To: arutz-7@israelnationalnews.com, arutz-7b@israelnationalnews.com
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@israelnationalnews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News: Monday, April 30, 2001
Arutz Sheva News Service
<http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Monday, Apr. 30, 2001 / Iyar 7, 5761
------------------------------------------------
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
1. SARID TO ARAFAT: YOU MAY CONTINUE VIOLENCE UNTIL ISRAEL STOPS
SETTLEMENTS
2. BEILIN ACCUSED OF LOBBYING FOR ARAFAT; JERICHO RESTRICTIONS RELAXED
3. TOUGH BUSH TALK TO ARAFAT
1. SARID TO ARAFAT: YOU MAY CONTINUE VIOLENCE UNTIL ISRAEL STOPS SETTLEMENTS
While Israel is objecting to the settlement-freeze clause in the
Egyptian-Jordanian peace initiative, and refusing to conduct negotiations
with the PA until the violence stops, opposition head MK Yossi Sarid
(Meretz) is suggesting that Arafat combine both of them into one big
"no." Sarid met with Arafat yesterday, and suggested that he condition the
cessation of violence on a settlement freeze. MK Michael Kleiner (Herut)
sharply attacked Sarid for this proposal, and asked, "Does Sarid mean that
as long as we are building settlements the Palestinians are justified when
they murder Jews?" Kleiner suggests that Sarid focus on his role as
chairman of the opposition and leave the role of Arafat-advisor to Ahmed Tibi.
2. BEILIN ACCUSED OF LOBBYING FOR ARAFAT; JERICHO RESTRICTIONS RELAXED
The Prime Minister's Office accuses former Justice Minister and longtime
Oslo proponent Yossi Beilin of aiding Yasser Arafat's quest for an
invitation to the White House. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon himself said,
during yesterday's Cabinet meeting, that "a former minister" had "turned
into a lobbyist for the Palestinian Authority in Washington." Beilin's
office denied the accusation, calling the report a lie. Sharon's aides
charged Beilin with causing harm to government policy, according to which
an Arafat visit to Washington would "encourage terrorism."
Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer has announced the relaxation of
restrictions on the PA city of Jericho. Israeli-Arabs with relatives in
the city may now enter, as well as eastern Jerusalem medical personnel and
others. Foreign Minister Shimon Peres declared again yesterday that Israel
plans to make life easier for the PA population at large, without any
demands in return. Opponents of the Jericho decision suggest that the city
was chosen in order to pave the way for the re-opening of PA's casino
there. At present, Israeli Jews are not allowed into the city, rendering
the re-opening of the casino a moot point.
3. TOUGH BUSH TALK TO ARAFAT
The Bush Administration has sent a sharp letter to Yasser Arafat, demanding
that he stop the violence against Israel. "We can no longer pressure Ariel
Sharon and prevent him from responding with force to the Palestinian
attacks," read the letter. "The Palestinian Authority must therefore
invest maximum efforts in stopping the violence [and] the attacks against
Israel." Unnamed Israeli officials told Israel Radio that U.S. Ambassador
Martin Indyk gave the letter to Arafat, and then visited Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon in his Negev farm to report on its contents.
**************************************************************
To: arutz-7@israelnationalnews.com, arutz-7b@israelnationalnews.com
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@israelnationalnews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News: Tuesday, May 1, 2001
Arutz Sheva News Service
<http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Iyar 8, 5761
------------------------------------------------
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
1. CAN ARAFAT CONTROL VIOLENCE?
2. MEETINGS WITH KOFI ANAN
3. STATE DEPARTMENT TERRORISM REPORT
4. EXCERPTS FROM AN EDITORIAL
1. CAN ARAFAT CONTROL VIOLENCE?
Did Peres mislead Mubarak into thinking that a "ceasefire" was
imminent, as the latter accuses, or did Mubarak simply misunderstand?
It turns out it was probably Arafat's fault. PA Speaker Abu Ala
apparently promised Foreign Minister Peres last week that the violence
would stop, but Yasser Arafat was unsuccessful in imposing his will.
Itim News Agency reports that when Arafat began instituting measures
to stop the mortar fire and the dismantling of local militias, it
turned out that his men did not follow his orders - and instead
continued their mortar and shooting attacks. Other commentators,
however, say that Arafat was simply not willing to enforce a cessation
of violence against Israel.
