null
Carol X Weakley  11/09/2006 02:54:02 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  Carol X Weakley

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS        TEL AVIV 04473

SIPDIS
CXTelA:
    ACTION: PD
    INFO:   POL DAO DCM AMB

DISSEMINATION: PD
CHARGE: PROG

APPROVED: PAO:HFINN
DRAFTED: PD:RPAZ
CLEARED: AIO:GANISMAN

VZCZCTVI455
PP RUEHC RHEHAAA RHEHNSC RUEAIIA RUEKJCS RUEAHQA
RUEADWD RUENAAA RHEFDIA RUEKJCS RUEHAD RUEHAS RUEHAM RUEHAK
RUEHLB RUEHEG RUEHDM RUEHLO RUEHFR RUEHRB RUEHRO RUEHRH
RUEHTU RUCNDT RUEHJM RHMFISS RHMFISS RHMFIUU
DE RUEHTV #4473/01 3131022
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 091022Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7514
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/WHITE HOUSE NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEADWD/DA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUENAAA/CNO WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEHAD/AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI PRIORITY 1164
RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS PRIORITY 7937
RUEHAM/AMEMBASSY AMMAN PRIORITY 1015
RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA PRIORITY 1929
RUEHLB/AMEMBASSY BEIRUT PRIORITY 1150
RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO PRIORITY 8815
RUEHDM/AMEMBASSY DAMASCUS PRIORITY 1874
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 8792
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS PRIORITY 9239
RUEHRB/AMEMBASSY RABAT PRIORITY 5919
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME PRIORITY 3294
RUEHRH/AMEMBASSY RIYADH PRIORITY 8167
RUEHTU/AMEMBASSY TUNIS PRIORITY 2411
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 4315
RUEHJM/AMCONSUL JERUSALEM PRIORITY 4990
RHMFISS/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL PRIORITY
RHMFISS/COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/COMSIXTHFLT  PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 11 TEL AVIV 004473 
 
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 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IS KMDR
 
SUBJECT: ISRAEL MEDIA REACTION 
 
 
-------------------------------- 
SUBJECTS COVERED IN THIS REPORT: 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶1. US Midterm Elections 
 
¶2. Beit Hanun Attack 
 
¶3. Mideast 
 
¶4. Syria 
 
------------------------- 
Key stories in the media: 
------------------------ 
 
Please note: block quotes only, Thursday, November 9, 2006. 
 
----------------------------- 
¶1. US Post Midterm Elections: 
----------------------------- 
 
Summary: 
-------- 
 
Senior military analyst Ze'ev Schiff wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz: "It is quite doubtful that the Democrats 
would have decided on an immediate withdrawal from Iraq had the 
decision been up to them.  They, too, understand that a rushed 
pullout could end up having the U.S. lose the entire Middle East. 
The Democrats will continue to make it difficult for Bush and 
criticize him for the war in Iraq, but they will find a way to 
finance the army's continued presence there without humiliating the 
U.S." 
Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized: "The 
Democrats must resist the temptation to dedicate their new found 
power to the sole purpose of bringing down their nemesis, George 
Bush.  They will be more successful politically if they do what is 
best for their country and the world, and join together to confront 
the terrorist tyrants that threaten us all." 
Block Quotes: 
------------- 
 
¶I. "U.S. Won't Quit Iraq Just Yet" 
 
Senior military analyst Ze'ev Schiff wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz (11/9): "Does the resignation of Donald 
Rumsfeld as U.S. Secretary of Defense, who led the war in Iraq, 
signal an immediate beginning of the American army's withdrawal from 
Iraq?  The answer is no.  It is more reasonable to conclude that the 
appointment of Robert Gates to the position will represent the start 
of changes in the way American forces are deployed in Iraq and the 
establishment of a plan with the Iraqi government for taking on 
greater military responsibility.  It is more reasonable that 
following its loss in Congress and a call by many voters for a 
change in military policy in Iraq, the Republican Party will now 
focus on an effort to save the White House for U.S. President George 
¶W. Bush's political heir.  In other words, the party wants to show 
that it will be making changes in Iraq, while taking national 
security responsibility for the United States' position as a world 
power.  It is quite doubtful that the Democrats would have decided 
on an immediate withdrawal from Iraq had the decision been up to 
them.  They, too, understand that a rushed pullout could end up 
having the U.S. lose the entire Middle East.  The Democrats will 
continue to make it difficult for Bush and criticize him for the war 
in Iraq, but they will find a way to finance the army's continued 
presence there without humiliating the U.S." 
 
