US embassy cable - 04TELAVIV1632

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 001632 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/16/2014 
TAGS: PGOV, PREL, KWBG, IS, GAZA DISENGAGEMENT, GOI INTERNAL, ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS 
SUBJECT: FOG REMAINS FOLLOWING SHARON WIN ON VAGUE 
DISENGAGEMENT PLAN SPEECH 
 
 
Classified By: Political Counselor Norm Olsen for reason 1.4 (b) and (d 
). 
 
1.  (C) Summary and comment:  Following a vaguely-worded 
speech that was supposed to be about his disengagement plan, 
PM Sharon turned a March 15 Knesset vote on that speech into 
a so-called "vote of confidence" on his government -- which 
he won 46-45, with 29 members absent.  The vote, however 
close, meant little since only the opposition can call for a 
"no-confidence" vote aimed at toppling a government, and even 
then, a no-confidence vote requires 61 votes to pass. 
Sharon's tactics nonetheless resulted in the right-wing 
coalition partners absenting themselves from the confidence 
vote rather than voting against Sharon's speech, and 
demonstrating these parties' desire to stay in the coalition. 
 Media pundits and politicos agreed that while the speech 
revealed nothing new about Sharon's strategy for 
disengagement, the vote demonstrated the dissension within 
the coalition.  In any event, PM Sharon's tactics 
successfully steered the Knesset away from a vote on 
disengagement, leaving observers still in the fog about the 
plan itself and whether the plan could win a Knesset 
majority.  End summary. 
 
--------------------------------------------- - 
Sharon Follows Adept Parliamentary Tactics... 
--------------------------------------------- - 
 
2.  (C) At the initiative of the left-wing Meretz party, 
which collected the required signatures of 40 MKs, PM Sharon 
was required under Knesset rules to appear before the body 
March 15 to discuss his disengagement plan.  Sharon 
reportedly wisely followed the advice of coalition whip 
Gideon Sa'ar (Likud), and, at the last minute, turned a vote 
on his speech into a vote of confidence on the government, 
which he won, 46-45.  (Note: Votes of "confidence," even if 
lost, have no ramifications for the government other than 
possible embarrassment and loss of credibility.  An 
opposition-called "no-confidence" motion, which must also 
nominate an alternative candidate for prime minister, can 
topple a government if approved by a Knesset majority of 61 
votes.)  Sa'ar rightly banked on the two right-wing coalition 
parties -- the National Religious Party (NRP) and the 
National Union -- not wanting to vote against their own 
government.  According to Shinui Party advisor Yoram Levy, 
Sa'ar had met with the NRP before the plenary to reach some 
sort of compromise.  In any event, the NRP and National Union 
MKs absented themselves rather than vote against the 
government.  According to the published voting record, 10 
Likud members also were absent from the vote. 
 
3.  (C) Sharon reportedly also followed Sa'ar's advice to 
avoid providing any details about his disengagement plan and 
to exclude any reference to such controversial catch-phrases 
as "painful concessions," and even the word "disengagement." 
The speech was little more than Sharon's appeal, in what he 
said is the absence of a Palestinian partner, for Israel to 
act proactively, thereby preventing a political vacuum from 
being filled by any one of "dozens" of more damaging plans -- 
such as the Saudi proposal.  Sharon noted that National 
Security Council chief Giora Eiland is currently formulating 
the plan, and promised that when the government approves a 
detailed disengagement plan, he will submit it to the Knesset 
for a vote. 
 
4.  (C) Opposition MKs complained that they were still in the 
dark about Sharon's plan.  Shas MK Amnon Cohen griped to 
poloff on March 16 that Sharon's speech did not reveal any 
information on which West Bank settlements Sharon proposes to 
dismantle, and that no solution was proposed for who would 
"supervise" the Gaza Strip after an Israeli withdrawal.  He 
underlined that Shas cannot take a position until it knows 
more about the plan.  Labor leader Shimon Peres accused 
Sharon of not even having a plan. 
 
------------------------------------- 
Coalitions Can Teeter for a Long Time 
------------------------------------- 
 
5.  (C) Media pundits and some MKs say the close vote of 
confidence demonstrates just how shaky the coalition is. 
Shinui advisor Levy speculated that "Sharon is losing control 
of the coalition."  He also pointed to the absence of 10 
Likud MKs as indicative of Sharon's problems within Likud. 
Meretz MK Roman Bronfman asserted to poloff on March 16 that 
it was just a matter of time before the NRP and National 
Union leave the coalition and that Sharon was actively 
coordinating with Peres to form a unity government.  Bronfman 
emphasized that, in fact, it was Peres who did all of 
Sharon's work at the Knesset plenary by "speaking against" 
the right-wing parties after they criticized Sharon.  He said 
that Peres "harshly" accused these parties of providing no 
alternatives to Sharon's plan.  He speculated that Sharon 
would use the March 25-May 2 Knesset recess to work with 
Peres to form a coalition and to gain Likud support for a 
unity government.  Shas MK Cohen questioned whether Sharon 
could muster the necessary Likud votes to support a coalition 
with Labor.  Shinui MK Ronny Brizon, however, commented to 
poloff on March 16 that "many coalitions and governments in 
Israel have teetered on the brink for a very long time."  He 
stressed that these votes were only an indication of 
problems, not a sign of an impending collapse of the 
coalition. 
 
-------------------------------------------- 
If It's Monday, It Must be No-Confidence Day 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
6.  (SBU)  While the media often depicts the now weekly 
Monday no-confidence votes on Sharon's government as close 
calls for Sharon, none of these votes have come close to 
bringing down the government.  Following are various types of 
Knesset votes and their ramifications for the GOI: 
 
-- Vote on PM's policy speech: The Knesset can vote to 
approve or disapprove policy speeches.  If Sharon had allowed 
a straight Knesset vote on his disengagement speech, despite 
the fact that it contained no details of his plan or even 
referred to dismantling settlements, it was likely that the 
NRP and National Union -- as well as some Likud members -- 
would have voted against the speech.  This might have been 
embarrassing for Sharon on the broader issue of 
disengagement, but it would not have had any concrete 
ramifications for the government. 
 
-- Vote of confidence in the government: A vote of 
confidence, which is a government-initiated action, has 
symbolic significance for the government.  If Sharon had lost 
this vote it would have been embarrassing, but, again, would 
not result in the fall of the government. 
 
-- No-confidence votes: A motion of no-confidence, which may 
only be called by the opposition, can bring down the 
government if approved by a majority of all Knesset members, 
or 61 votes, and if the party calling for the vote also 
submits a nomination for a replacement, with a signed letter 
from that nominee that he or she agrees to form a government. 
 All of the no-confidence votes taken to date on the Sharon 
government -- called on a weekly basis in the last couple of 
months -- have been close tallies yea and nay, but nowhere 
near the 61 votes needed, and there has been no indication 
that the parties calling the votes have had any replacements 
in mind. 
 
********************************************* ******************** 
Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv 
 
You can also access this site through the State Department's 
Classified SIPRNET website. 
********************************************* ******************** 
KURTZER