ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS TEL AVIV 002398 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 CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL FOR POLAD/USIA ADVISOR COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE FOR PAO/POLAD COMSIXTHFLT FOR 019 JERUSALEM ALSO ICD LONDON ALSO FOR HKANONA AND POL PARIS ALSO FOR POL ROME FOR MFO SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR IS SUBJECT: ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION -------------- SUBJECTS COVERED IN THIS REPORT: -------------- Mideast -------------- Key Stories in the Media: -------------- Please note: Op Eds only August 6, 2007 -------------- Mideast: -------------- Summary: -------------- Palestinian affairs correspondent Danny Rubinstein wrote in the independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz: "In other words, all the current political activity is liable to turn out to be nothing but bunk. Ultimately, the opinion of many Palestinians will turn out to be right: If Hamas isn't in the game, there is no game." Defense commentator Amos Gilboa wrote in the popular, pluralist Maariv: "Therefore at the end of the day Israel cannot rely on Saudi Arabia to help with making arrangements with the Palestinians, certainly not on the strategic regional level." Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in the independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz: "In the past few days Jerusalem was busy lowering expectations, and Olmert's bureau said the leaders were not seeking to formulate an 'agreement of principles,' but rather 'agreed-on principles' -- which is the same thing, but less frightening. The bureau cautioned diplomatic correspondents not to get their hopes up." Contributor Yoram Meital, a specialist in Middle East affairs at Ben-Gurion University, wrote in the mass circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot: "The weakest point in the latest moves lies in the assumption that a political agreement on the future of the West Bank can be promoted with Abu Mazen and the Fayad government irrespective of what is happening in the Gaza Strip [under Hamas].... However, the national and political approach shared by the Palestinian public, including all of its factions, rules out such a separation." The independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized: " The question of when the Winograd Committee's report on the Second Lebanon War will be published has become a question of how relevant the report will be.... [It] must be published either in another few months - or not at all. Otherwise, it will mainly be useful for history lessons." Block Quotes: -------------- ¶I. "If Hamas isn't in the Game" Palestinian affairs correspondent Danny Rubinstein wrote in the independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz (08/06): "The Olmert government in Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, headed by Mahmoud Abbas, are in the midst of renewed political activity, encouraged by intensive American efforts.... Although there still are many problems in the field ... there certainly has been progress.... However, there is no doubt that Hamas is more capable of sabotaging Abbas' policy than it is of ruling. As long as the Hamas leadership has a hope of holding on in Gaza and of influence in the West Bank, there will be relative quiet. But when Hamas loses hope and it becomes clear that Abbas is far from achieving the minimum that the Palestinians are demanding, then the terrorism and violence almost certainly will be renewed. In other words, all the current political activity is liable to turn out to be nothing but bunk. Ultimately, the opinion of many Palestinians will turn out to be right: If Hamas isn't in the game, there is no game." II. "More Islamic than Western" Defense commentator Amos Gilboa wrote in the popular, pluralist Maariv (08/06): "If there is a prominent line in Israeli foreign policy since the Second Lebanon War, it is the special role assigned to Saudi Arabia in the Palestinian issue in particular, and in the 'moderate' Arab arena in general.... The Saudi influence should not be discounted, and it would be foolish not to understand that a country with one quarter of the proven oil reserves in the world, which is the leading oil exporter in the world, has what to say in the Arab world, and not only there. But it is necessary to understand the limitations and weaknesses of Saudi Arabia, and its problem with Israel.... Saudi Arabia may be a 'moderate' country, by being pro-American, but no more than this. It is an Islamic Sunni state of the extremist variety ... which still upholds the laws of Islam.... Saudi Arabia will be the last to recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people.... Needless to say, Saudi Arabia constitutes the largest human reserve of extremist Islamic terrorism.... Saudi Arabia has never been a leading country in the Arab world.... It will always prefer to embrace Iran than to clash with it, and will certainly not do so with the Jews!....Therefore at the end of the day Israel cannot rely on Saudi Arabia to help with making arrangements with the Palestinians, certainly not on the strategic regional level." III. "Don't get hopes up" Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in the independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz (08/05): "Seven years after the failed Camp David summit, and six and a half years after negotiations ended with the Taba talks, Israel has started talking with the Palestinians on a peace agreement again.... U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice gave the parties their homework during her visit last week: to reach an agreed-on diplomatic formula by November's Washington summit and to continue confidence-building gestures.... In the past few days Jerusalem was busy lowering expectations, and Olmert's bureau said the leaders were not seeking to formulate an 'agreement of principles,' but rather 'agreed-on principles' -- which is the same thing, but less frightening. The bureau cautioned diplomatic correspondents not to get their hopes up. Nevertheless, Rice heard a different tune this week in Jerusalem and Ramallah. Olmert agreed to a proposal raised a year ago by Rice and Livni to talk to Abbas and Palestinian moderates.... And Salam Fayad's appointment as prime minister has given Washington hope that something has changed for the better among the Palestinians. Experience teaches that the real bargaining will begin only in the days and hours running up to the summit, when Olmert and Abbas are already on their way to Washington." IV. "Not Without Gaza" Contributor Yoram Meital, a specialist in Middle East affairs at Ben-Gurion University, wrote in the mass circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot(08/06): "The meeting scheduled today between Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas will be added to the wave of diplomatic efforts to promote the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. State leaders from the West, from Israel and from Arab states link these efforts to the 'window of opportunity' that opened up after the violent takeover of the Gaza Strip by Hamas.... The weakest point in the latest moves lies in the assumption that a political agreement on the future of the West Bank can be promotQ with Abu Mazen and the Fayad government irrespective of what is happening in the Gaza Strip [under Hamas].... Can the West Bank really be divided from the Gaza Strip? Should a political agreement be promoted with a Palestinian leadership that commands limited public support, while blatantly disregarding Hamas, which rode to victory on popular support in the last election? There is no doubt that over the years, a different reality has developed in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. However, the national and political approach shared by the Palestinian public, including all of its factions, rules out such a separation. The chances are also slim that gestures and channeling funds to the residents of the West Bank and 'drying up' the Gazans will lead to a change of consciousness, in which the Palestinians will settle for a 'mini-state' in part of the West Bank, which will be led by non-elected governments." ¶V. "Will Winograd be Relevant?" The independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized (08/06): "The question of when the Winograd Committee's report on the Second Lebanon War will be published has become a question of how relevant the report will be.... The current government has no interest in prompt publication of the final Winograd report.... We must not forget the purpose for which the committee was established. It is not conducting a criminal investigation, which has rigid rules, nor is it probing allegations that could lead to criminal charges, since itQranted immunity to everyone who appeared before it. The committee's report is supposed to provide an understanding of what happened and to enable conclusions to be drawn. A committee of this type cannot be turned into a commission of inquiry halfway through.... The attempt to impose obligations on the committee that exist neither in the law nor in its letter of appointment is liable to make its conclusions irrelevant. The final report must be published either in another few months - or not at all. Otherwise, it will mainly be useful for history lessons." JONES