2. MEETINGS WITH KOFI ANAN
Foreign Minister Shimon Peres met with UN Secretary-General Kofi Anan
last night and told him that Syria was preventing the Lebanese
government from deploying its forces along its southern border. Peres
explained that this was a violation of the UN resolutions calling for
just such a deployment to safeguard against Hizbullah attacks against
Israel.
The family members of the abducted Israelis in Lebanon will meet with
Anan today. Anan's office made the strange announcement that it would
not allow media coverage of the meeting. The Betar movement in New
York held a rally of solidarity with the kidnapped Israelis this
afternoon outside the Lebanese Consulate. Speakers included the
fathers of the three abducted soldiers - Adi Avitan, Benny Avraham,
and Omar Souad.
3. STATE DEPARTMENT TERRORISM REPORT
The State Department has released its annual terrorism report, which
has received mixed reviews in Israel. On the one hand, it confirms
the Congressional call for a reassessment of the U.S.-PLO
relationship. Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI) spokesperson Helen
Freedman told Arutz-7's Ron Meir that the fact that the State
Department named Arafat's Fatah and Tanzim youth militia as
perpetrators of terrorist activities means "the U.S. is one step
closer to declaring these groups foreign terrorist organizations."
Such a declaration, she said, would oblige the U.S. to sever ties with
the PLO. It was also noted that the report marks the first time that
mainstream elements of the PLO are cited by the State Department in
its influential terrorism report.
On the other hand, Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA notes that key sentences
in the report merely quote Israel's accusations against the PA,
leaving it up to the reader to decide if the accusations are correct.
Examples of this refusal to point a direct finger at the PA include
the following selections:
"Israeli authorities accused Palestinian Authority security officials
of facilitating the attack... Israeli officials publicly expressed their
dissatisfaction with PA counter-terrorism efforts during the crisis.
The Israelis also accused PA security officials and Fatah members of
facilitating and taking part in shooting and bombing attacks against
Israeli targets, including the bus bombing in Tel Aviv on 28 December.
The Israelis charged that the release of several prisoners during the
crisis had facilitated terrorist planning by the groups and that
Palestinian security officials had not been responsive to their calls
for more decisive measures against the violence."
Arutz-7's Yosef Zalmanson notes that the State Department's annual
human rights report, which was released in late February, took a
similarly lukewarm tone. It ignored the role of Yasser Arafat and the
Palestinian Authority leadership in organizing violence against
Israel, played down the constant Palestinian Arab attacks on Jewish
holy sites, and equated between aggressive Arab violence and Israeli
self-defense. An analysis of the State Department report can be seen
at "http://www.zoa.org/pressrel/20010227a.htm".
4. EXCERPTS FROM AN EDITORIAL
Yesterday's main editorial in the Jerusalem Post read, in part, as
follows:
"...the Palestinian attempt to tack on conditions to the cease-fire
should be soundly rejected. It should be obvious that Israel cannot agree to
any conditions to a cease-fire, because to do so would be rewarding
the Palestinian resort to violence even before the resumption of
negotiations. The whole point of the last election was the complete
rejection of negotiating under fire, which is one way of rewarding
violence. If there is something worse than negotiating under fire, it
is making concessions under fire...
"It is not clear why there should be any disagreement on this from those
claiming to be a 'peace camp'' outside the government. It is not
particularly helpful that Yossi Sarid, Yossi Beilin, and others have
met with Arafat while the government has been correctly urging the
White House to boycott him. But even if such meetings are by some
stretch of the imagination acceptable, does Sarid really have to
support Arafat's conditions for a cease-fire? Instead of backing
Arafat's calls for a settlement freeze, why can't Sarid differentiate
between his own support for a settlement freeze and the need not to
reward Arafat's offensive? The peace camp's inability to learn from
its own mistakes is stunning.
"The previous government, following the advice and using the services
of Sarid and Beilin, decided to ignore the principle of not rewarding
violence. The result was more violence, a hardening of Palestinian
positions, and the landslide rejection of this path by the people of
Israel. Given his camp's resounding defeat and the fact that Israelis
are still being gunned down in their cars and bombarded with mortars,
it should not be too much to expect a modicum of humility and
responsibility from opposition leader Sarid. "...Sarid cannot claim
that his way was not tried - it was. The alternative approach is to
recognize that an unlimited Israeli willingness to compromise its
principles does not lead to peace, but to unending conflict.
