ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION

UNCLAS TEL AVIV 000632 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: -------------- All media reported that the indirect talks between Israel and Hamas in Cairo have failed to achieve a breakthrough that would free Gilad Shalit in return for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. HaQaretz surmises that, at a special meeting of the cabinet on Tuesday, outgoing PM Ehud Olmert will say that "Israel has drawn back its red lines as far as possible, but Hamas foiled the negotiations. Under these conditions it is not possible to reach an agreement." Major media reported that IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi is cutting short his visit to the U.S. in order to attend the meeting. (HaQaretz quoted IDF sources as saying that AshkenaziQs action is not a reflection of optimism or pessimism regarding the chances that the prisoner exchange will take place and Shalit will be freed.) After two days of intense indirect negotiations, Olmert's special envoy on the prisoner exchange, Ofer Dekel, and Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin returned from Egypt last night. At a briefing for Olmert and his advisers, the two blamed Hamas for what they called its unwillingness to show flexibility to reach an agreement. Dekel and Diskin told Olmert that Hamas had actually toughened its stance and that it returned to positions it had held in the negotiations a year ago. HaQaretz quoted sources as saying that at a certain point Diskin and Dekel sent over the final Israeli offer. When the Egyptian officials returned with the Hamas offer the two Israelis were shocked to realize that the Islamist group had posed new demands. HaQaretz quoted a source as saying that the two men had told Olmert: "They raised the demands of someone who did not wish for a solution. The demands came out of nowhere and there was a huge discrepancy between that and things that had been discussed in the past." The media reported that most of HamasQs demands revolved around several dozen prisoners that the group wants freed, and over the issue of whether the freed prisoners would be allowed to return home to the West Bank. HaQaretz reported that a senior Egyptian source told the newspaper that there were significant difficulties in the negotiations. The source said progress in the deal depends on "political decisions that Israel must make." The source was quoted as saying that the main dispute was the number of prisoners released who would be expelled from the West Bank. Hamas appears to agree to the expulsion of only five prisoners on its list, while Israel wants to send dozens abroad. Yediot and Israel Radio reported that PM-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has asked President Shimon Peres to help him in the coalition talks with Kadima and the Labor Party. Maariv reported that the stances of those parties have not changed. HaQaretz reported that, according to the government coalition agreement signed between Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu, the government will be committed to toppling the Hamas regime. The Jerusalem Post reported that the agreement puts Yisrael Beiteinu Chairman Avigdor Lieberman in charge of IsraelQs strategic dialogue with the U.S. on issues such as Iran. Maariv reported that, in an interview with the Russian news agency Interfax, Lieberman advocated defense cooperation with Russia, in contradiction with the official Israeli position. The Jerusalem Post reported that EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana told reporters in Brussels yesterday that the EU may reconsider its links with Israel if the countryQs incoming government is not committed to establishing a Palestinian state. The Jerusalem Post quoted the Czech European Union presidency as saying yesterday that there is a Qstrong European call to withdraw from the Durban 2 conference if final documents do not take into consideration the EUQs suggestions. The Jerusalem Post reported that Netanyahu told representatives of some 30 independent charities and NGOs yesterday that he was ready to work together with them to beat the recession and continue helping them to provide assistance to the countryQs weakest populations. Maariv reported that all major Israeli banks suffered losses following a reevaluation of securities and investments. -------------- Mideast: -------------- Summary: -------------- Senior columnist Nahum Barnea wrote on page one of the mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot: QThe choice that Israel is facing remains unchanged.... No matter what we do, we lose. Military correspondent Amos Harel and Palestinian affairs correspondent Avi Issacharoff wrote on page one of the independent, left-leaning HaQaretz: QThere are Hamas demands, which Israel is not prepared to accept.... The question arises whether Olmert's bureau did not raise, with the help of the media, exaggerated, and baseless, expectations. The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized: QIsrael must, at the very least, consider declaring a new, irrevocable and sacrosanct policy: There will be no more lopsided prisoner exchanges with terrorist organizations. Military correspondent Alex Fishman wrote on page one of Yediot Aharonot: QIf the Prime Minister indeed sends [negotiator] Ofer Dekel for another round, he will have to send him with a mandate to make another compromise on the issue of deportation [of released Palestinian prisoners]. HaQaretz editorialized: QEven in a narrow government [Netanyahu] will have to act as the leader of all the people and adopt a statesmanlike approach, just as he did as head of the opposition in the previous Knesset and as a candidate in the elections. Block Quotes: -------------- ¶I. QWe'll Lose in Any Event Senior columnist Nahum Barnea wrote on page one of the mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (3/17): QThe gap between [IsraelQs and HamasQs] positions is too large, and the time that the Olmert government has left in office is too short. Out of all the obligations that the Olmert government will be leaving behind for the Netanyahu government to inherit, releasing Shalit is