II. "Confront Iran Together" 
Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (11/9): "The 
call for unity and cooperation just after a hard-fought election is 
as American as motherhood and apple pie.  For all our sakes, 
however, this pledge had better not be mere boilerplate. Speaking 
from a particularly precarious part of the world, we simply cannot 
afford a United States that, in the midst of global war, becomes 
paralyzed by partisan bickering.  Though there is a long history of 
midterm elections of second-term presidents being treacherous for 
the party in power, it is clear that President George Bush and, in 
particular, the war in Iraq, cost the Republicans dearly.... The 
real problem ... is not the shallow and unconstructive debate over 
Iraq, but that Democrats and Republicans have allowed Iraq to become 
a distraction from the main threat looming, that of a nuclear 
Iran.... What the US needs, instead, is a bipartisan strategy for 
victory.... As it happens, a successful policy toward Iran is 
critical to winning in Iraq, since it is almost impossible to 
imagine democracy prevailing in Iraq so long as Iran is increasingly 
able to support terrorism there, eventually under the protection of 
a nuclear umbrella.... The best way for Democrats to prove that they 
should be given the chance to govern is for them to work 
shoulder-to-shoulder with Bush on foreign policy in the two critical 
years ahead.  The sight of Bush and Pelosi reaching agreement on 
Iran policy would itself send a powerful message to Europe that 
America is not willing to live with a nuclear Iran, and would 
embolden these nations to toughen their own policies.  As unlikely 
as this positive scenario may seem to be, the alternative to it is 
frightening, and would be disastrous for America and the world.  A 
divided America following a feckless Europe is a recipe for 
deterioration across the board, including defeat in Iraq and the 
emboldening of the radical axis that emerged in the recent Lebanon 
war: Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas.  The Democrats must resist 
the temptation to dedicate their new found power to the sole purpose 
of bringing down their nemesis, George Bush.  They will be more 
successful politically if they do what is best for their country and 
the world, and join together to confront the terrorist tyrants that 
threaten us all." 
--------------------- 
¶2. Beit Hanun Attack: 
--------------------- 
 
Summary: 
-------- 
 
Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized: "The cannons must 
be replaced with calls for dialogue, the economic boycott must be 
replaced with an opening of the taps, and the cruel siege of Gaza 
must be replaced with a supervised opening of the border crossings. 
Only in this way can we perhaps change the dangerous atmosphere that 
now prevails, and even more so following the bloodbath in Beit 
Hanun.  The responsibility for this rests entirely on the prime 
minister's shoulders." 
 
Diplomatic correspondent Ben Caspit wrote in popular, pluralist 
Maariv: "They [the Palestinians] are not attacking the 1967 borders; 
they are attacking the 1948 lines.  They are not challenging the 
occupation, and they are not arguing with the oppression. They want 
to uproot us from here, wipe us from the face of the earth.... All 
they have to do to get quiet is to stop shooting.  Until then, there 
will be no quiet, and sometimes, there will be mishaps." 
 
Political affairs correspondent Sima Kadmon wrote in 
mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot: "This is indeed, a 
calibration problem. But this is a problem not just of the artillery 
battery, but of us, all of us.  Of a government that for such a long 
time has found no way to talk to the other side.  Of the IDF, that 
time after time manages to get us into trouble in mishaps that 
should not happen.  Of a state that closes its eyes and seals its 
heart to what is happening a few dozen kilometers away.  Of the 
Palestinians, who display negligence and have not managed to vomit 
from their midst the radical elements.  And of an indifferent world 
that does nothing to stop what is happening." 
 
Middle East affairs commentator, Guy Bechor, a lecturer at the 
Interdisciplinary Center, wrote in mass-circulation, pluralist 
Yediot Aharonot: "Despite the promised disengagement, Gaza still 
remains an Israeli matter, and the world is watching from the 
bleachers, on the television screens.  It's time that weary Israel 
should sit on the bleachers and watch as the world takes charge over 
Gaza.  Those who criticize Israel in the Western world should also 
be prepared to act, and the moment has come." 
 