"...The tragedy of the peace camp is that years of believing that
Israeli intransigence was the obstacle to peace has made its leaders blind to
the need to confront Palestinian intransigence. The only way to cut
the vicious cycle of increasing Israeli flexibility leading to greater
Palestinian intransigence is to be less flexible. There are no
guarantees that being more resolute will work quickly, but the sooner
the rest of the peace camp joins this new path to peace, the sooner it
will bear fruit..."
******************************************************************
To: arutz-7@israelnationalnews.com, arutz-7b@israelnationalnews.com
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@israelnationalnews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News: Wednesday, May 2, 2001
Arutz Sheva News Service
<http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Iyar 9, 5761
------------------------------------------------
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
1. PERES WILLING TO COMPROMISE IN YESHA
2. MORE P.A. SMUGGLING OF COMBAT MEANS FROM EGYPT
3. HA'ARETZ TURNS RIGHT
1. PERES WILLING TO COMPROMISE IN YESHA
Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, visiting in Washington, gave a
different message than his cabinet colleagues. He said last night
that Israel would be prepared to make "painful compromises" regarding
the Yesha settlements when the negotiations are resumed. "We cannot
solve everything with force," he told reporters upon his arrival in
Washington. He further said that Arafat remains Israel's peace
partner.
Prime Minister Sharon was asked today whether he would agree to stop
building in Yesha in exchange for the cessation of violence. His
response was strong: "We will not pay for a cessation of violence, we
will not pay for them to stop killing us. We will solve it [in other
ways], and it will require some patience, but there will be no
payment!"
2. MORE P.A. SMUGGLING OF COMBAT MEANS FROM EGYPT
Sources in Israel's security establishment confirmed to journalist
Yoav Yitzchak today that the PA continues to smuggle in weapons and
ammunition. A series of underground tunnels is the channel for
massive Palestinian smuggling from Egypt into the Rafiach area. It is
not clear whether the Egyptian authorities are actively or only
passively involved in the operations. The intense battles initiated
by the Palestinians over the past few days in the Rafiach area are
assumed to be their way of safeguarding the smuggling routes.
3. HA'ARETZ TURNS RIGHT
The excerpts published here yesterday from a Jerusalem Post editorial,
may not have been surprising. The paper wrote as follows:
"...the Palestinian attempt to tack on conditions to the cease-fire
should be soundly rejected [because otherwise it] would be rewarding
the Palestinian resort to violence. It is not clear why there should
be any disagreement on this from those claiming to be a 'peace camp''
outside the government. [D]oes Sarid really have to support Arafat's
conditions for a cease-fire? Instead of backing Arafat's calls for a
settlement freeze, why can't Sarid differentiate between his own
support for a settlement freeze and the need not to reward Arafat's
offensive? The peace camp's inability to learn from its own mistakes
is stunning. The only way to cut the vicious cycle of increasing
Israeli flexibility leading to greater Palestinian intransigence is to
be less flexible."
However, today's excerpts - from a Ha'aretz editorial - may raise some
eyebrows, in light of some of the paper's previously-expressed
positions. Excerpts from today's Ha'aretz editorial:
"The government of Israel cannot and must not agree to any concessions
that it already rejected before the Palestinians turned to violence...
"The Palestinian attitude toward cease-fires does not give rise to a
great deal of confidence. Inherent in this attitude is the Palestinian
threat to resume shooting if they believe their position is not being
advanced in the negotiations. The support given to the Oslo process by
the Israeli public stemmed, in great part, from the assumption that in
return for gradual Israeli withdrawal from the territories conquered
in 1967 and the establishment of a Palestinian state there, the
Palestinians would relinquish the use of violence.
"Clearly, in the wake of the current confrontation, there can be no
process that is partly diplomatic and partly military, a mixture of
dialogue and terrorist attacks. The cease-fire must be safeguarded by
a definite Palestinian commitment to end the incitement, to return to
prison those it released during the Intifada, and to destroy the arms
it holds in violation of the agreements, such as the mortars and the
anti-tank weapons.
"...The key to a cease-fire, which in itself is the key to the
resumption of the diplomatic negotiations, is still in the hands of
the Palestinians, primarily Chairman Yasser Arafat. Their violence and
terrorism are leading nowhere."