the one that involves the greatest degree of heartache... . The choice that Israel is facing remains unchanged: Either risk the chance of Gilad Shalit's fate being the fate of [MIA] Ron Arad or risk the awful security damage that will be wrought by those dangerous prisoners once they are released. No matter what we do, we lose... The life of an entire state cannot hinge on the fate of a lone soldier, no matter how precious he is. That said, Gilad Shalit's continued captivity by Hamas has become a national trauma, and it is the nature of national traumas to become strategic problems. Netanyahu empowered Olmert to conclude the deal. He was prepared to put off the presentation of his new government, just so long as he might be absolved of the need to decide on this most awful of dilemmas. Nevertheless, it has been fated that he should be the one to have to deal with this problem. We need to wish him luck at finding the way, because the 1,000 days of Gilad Shalit's captivity are far-far too many. II. "The Gaps Remain" Military correspondent Amos Harel and Palestinian affairs correspondent Avi Issacharoff wrote on page one of the independent, left-leaning HaQaretz (3/17): QYesterday's round of Egyptian-mediated talks did not blow up, but neither did it lead to an accord.... Although it was not expressly stated, it seems that Tuesday's special cabinet meeting will not discuss a deal at all, because there is no deal. There are Hamas demands, which Israel is not prepared to accept. In light of the above, the question arises whether Olmert's bureau did not raise, with the help of the media, exaggerated, and baseless, expectations.... The fate of Gilad Shalit has become a central topic of conversation in many Israeli homes over the past few days. The question, Qwhat will happen to the boy?Q is heard everywhere. The media is also enlisted almost fully in calling for the release of the soldier, marginalizing opponents to a swap. Support for a deal is legitimate, but even those who support it should ask themselves if those calling for release at any cost will be around to share the blame when some of those freed commit new attacks. III. QTwo Funerals and a Prisoner Exchange The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (3/17): QBoth Jewish law and rational analysis should instruct Israel's cabinet to conclude that this country must under no circumstances release hundreds upon hundreds of murderous Palestinian prisoners as ransom for our captive soldier Gilad Shalit.... [Yet,] generals and spymasters are leaning toward jettisoning the no-nonsense strictures of security in order to reunite Noam and Aviva Shalit with their son Gilad. As the cabinet meets today, the hunt is on for the Palestinians who shot dead at close range two traffic policemen Sunday night near Masu'a in the Jordan Valley.... Granted, the terror war against the Jewish state will continue regardless of whether Israel does a prisoner deal or not. And yet setting these incarcerated exemplars of Islamist values free would doubtless provide an immense boost to enemy morale; for, paradoxically, in Palestinian mythology shahids have a Qfuture,Q while those taken alive and sentenced to rot in Israeli prisons are monuments to the futility of waging war on the Zionist enterprise -- provided, that is, that they are kept in those prisons, with the possibility of their release arising only when the Palestinians make real peace with the Jewish people. While the Shalits' campaign and the Olmert-Livni government fumble, Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu's deafening silence is sending a message of acquiescence. Yet however the Shalit dilemma pans out, Israel must, at the very least, consider declaring a new, irrevocable and sacrosanct policy: There will be no more lopsided prisoner exchanges with terrorist organizations. IV. QThere's Still a Chance Military correspondent Alex Fishman wrote on page one of Yediot Aharonot (3/17): QTheoretically, this government still has a few days in which it can make history and set a precedent, either way. But the announcement of the Prime Minister's Office last night, saying that Hamas had backed down from all agreements, already hints that Olmert chose the easy way: to accept Shin BetQs recommendation, to wrap himself in the alibi of having made a Qconcerted effortQ and to kick the Shalit affair over to the Netanyahu government.... it is highly unlikely that by the end of today's cabinet meeting there will indeed be a vote on any decision. It is more likely that the Prime Minister will summarize the meeting in one of two ways: Either he will declare that the current stage of negotiations have ended and he leaves the matter to the next government, or he will announce that he is sending his representatives for another round in Cairo. If the Prime Minister indeed sends Ofer Dekel for another round, he will have to send him with a mandate to make another compromise on the issue of deportation. The problem is that in order to recommend a compromise -- contrary to Shin BetQs professional opinion -- he needs a great deal of courage. ¶V. "Statesmanlike in a Narrow Government" HaQaretz editorialized (3/17): QLike Livni, who is steadfast in her positions, Netanyahu has a right to adhere to his principles. Yet even in a narrow government he will have to act as the leader of all the people and adopt a statesmanlike approach, just as he did as head of the opposition in the previous Knesset and as a candidate in the elections.... Even though he came to power after the murder of Yitzhak Rabin, he did not act as a unifying leader. Rather, his conduct exacerbated domestic strife.... The formation of a right-wing government does not obligate him to resume this approach even if there is pressure on him to do so from within the coalition. The national challenges require him to focus and adopt a statesmanlike, unifying attitude rather than a sectarian-partisan approach. It is possible to enact reforms without resorting to incitement against adversaries. A statesmanlike posture is especially important toward Arab citizens, against whom Netanyahu's senior coalition partner, Avigdor Lieberman, orchestrated a racist election campaign. CUNNINGHAM