Military correspondent Alex Fishman wrote in mass-circulation, 
pluralist Yediot Aharonot: "For our own sake, we must know what 
really happened yesterday in Beit Hanoun.  We must, because our 
hearts have become inured.  Ten killed here, 60 killed there, 
yesterday another 18, some of them innocent civilians.  For us, this 
passes as if it were nothing.  We have to ask ourselves: does this 
truly have to be?" 
 
Senior op-ed columnist Eitan Haber wrote in the lead editorial of 
mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot: "It is terrible [What 
happened in Beit Hanun].  And we have to try not to use the excuse, 
'but we are at war.'  Because if, God forbid, such sights continue, 
we will perhaps beat Hamas, but we will lose the world's support." 
 
Senior military analyst Ze'ev Schiff wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz: "Instead of talking, Israel has become an 
observer that deploys artillery.  For months, Israel has avoided 
negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas.  By doing so, Israeli is 
strengthening Palestinian extremists, and what is happening in the 
Gaza Strip is adding fuel to the bonfire." 
 
Block Quotes: 
------------- 
 
¶I. "A Cease-Fire in Gaza (2)" 
 
Independent, left-leaning Ha'aretz editorialized (11/9): "Yesterday, 
we wrote here that 'Israel should declare a complete cease-fire in 
the Gaza Strip for a predetermined period, during which it will not 
engage in any violent actions, neither assassinations nor 
incursions.  Simultaneously, it should call on the Palestinians to 
hold their fire as well.' What we feared has come to pass -- and for 
the Palestinians, even worse: At least 19 Palestinians were killed 
yesterday during a sustained Israel Defense Forces artillery attack 
on the town of Beit Hanun.... No excuse can justify this 
atrocity.... It is no longer enough to express regret; it is also 
necessary to draw conclusions.  It has now become conclusively clear 
that the campaign against the Qassam rocket launchers in Gaza can no 
longer be entrusted solely to the IDF.... That operation [Autumn 
Clouds] sowed only death and destruction, without bringing an end to 
the Qassam fire.  On the contrary, it only increased it.... The 
prime minister, as the person who bears overall responsibility, must 
order the IDF to halt the fire on Gaza -- immediately, in all cases 
and with every type of weapon.  If Israel does not want to find 
itself embroiled soon in a new bloodbath, including suicide bombings 
in its cities, it must launch a dramatic, unequivocal move, as only 
such a move might prevent the outbreak of a new intifada.... The 
cannons must be replaced with calls for dialogue, the economic 
boycott must be replaced with an opening of the taps, and the cruel 
siege of Gaza must be replaced with a supervised opening of the 
border crossings.  Only in this way can we perhaps change the 
dangerous atmosphere that now prevails, and even more so following 
the bloodbath in Beit Hanun.  The responsibility for this rests 
entirely on the prime minister's shoulders." 
 
II. "The Price of the Kassam Rockets" 
 
Diplomatic correspondent Ben Caspit wrote in popular, pluralist 
Maariv (11/9): "Somebody needs to tell the truth, to the inhabitants 
of Beit Hanoun, to the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, to the Arabs 
of the territories, to the whole world.  It is a simple, harsh and 
single truth: those who fire thousands of Kassam rockets upon a 
civilian population for years, those who accumulate tons of 
explosive materials, arms and Katyusha rockets for months, those who 
impose terrorism and fear upon an entire region for no apparent 
reason need to understand that they cannot hide behind women and 
children.  Such behavior carries a price tag.  Every country in the 
world has an obligation to protect its citizens.  Israel's behavior 
in Gaza has been much more moderate, humane and moral than the way 
American, British or Russian armies would respond to terrorists who 
consistently fired on Texas, Coventry or Moscow.... The truth is 
that until they stop firing Kassam rockets upon Israel, Israel must 
keep firing back.  Yes, firing back.  They shoot to kill women and 
children.  We do not.  Never.  But when they shoot at us from inside 
inhabited areas, it is very difficult to prevent mishaps or terrible 
incidents.... Every other method has been tried, and failed.  With 
scoundrels you behave like a scoundrel, and with murderous, 
bloodthirsty terrorism that wants to wipe you off the map, you have 
to respond accordingly: wipe it out.... We expected that they would 
sit quietly after we left Gaza.... Yes, in our naivet we expected 
that now, at least in Gaza, 'they would sit quietly.'  Instead of 
that, we got intensified barrages of upgraded Kassam rockets, tons 
of explosives and Hamas in power.... They [the Palestinians] could 
have proven to the world that when Israel leaves, withdraws and 
recognizes the international border, a solution is accomplished and 
calm achieved.  They could have given us a reason to leave the West 
Bank as well.  But instead, they fell upon us with wild rage. They 
are not attacking the 1967 borders; they are attacking the 1948 
lines.  They are not challenging the occupation, and they are not 
arguing with the oppression. They want to uproot us from here, wipe 
us from the face of the earth.... All they have to do to get quiet 
is to stop shooting.  Until then, there will be no quiet, and 
sometimes, there will be mishaps." 
 