Yediot Acharonot's editorial, however, states, "[Although] yesterday's
murder in Ofrah - the second to hit the same family within a short
period - sets the blood aboil and cries out for a response and
revenge, [which] today or tomorrow, the IDF apparently will do... we,
at least in our hearts, even if we want revenge, know that this is no
solution to terrorism."
Ma'ariv writes today, "One need not support the settlers in order to
feel outrage over the double [terrorist] murder [within the
Hershkovitz family]," and adds, "While it is possible to support the
evacuation of settlements like Ofrah, Beit El and Psagot in order to
achieve an honorable, concession-based settlement with the
Palestinians, one cannot be silent in the face of acts of despicable
terrorism because this only invites additional attacks... Murder is
murder, and those who shoot at you must receive redoubled blows until
they understand that this isn't the way."
**************************************************************
To: arutz-7@israelnationalnews.com, arutz-7b@israelnationalnews.com
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@israelnationalnews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News: Thursday, May 3, 2001
Arutz Sheva News Service
<http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Thursday, May 3, 2001 / Iyar 10, 5761
------------------------------------------------
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
1. LANDAU: "THIS WAR REQUIRES ENDURANCE, MOTIVATION, AND WISDOM"
2. LIEBERMAN: "THIS WAR REQUIRES A NEW CONCEPTION"
3. SHARON VS. PERES
1. LANDAU: "THIS WAR REQUIRES ENDURANCE, MOTIVATION, AND WISDOM"
In a moment of candor yesterday during his condolence call to the
grieving Hershkovitz families in Ofrah, Prime Minister Sharon said, "I
thought that we'd be able to overcome the terrorism faster. This
confrontation requires a new way of thinking, a new approach."
Arutz-7's Haggai Segal and Yosef Zalmanson spoke with former
GSS-senior Menachem Landau today, and asked him what has occurred to
cause Sharon to make such a statement. Landau:
"Undoubtedly the Prime Minister is anxious to keep his promises and
squelch the terrorism - but there are several reasons why it has not
been so easy: We are fighting an enemy that has no restraints, while
we do have restraints - some that are self-imposed as the army of a
normal country, and a Jewish army at that, and others that stem from
our international standing. Sharon is trying, of course, and I think
that his general approach is the correct one, but more can be done.
For instance, if we have intelligence on a training ground, or a
terrorist cell, or weapons storehouses, we should go in and destroy
them. I hope that we are doing this; it is hard to know... Another
important area is to hit the leaders of the terrorism; I'm not talking
about Arafat - he's not the one organizing the violence on a
day-to-day level. I'm talking about the ones who organize terrorist
cells and decide how, where, and when they will hit..."
Zalmanson asked if it wouldn't be effective to destroy ten Arab houses
wherever such buildings are used for Palestinians to shoot onto
Israeli targets. Landau:
"No, it would not be effective. The terrorists terrorize the local
Palestinian population as well, and they can always find other places
from which to shoot... Of course sometimes it is important to destroy
buildings, but this cannot be our overall strategy. We have to define
for ourselves exactly what our goals are. The Palestinians know
precisely what they want: a state on the entire Land of Israel, and
international intervention - whereas with us it's not so simple. The
proof is what happened in Beit Hanoun in Gaza a few weeks ago, when we
went in, and then we were forced to leave, apparently under some sort
of pressure... We have not even formulated the exact final borders
that we wish to have..."
Landau continued, "I doubt whether Sharon will be able to put an
absolute stop to all terrorism, especially when it can be activated by
just one guy with a rifle. But it can be significantly lessened. The
PA's terrorism is different than other terrorism in that it's not
exactly underground - it is being organized and financed by a known
entity that has an army of sorts; if we take care of all those who
sponsor and organize the attacks, then we can reduce it to an absolute
minimum... Don't be mistaken: The Palestinians are suffering. Their
unemployment is closing in on 50% [38%, according to latest reports].
If they were at all smart, they would topple their leadership and
replace it with those who realize that violence is leading them
nowhere. This is a struggle that requires endurance, motivation, and
wisdom - and little by little, by applying more and more pressure, we
can win."
2. LIEBERMAN: "THIS WAR REQUIRES A NEW CONCEPTION"
Arutz-7's Haggai Segal spoke today with Shomron Regional Council head
Bentzy Lieberman, and asked him: "You were at the meeting yesterday
in Ofrah between Yesha Council leaders and Prime Minister Sharon.
