ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS TEL AVIV 001326

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


1. PM Netanyahu's Speech


2. Iran


3. Mideast
Block Quotes Only:
--------------

1. PM Netanyahu's Speech



I. "Netanyahu's revolution"

Ari Shavit, senior commentator, wrote in the independent,
left-leaning Ha'aretz (6/18): "A week ago my piece about the
seven-word formula - a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside a
Jewish Israeli state - appeared on this page. Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu adopted this formula, making it the cornerstone
of Israeli policy.... However, he added two fundamental elements to
the formula: a solid international guarantee that the Palestinian
state is indeed demilitarized, and a clear Palestinian recognition
of Israel's being a Jewish state....He decided to break out of the
corner and take the initiative. Netanyahu accepted the principle of
dividing the land in a controlled manner to avoid an imposed
partition. In order to prevent a swift, dangerous retreat to the
1967 borders he proposed a painful compromise. Thus he found himself
uttering the two taboo words he had sworn he would never say:
Palestinian state.... He realized that neither the world nor the
Israeli public understand what Israel is fighting over....
Netanyahu grasped that when the battle line is the occupation and
the settlements, Israel is in an inferior position.... Unlike them
he is not trying to engineer a practical arrangement, but rather to
establish peace on a clear, solid ideological foundation. ... He may
or may not succeed.... He might lead the country to peace, or bring
it to war. But he made a move of revolutionary significance.
Netanyahu not only took a courageous personal step, he generated an
intellectual, ideological turnabout. With the seven-word formula he
changed the discourse on the conflict from its very foundations. He
set an unprecedented challenge before the Palestinian nation and the
international community. After the Bar-Ilan speech the question on
the world agenda is not only when and where the Israelis will
withdraw, but what the Palestinians, Arabs, Europeans and Americans
will do to ensure that the great Israeli withdrawal does not end in
disaster."

II. "He Also Considers Them a Nuisance"

Veteran columnist Uzi Benziman wrote in popular, independent Maariv
(6/18): "The legitimacy of the settlement enterprise is already
being eroded, not only in the eyes of Israeli society as a whole,
but also in the eyes of the right wing camp itself.... When the
prime minister-who is, as we recall, the Likud leader-declares his
recognition of a Palestinian state on part of Judea and Samaria, he
necessarily recognizes the possibility that part of the existing
Israeli settlements will be compelled to hand over their land to
this state... He admits before the whole world that the settlements
are a nuisance, an illegitimate enterprise, and ways must be found
now to minimize their damage.... The practical attitude of the
Israeli governments towards the settlements pushes the state into an
absurd situation: Even though an absolute majority of Israelis and
their elected leaders recognize the burden that the settlements
impose on the state and its welfare, they continue to maintain and
cultivate them. This paradoxical conduct is made possible for known
reasons...(the fear of governments over the generations to clash
with the settler public, repressing the probability that a
Palestinian state will be established one day, the cocky belief that
it is possible to fool the entire world all the time),but the time
has come to break free of it.... Netanyahu's speech this week
determined what the settlements were for Israeli society; it now
remains to determine the price of their evacuation."






2. Iran

I: "West Failed to Anticipate Magnitude of Iranian Protest"

Alex Fishman, Military Commentator, wrote in the mass-circulation,
independent Yediot Aharonot (6/18): "Why do we have the feeling that
all those Western experts and intelligence officials... simply
missed a number of processes that were afoot within Iranian society
and fell asleep on the job? We can only hope that the information in
the West, and mainly in Israel, about the Iranian nuclear program is
a bit more up to date and accurate.... The current unrest is being
directed by conservative elites that are fighting against one
another.... If it forcibly suppresses the demonstrations, Iran will
enter a state of perpetual unrest.... The village fool in this story
is President Barack Obama. That man thinks that he is playing the
role of president of the United States in some Hollywood disaster
movie. He showed weakness in dealing with the Iranians when he
passed up on Dennis Ross's services as his representative in talks
with Iran. The Iranians demanded that Ross be ousted, and Obama
capitulated, despite his commitment not to allow any preconditions
to be set before the talks were held. In addition to Dennis Ross's
ouster, the Iranians set another eight preconditions that they are
demanding be met before the talks are begun. Then he threatened to
impose harsher sanctions against Iran without first coordinating
that course of action with the Russians. Russia laughed behind his
back and has been sabotaging the process. Then he announced in Cairo
that he was prepared, actually, to allow the Iranians to develop
their nuclear capabilities on their own for peaceful purposes.
Behind the scenes, the Americans are trying to sell the Iranians the
old and idiotic idea that Iran will develop its nuclear program on
Russian soil under Russian supervision. In tandem, the Americans are
trying to sell the Iranians an idea by the World Bank about a
peaceful nuclear program that will supply Iran with the fissionable
materials it needs. And today, in light of the events underway in
Iran, we see the leader of the free world stammering a few
non-committal and irrelevant statements. That too is something that
Israel needs to take into account."

II: "Iran Youth Bring Promise of Change to Islamic Regime"

Zvi Bar'el, senior Arab affairs commentator, wrote in the
independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz (6/18): "Iran's young generation
- which makes up 60 percent of the population and never experienced
the Islamic Revolution nor identifies with the ideology behind it -
is channeling all of its bottled-up economic, social and democratic
frustrations into the current demonstrations. At this point, U.S.
President Barack Obama's rationale that Iran's policy won't
radically change whether its president is Mousavi or Ahmadinejad is
of secondary importance. Protests are without a doubt in favor of
one symbol over another; in favor of a Green Revolution and a new
dream, rather than for an Islamic Revolution.... At this crucial
point, Khamenei has to decide how to react. He has three options: To
sacrifice Ahmadinejad; to clash with protesters and shed blood; or
to find a worthy compromise acceptable to Mousavi. It is highly
doubtful that Khamenei will call for new elections, but he might ask
Ahmadinejad to make a compromise "for the sake of national unity and
the revolution's honor."... Such protests can get out of hand, be
taken over by local leaders or simply dissipate - an outcome that
would be a long-term defeat for reformists.... The expectation is
that the regime will unbridle the Islamic Revolutionary Guards and
order a forcible clampdown on the protests. The chances he will call
for a compromise are also still considerable."


3. Midest

I."In the Aftermath of his Cairo Speech

Dov Contorer, contributor, wrote in the Russian-language
conservative daily Vesty (June 18):"In the aftermath of his Cairo
speech, the US President came back home and posed for a picture
during his telephone conversation with the Israeli Prime Minister,
with his shoe soles facing the camera (and the interlocutor [PM
Netanyahu]). Israelis can't say anything, because 'this is American
style', however the Arabs will understand immediately how President
Obama is treating PM Netanyahu.... This was a thought-through
gesture that President Obama would have never let himself do to the
Saudi King or President Mubarak. ... The Israeli side should find a
way to convey its dissatisfaction to the Americans. If we don't
want to have to deal with not only pressure, but also with growing
political disrespect from the White House, we have to define what
Israel believes to be unacceptable [behavior] towards it and its
Prime Minister."

CUNNINGHAM