III. "Not Calibrated" 
 
Political affairs correspondent Sima Kadmon wrote in 
mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (11/9): "A calibration 
problem, the OC Southern Command yesterday explained the killing in 
Beit Hanoun.  Indeed, a calibration problem. But not just of the 
artillery battery.  But of us, all of us.  Of a government that for 
such a long time has found no way to talk to the other side.  Of the 
IDF, that time after time manages to get us into trouble in mishaps 
that should not happen.  Of a state that closes its eyes and seals 
its heart to what is happening a few dozen kilometers away.  Of the 
Palestinians, who display negligence and have not managed to vomit 
from their midst the radical elements.  And of an indifferent world 
that does nothing to stop what is happening.... A regrettable 
mistake, politicians and army people in the past and present said 
yesterday.  This was not a mistake.  This was a disaster.  It's a 
regrettable mistake when you step on someone's toe, not when you 
kill 11 members of one family.... This is not even one stray shell 
that was mistakenly discharged.  More than ten shells were fired 
from this artillery battery.... Somebody has to stop this madness. 
Somebody has to stop for a moment and think.... The Kassam rocket 
fire will not stop, every child in Sderot knows this.  Just as every 
child in Beit Hanoun knows that we will never go away. The question 
is when we will begin to talk.  Because ... there must be consensus 
on one thing: that there is nothing -- neither for us nor for them 
-- to lose by this." 
 
IV. "A Moment before the Next War" 
 
Middle East affairs commentator, Guy Bechor, a lecturer at the 
Interdisciplinary Center, wrote in mass-circulation, pluralist 
Yediot Aharonot (11/9): "Yesterday's tragedy in Gaza, and in recent 
years in Sderot, makes it clear that the Israelis and the 
Palestinians can no longer be left on their own.  The rise of 
fanatic political Islam in the territories has made any political 
solution, or even a partition, impossible.   It has already been 
proven that every time Israel evacuates territory, whether in 
Lebanon or in the Palestinian Authority, the territory is 
immediately seized by terror.  This is violent, destructive terror 
that has no limits, that will not hesitate to do all it can to 
attack us.  From this aspect, there is no choice but to admit that 
even an orderly handover of the area to the Palestinians, such as in 
the Oslo process, or even abandoning it, such as in disengagement, 
have not proven themselves.... It seems that the Palestinians 
themselves are planning a large-scale military action against 
Israeli cities, and this can be expected in about half a year, after 
the tons of ammunition that they are storing in the Gaza Strip turn 
into a critical mass of rockets, which are smuggled from Egypt.... 
After this war, the world will enter the picture, just as it did in 
southern Lebanon, and will send a strong enforcement force to Gaza, 
like UNIFIL.... On second thought, and in light of yesterday's 
serious incident, why should such an international force not go in 
now already, and so prevent the war that assessments say can be 
expected in the spring?.... The Gaza Strip will be given over to the 
world's responsibility, military and humanitarily.... The 
Palestinians themselves will become an international problem, and 
will thereby be very limited in continuing to fire at Israel.... 
What happens inside the Gaza Strip -- whether its residents achieve 
independence one day and how it will be run -- will be under the 
responsibility of the world, which now condemns Israel.... Despite 
the promised disengagement, Gaza still remains an Israeli matter, 
and the world is watching from the bleachers, on the television 
screens.  It's time that weary Israel should sit on the bleachers 
and watch as the world takes charge over Gaza.  Those who criticize 
Israel in the Western world should also be prepared to act, and the 
moment has come." 
 