What happened there?"
Lieberman: "It was a very difficult meeting. We told him of the
great hopes the public had for him when he came to power, yet we know
that major changes have not yet been made, nor has the process been
started. The PA must be defined as an enemy and must be defeated on
the battlefield; negotiations can only be held on the basis of our
victory over the terrorist murderers... Sharon did not disagree with
this concept, and in fact said very severe things about the PA and its
leaders - "Liars, they can never be believed, I have never trusted
them and will never trust them" - and he made no distinction between
the terrorist activities of Hamas, Tanzim, and Fatah. The words we
heard were definitely good, but as you know, we have often heard good
things, and we're now waiting for actions. We understood from him
that he had met Tuesday night with Chief of Staff Mofaz to decide on a
new conceptual strategy to fight terrorism not only in Yesha but all
around the country."
Haggai Segal: "Did he imply that it may be partly the army's fault?"
Lieberman: "'Lulei d'mistifina' [If I weren't hesitant or afraid], I
would say categorically yes. The army is something very precious to
me, and we don't want to harm it in any way, yet there was something
about Sharon's body language that indicated a certain frustration...
It looked like he had hoped the army would present more creative and
significant ideas. I had the impression that Arik is looking for an
Arik, as Ben Gurion and other Prime Ministers had Arik Sharon [as a
great military commander]. Just like in Gaza last month when he
snapped, 'Under my command, there would have been less talk and more
action,' yesterday too he said something similar."
HS: "In your opinion, is the army in fact working the best it can
with the free hand it has been given?"
BL: "Since Oslo, the army has been working with a different mindset
than it did in the decades before Oslo. Of late they have not been
taught the same daring, the same chutzpah, and the like that they had
before... I work with the army on many planes, and I have no doubt
that in practical terms, the officers and soldiers are being stretched
beyond their normal capacities. They are working very hard, and they
deserve a lot of credit. But I am talking about something else: a
switch in conception, a new manner of thinking. I am sure this will
come, because we have very talented people there, and it will have to
come..."
3. SHARON VS. PERES
Following Shimon Peres' appearance in Washington, Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon's Bureau issued the following statement today: "The current
attacks are the result of a strategic decision by Arafat. The
organizations subject to Arafat - including Fatah, Hamas, Islamic
Jihad and Hizbullah - understand that they have a 'green light' to
continue attacks against Israel."
This statement is in stark contrast to yesterday's remarks by Foreign
Minister Peres, who said that Arafat is "still Israel's peace
partner." Peres was also quoted as saying that Arafat is not
responsible for the violence in the territories, but that "some
dissident groups and some forces under Arafat participated in the
killings without his knowledge.'' Officials in the Prime Minister's
Office expressed displeasure at Peres' comments, Israel Radio
reported, quoting them as saying that Peres' actions in the U.S. must
be closely watched to ensure that he does not deviate from the
understandings he reached previously with Sharon.
**************************************************************
To: arutz-7@israelnationalnews.com, arutz-7b@israelnationalnews.com
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@israelnationalnews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News Brief: Friday, May 4, 2001
Arutz Sheva News Service
<http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Friday, May 4, 2001 / Iyar 11, 5761
------------------------------------------------
TODAY'S HEADLINE:
LIEBERMAN: TAKE OVER SOME P.A. AREAS FOR TWO DAYS
In contradistinction to the above, Infrastructures Minister Avigdor
Lieberman expressed his intense disappointment today with the
government's military stance. Lieberman said that Israelis feel that
Sharon's political landslide has so far accomplished nothing, and that
the situation now is even more dangerous than it was under Barak.
Minister Lieberman called upon the government to send the IDF into
PA-controlled Area A for two days and destroy the Palestinian military
infrastructure. Prime Minister Sharon's office and some Likud Knesset
Members disassociated themselves from Lieberman's comments.
Former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, however, appeared to side
with Lieberman - a former top aide of his - and called on the
government to seize control of the Area A sections from which the Arab
terrorists are shooting on Jews. He specifically cited the Abu
Sneineh hills overlooking the Hevron Jewish community, as well as Beit
Jalla, the Arab village from which terrorist shooting has long rained
down on the southern Jerusalem Gilo neighborhood.
***************************************************************