GOI STILL WORKING OUT DETAILS FOR GHAJAR

C O N F I D E N T I A L TEL AVIV 000438 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/24/2020 TAGS: PREL LE IS SUBJECT: GOI STILL WORKING OUT DETAILS FOR GHAJAR WITHDRAWAL Classified By: Political Counselor Marc Sievers, Reason 1.4 (b) (d) ¶1. (C) According to Gilad Cohen, Advisor to MFA Director General Yossi Gal, Israel remains committed to withdrawing from Ghajar, but noted that the more the interagency team gets into the details of withdrawal, the more complicated the issue becomes. Embassy POLOFF and POLOFF from the Office of the Special Envoy for Middle East Peace (SEMEP) met Cohen on February 18. Cohen said that Ghajar was increasingly a bureaucratic mess. He noted that the higher profile the issue becomes, the more they must focus on the details to ensure they are covered. (Note: Ghajar's residents are Syrian Alawites but most of them were granted Israeli citizenship in the 1970s.) "Once the lawyers got involved," he said, issues that had been fuzzy from 2000-2006, and are even fuzzy under the current system, began to be scrutinized "perhaps too closely" in order to prepare for potential post-withdrawal legal challenges by Ghajar residents remaining north of the Blue Line. Cohen said that under the current system the Israeli telephone company is not always willing to send a technician to service homes in northern Ghajar, or will insist on sending Israeli Arab or local Druze technicians when they are available, but this cannot continue if there is a fomralized plan. MFA and other Israeli government lawyers are insisting that these issues be hammered out in detail with the appropriate Israeli ministries, utilities and other service providers, as well as with UNIFIL and the residents, before the IDF can depart. ¶2. (C) The MFA and IDF were working to improve communication with Ghajar residents in order to correct misunderstandings, Cohen explained, including many false rumors that have received press play, especially via village spokesman Najib Khatib. Many residents fear that withdrawal will result in the physical division of the village, splitting families across the Blue Line. However, the UNIFIL plan speaks of no physical barrier, and indeed both the Israeli government and UNIFIL are clear that villagers' movement across the Blue Line will continue unimpeded. Israel also plans on looking at easing the access regime as another incentive once the new system is in place. Currently, all residents of Ghajar, north and south, must pass through a tightly controlled IDF checkpoint to enter and exit the village (Note: There is no access from the village into Lebanon proper.). This is especially difficult for Ghajar residents who hold jobs in other parts of the Golan or Israel proper. ¶3. (C) Cohen noted that General Asarta, the new UNIFIL commander, would meet Director General Gal in Jerusalem on February 23 to continue Ghajar talks. General Graziano had conducted three rounds of talks with Gal prior to Graziano's departure on January 28; this will be Asarta's first meeting with Gal. Cohen had no sense of how many additional rounds would be required. PolOffs reiterated US support for a speedy resolution of the details, urged continued communication with the villagers, and emphasized that resolution of the Ghajar issue within the context of UNSCR 1701 will make it easier to press Lebanon on its outstanding 1701 commitments. ¶4. (C) Israel is serious about resolving Ghajar, Cohen emphasized, but as the issue gains additional political attention, the Israeli government is forced to examine the issue in greater detail in anticipation of possible legal challenges. In addition, he said, Israel will not compromise on its demand that any future change in the security or political status of northern Ghajar, including the timing of a handover of responsibility from UNIFIL to the Lebanese Armed Forces, can only occur with Israel's consent. Finally, Cohen worried that once Ghajar was resolved, UNIFIL, Lebanon, and the international community would renew their calls for unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Sheba'a. PolOffs underlined that the two issues were absolutely distinct in U.S. thinking, that any deal on Sheba'a absent Syrian-Lebanese border delineation would require significant Lebanese steps, and that this position had been made clear in Beirut. ¶5. (U) SEMEP cleared this cable. Cunningham