. (C) Summary: A March 21 article in the Jerusalem Post
claimed that senior GOI officials are considering a proposal
to retroactively authorize ten illegal West Bank outposts
that would remain under Israeli control under a future
unilateral disengagement plan. The outpost authorizations
are supposedly part of Kadima's plan for unilateral
disengagement, announced by Avi Dichter weeks ago. Despite
denials from MOD officials, who characterized the piece as
disinformation, Post believes that the article may be a trial
balloon, which the U.S. should seek to deflate. End summary.

--------------
Rumors of Retroactive
Outpost Approvals
--------------


3. (C) The Jerusalem Post on March 21 reported that senior
GOI officials are discussing a plan to retroactively
authorize ten illegal outposts in the West Bank. According
to the article, the outposts must fall inside settlement
blocs that Israel intends to "keep" if the GOI undertakes
another unilateral disengagement in the near future. The
article names two outposts as Aloney Shilo and Nof Kana, near
Qarney Shomrom settlement in the Ariel bloc, as well as
unnamed outposts near Ofra and Bet El in the central West
Bank. (Note: Aloney Shilo and Nof Kana are different names
for a single outpost, not two separate outposts, according to
both the USG and IDF. This may be a misprint in the article.
End note.) The article did not name any other outposts for
consideration, so it is unclear whether the GOI would
retroactively authorize pre- or post-March 2001 outposts.


4. (U) In exchange for approval of these outposts, Israel
expects the settlers to voluntarily evacuate from other
outposts throughout the West Bank, according to the article.
GOI officials claim that negotiations on such a deal between
the government and settler leaders are ongoing, but Emily
Amrusi, spokeswoman for the YESHA Council, denied the
allegations.

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

GOI Denies the Plan
--------------


5. (C) Brigadier General (ret.) Baruch Spiegel, Ministry of
Defense (MOD) advisor, told Economic Counselor on March 23
that the information presented in the article was not true,
and characterized it as "disinformation." Lt. Col. Oded
Herman, who works for Spiegel, said that the GOI recognizes
that it has commitments to the USG to remove all 24
post-March 2001 outposts, that his office has orders to plan
for the removal of these outposts, and that the IDF will
start to implement the plan after the elections. (Note: The
USG counts 44 post-March 2001 outposts. End note.)

--------------
But If It's True?
--------------


6. (C) Notwithstanding Spiegel's and Herman's denials of the
report, Post believes that this announcement may be a trial
balloon, which the USG should seek to deflate. The outpost
of Aloney Shilo/Nof Kana, near Qarney Shomrom settlement, is
in the Ariel bloc, and on land Israel might well seek to
retain in permanent status negotiations, but chances for its
success in this regard are questionable. The other outposts
cited in the article as being near Ofra and Bet El
settlements are even more problematic. Ofra and Bet El are
nowhere near the separation barrier; they are slightly
northeast of Ramallah in the middle of the central West Bank.
The GOI is likely considering these outposts, despite their
distance from the barrier, because they have been included in
descriptions of Kadima's plans for a second unilateral
disengagement as announced by former Shin Bet Director Avi
Dichter several weeks ago. Dichter, rumored as a possible
defense minister in the new government, said that the GOI
would keep Ma'ale Adumim, Ariel, Gush Etzion, Qedumim,
Ofra-Bet El, and Hebron-Qiryat Arba.

--------------
Comment and Action Request
--------------


7. (C) Ultimately this speaks to the greater issue of
Kadima's plan for unilateral disengagement and declaration of
the separation barrier as a final border. The GOI has never
negotiated the route of the separation barrier with the
Palestinian Authority (PA) and, with Hamas now in charge of
the PA, Kadima seriously doubts it will ever be able to.
Hence, it hopes to gain international supporters, starting
with the U.S., for a unilateral approach recognizing "facts
on the ground." Some in Kadima may see approving outposts
retroactively in advance of a campaign for international
support as a convenient way of quietly adding to such ground
facts. Laying down a marker now that the U.S. continues to
expect Israel to abide fully by its commitments to us on
outposts may be a way of dissuading them from embarking on a
strategy which will only complicate matters for us now and
make it harder for them to gain international support when
the time comes. We request approval to use the following
talking points with appropriate GOI officials:

-- We have noted a recent article in the Jerusalem Post
alleging plans to retroactively authorize ten illegal West
Bank outposts that the GOI would treat as part of Israel
under a future unilateral disengagement plan.

-- As you know, Israel and the United States have an
understanding regarding outposts. The U.S. continues to
abide by this understanding and calls on Israel to do so as
well.

-- Efforts to change retroactively the status of outposts
would complicate our mutual efforts to gain international
support for isolating Hamas and should be avoided.

********************************************* ********************
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.
********************************************* ********************
JONES