¶V. "The Mystery of the Shells" 
 
Military correspondent Alex Fishman wrote in mass-circulation, 
pluralist Yediot Aharonot (11/9): "Anyone who couldn't sleep 
yesterday because they were worried about the damage to the State of 
Israel's good reputation can stop worrying.  It has been a long time 
since we had such a reputation.  Israel is viewed by the world as 
having a light trigger finger when it comes to civilians.  Whether 
this is true or not -- this is a fact.... For our own sake, we must 
know what really happened yesterday in Beit Hanoun.  We must, 
because our hearts have become inured.  Ten killed here, 60 killed 
there, yesterday another 18, some of them innocent civilians.  For 
us, this passes as if it were nothing.  We have to ask ourselves: 
does this truly have to be? Does this really serve our national 
interests? We deserve to know if it is really just bad luck that 
pursues us, or if this bad luck is, in fact, inherent in the system. 
 Those who play with artillery near a dense urban area -- even if 
they take into account all the safety ranges, orders and procedures 
-- should expect disasters.  Something unexpected and unplanned is 
always liable to happen.  That is inherent in this game." 
 
VI. "Blood and Tears" 
 
Senior op-ed columnist Eitan Haber wrote in the lead editorial of 
mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (11/9): "The IDF made a 
serious mistake yesterday, and not for the first time.  The sights 
from Gaza were harsh and bitter and it is impossible and we must not 
remain indifferent to the ripped bodies of children.  The IDF must 
-- damn it, how is this done -- be careful and cautious and strict 
so that such blood curling mistakes do not happen, but it is 
important to remember that only the clumsiness of the Hamas in Gaza 
-- thank God -- prevents us from seeing similar sights, almost every 
day, in Sderot, for example.  It is terrible.  And we have to try 
not to use the excuse, 'but we are at war.'  Because if, God forbid, 
such sights continue, we will perhaps beat Hamas, but we will lose 
the world's support." 
 
 
VII. "A Military Failure and Strategic Vacuum" 
 
Senior military analyst Ze'ev Schiff wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz (11/9): "The severe incident in Beit Hanun in 
the Gaza Strip has again dragged the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to 
a gloomy crossroad from both a tactical and strategic 
perspective.... In principle, it is correct to argue that the Beit 
Hanun affair did not begin there; it was preceded by four Qassam 
rockets that landed in the heart of Ashkelon the previous day.  Two 
other rockets were fired at Sderot yesterday morning.  No country 
would remain indifferent to rocket fire on its cities.  The only 
problem is the lack of proportionality regarding Israel's 
response.... Indeed, even in a clear case of self-defense, the 
killing of many innocent civilians, and especially children, is 
intolerable.  Israel is not engaged in all-out war with the 
Palestinians.... Just as Israel is not placing a total blockade on 
the Gaza Strip, it should also refrain from expanding the number of 
civilians injured while confronting Palestinian terror.... From a 
military perspective, it must be acknowledged that the IDF has in 
fact failed in its war against the Qassam rockets.... Sadly, the IDF 
today is not providing the requisite security to Israel's 
citizens.... Israel finds itself in a dire strategic situation, but 
there are some openings.  The bad thing is that Israel has been 
thrust into a dangerous political-strategic vacuum.  It faces four 
extremist entities: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas.  With regard 
to two of them, Iran and Hezbollah, there is not even a tiny opening 
for negotiations and an accord. Israel itself placed the other two, 
Syria and Hamas, in a political-strategic vacuum.  Syria, which is 
ready to recognize Israel, is being told that there's nothing to 
talk about.  Hamas, which does not want to recognize Israel and 
previous agreements with Israel, has been isolated by the 
international community.  Instead of talking, Israel has become an 
observer that deploys artillery.  For months, Israel has avoided 
negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas.  By doing so, Israeli is 
strengthening Palestinian extremists, and what is happening in the 
Gaza Strip is adding fuel to the bonfire." 
 
----------- 
¶3. Mideast: 
----------- 
 
Summary: 
-------- 
 
Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz: "Next week, Olmert will hear from George Bush 
about the American administration's aspirations for the two 
remaining years of the president's term, and whether he will invest 
efforts in Middle East diplomacy.  An understanding of the American 
position is vital for the prime minister's situation assessment; but 
upon his return from Washington, Olmert will have to explain to the 
public where we go from here." 
 
Block Quotes: 
------------- 
 
"Olmert in Autumn" 
 
Diplomatic correspondent Aluf Benn wrote in independent, 
left-leaning Ha'aretz (11/9): "The results of Friday's Haaretz 
survey indicate a growing and worrisome rift between Israel's 
citizens and the political system that is supposed to represent 
them.  The prime minister and defense minister have lost the 
public's confidence.... One can say that the distaste for the 
government of Ehud Olmert and Amir Peretz stems not only from the 
results of the war in Lebanon, but also from a lack of hope for the 
future.  In the autumn of his rule, Olmert is fulfilling what he 
promised: 'to manage the country without an agenda.'.... He [Olmert] 
still believes in evacuating settlements from the West Bank and 
demarcating a new border on the hills.  But his hasty abandonment of 
the convergence plan left him without anything.  The diplomatic 
channels are blocked.... Now the time has come for Olmert to find 
himself a direction.... In his recent speeches, Olmert has raised 
several banners: establishing a constitution, revising the system of 
government, rehabilitating the North, signing an accord with the 
Palestinians, exercising deployment vis-a-vis Iran, making peace 
with Lebanon, confronting the struggle against Hamas, tackling 
poverty.  All of them are fine and worthy objectives, but now he 
must choose.  A prime minister generally has one opportunity in each 
term to set a central goal and work to advance it. It is impossible 
to march on five parallel paths.  Next week, Olmert will hear from 
George Bush about the American administration's aspirations for the 
two remaining years of the president's term, and whether he will 
invest efforts in Middle East diplomacy.  An understanding of the 
American position is vital for the prime minister's situation 
assessment; but upon his return from Washington, Olmert will have to 
explain to the public where we go from here." 
 
--------- 
¶4. Syria: 
--------- 
 
Summary: 
-------- 
 
Columnist Larry Derfner wrote in conservative, independent Jerusalem 
Post: "The Syrian regime is secular; its alliances with Hizbullah 
and Iran grow out of political convenience, not ideology; it has 
kept the cease-fire on the Golan for three decades; it has talked to 
Israel before and is seemingly eager to do so again.  Maybe it's a 
bluff.  Maybe negotiations would fail like they did the first time. 
But with the IDF predicting war with Syria next summer, what do we 
have to lose? Nothing but our despair." 
Block Quotes: 
------------- 
 
"Talk to Syria" 
Columnist Larry Derfner wrote in conservative, independent Jerusalem 
Post (11/9): "If for no other reason than the Israeli people's 
psychological well-being, the Olmert government has to accept 
Syria's offer to begin peace negotiations.  Since the summer war in 
Lebanon, Israelis have gone into a serious, dangerous depression, 
and it's only getting deeper.... Israelis have resigned themselves 
to a life of war and a future of war.... The only options left, most 
Israelis are now convinced, is fight or flight, and since very few 
of us are about to flee the country, that leaves only fight -- here, 
there, wherever.... NOW HERE comes Syrian President Bashar Assad 
and, only a few days ago, Foreign Minister Walid Muallem to urge 
Israel to talk peace -- and Ehud Olmert says no.... The real reason 
Olmert won't talk is because the Bush administration won't let him, 
something the administration hasn't even tried to hide.  As far as 
Bush is concerned, Syria is an auxiliary member of the axis of evil, 
and you don't talk to them.... This strategy has worked about as 
well with Syria as it has with Iran and North Korea, and about as 
well as the crusade for democracy has worked in Iraq.  It may be 
about to change.  Between the congressional election results and the 
exit strategy from Iraq being devised by the forceful diplomat James 
Baker, Bush could decide that on second thought, maybe Israel and 
Syria ought to sit down and try to settle their differences.... WHAT 
WOULD Olmert say to that? He'd say, 'Yes, sir.'.... And then masses 
of Israelis who once hoped for such an agreement, but who have since 
soured on the possibility of peace with Syria or anybody else in the 
Middle East, would start to hope again.... The Syrian regime is 
secular; its alliances with Hizbullah and Iran grow out of political 
convenience, not ideology; it has kept the cease-fire on the Golan 
for three decades; it has talked to Israel before and is seemingly 
eager to do so again.  Maybe it's a bluff.  Maybe negotiations would 
fail like they did the first time.  But with the IDF predicting war 
with Syria next summer, what do we have to lose? Nothing but our 
despair." 
JONES