US embassy cable - 05TELAVIV4859

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 TEL AVIV 004859 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA, NEA/IPA, NEA/PPD 
 
WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESS OFFICE, SIT ROOM 
NSC FOR NEA STAFF 
 
JERUSALEM ALSO FOR ICD 
LONDON ALSO FOR HKANONA AND POL 
PARIS ALSO FOR POL 
ROME FOR MFO 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IS, KMDR, MEDIA REACTION REPORT, GAZA DISENGAGEMENT 
SUBJECT: SPECIAL MEDIA REACTION: RELIGIOUS ZIONISM VS. THE STATE 
OF ISRAEL: RECENT MEDIA COMMENTARY ON DISENGAGEMENT PART 3 
 
1.  Summary:  With disengagement slated to begin less than two 
weeks from now, it seems most Gaza settlers have grasped that, be 
it voluntarily or by force, they will soon be effectively 
"disengaged" from their Gaza Strip homes.  The goal, therefore, 
of the anti-disengagement campaign has shifted from preventing or 
postponing disengagement for as long as possible to attempting to 
searing negative memories of this exercise into the Israeli 
national psyche as a way to head off the next disengagement. 
Analysis of the activists' efforts has occupied the majority of 
editorial column space in recent weeks.  Leading opinion makers 
weigh in on the efficacy of right-wing demonstrations; the 
legitimacy of the security sector's actions to control said 
demonstrations; and the rabbis of the far right who encourage and 
"incite" them.  Logistical preparations for removal of goods and 
people, PA and Israeli coordination efforts, and "day after" 
scenarios have also been highlighted. End Summary. 
 
-------------------------- 
Gaza:  Closed for Business 
-------------------------- 
 
2.  Several leading opinion makers declared July 14 as "the day 
disengagement began."  This characterization owes to Prime 
Minister Sharon's decree that the Gaza Strip would henceforth be 
closed to all non-residents.  Shimon Shiffer of mass-circulation, 
pluralist Yediot Ahronot writes on July 14, "The decision to 
close the Gaza Strip has many shades of significance, some far 
reaching: it would not be an overstatement to say that the 
central significance is that Israeli democracy is prepared to 
deal with those who want to rise up and force it to do what they 
want....The closure order issued yesterday by Sharon put an end 
to the planned parliamentary tricks to thwart the evacuation, 
could stop the denial process nurtured by the hard core of Gush 
Katif settlers. That's it, the die has been cast..."  Yaron 
London, in Yediot Ahronot, describes the Gaza closure on July 14 
as not "unprecedented" though usually utilized against the other 
"political camp."  He writes, "Declaring an area a closed 
military zone to those who are not permanent residents is a 
practice that is frequently employed toward Palestinians and left 
wing demonstrators. When the closure orders were used against the 
latter, the excuse was that it was necessary to maintain public 
order.  Usually it was not the demonstrators who were disrupting 
order, but those against whom they came to protest, but the 
military authorities did not get too deep into the question of 
who was responsible for the clashes.  They expelled those who 
wished to exercise their right to speak up, the same right now 
cited by those who oppose disengagement." 
 
3.  The far-right, represented by Hagai Hubermann in nationalist, 
Orthodox Hatzofe, concurs that July 14th is a turning point on 
the road to disengagement, although the conclusions he draws from 
this quickly diverge from those of the mainstream media.  On July 
14 he writes, "The battle for Gush Katif began yesterday, there 
is no question about that.  A bit early, not according to the 
original timetable of the uprooting opponents, with the 
government employing the element of surprise-but these facts must 
not make us weak.  We can win. It will be a tough battle, not a 
simple one, against hostile forces, against an imperious and 
dictatorial government.  Opponents of uprooting will have to 
recruit enormous forces to meet the difficult task whose 
definition is hard to actually utter:  to defeat the IDF. Bring 
the Israel Defense Forces to its knees." 
 
--------------------- 
The Limits to Dissent 
--------------------- 
 
4.  Anti-disengagement activists, galvanized primarily by the 
Settlers Council composed of heads of local councils in the 
territories, have rallied in large numbers in recent weeks, first 
in Kfar Maimon, then in Sderot and Ofakim with more gatherings in 
the works.  Leading media have closely followed their every move, 
with commentary spanning the spectrum from left to right- some 
authors emphasize the vital role of freedom of speech and 
movement within a democracy, while others decry the 
demonstrations as lawless and a drain on security sector 
resources and personnel.  Deputy Managing Editor and columnist 
Caroline B. Glick wrote in conservative, independent Jerusalem 
Post on July 22, "When a democratic government adopts an immoral 
policy, it is the duty of its loyal citizens, through acts of 
protest and civil disobedience, to hold up a mirror to their 
leaders and fellow citizens to force them to contend with the 
implications of their policies."  Yael Gwurtz writes in Yediot 
Ahronot on July 25, referring to the events in Kfar Maimon,  "In 
the moment of truth, the leadership of the disengagement 
opponents was revealed as being capable of preventing the threat 
to democracy that it had fueled for many months with its own 
hands...The Settlers Council received credit from the 
public...only due to the fact that it proved its ability to 
control the masses that it brought to demonstrate...." 
 
5.  Amnon Dankner, Editor-in-Chief of popular, pluralist Maariv, 
distills the conflict down to the issue of protest and resistance 
versus attempting to subvert the law.  He writes on August 1, 
"The real debate that is being waged today -- with anger that is 
no less noisy than the debate over disengagement itself -- 
pertains to the boundaries of protest and the resistance to 
disengagement and evacuation.  The definition itself already 
demarcates a clear boundary:  Protest -- yes. Resistance -- yes, 
to a certain degree.  An attempt to thwart [disengagement] -- 
no...." Expressing fatigue with the anti-disengagement movement, 
Nahum Barnea writes in Yediot Ahronot on August 1, "Enough 
already, really.  Enough already of the daily threats to turn the 
country upside down; enough already of the announcements about 
marches into the Gaza Strip, be they single pronged, dual-pronged 
or triple-pronged.  There hasn't been an attempt so blatant, so 
impudent since Mussolini's march on Rome in 1922, to change, by 
pedestrian means, the legal decisions made by the head of 
state..." 
 
6.  Editor in Chief Lutfi Mashour of the independent, moderate 
Arabic-language newspaper A-Sennara comments on the preferential 
treatment Jewish protestors receive as compared to their Arab 
compatriots.  He writes on July 22, "If the protestors were 
Arabs, then how many martyrs would have been fallen from the 
reaction of the police, security and the politicians??!  In the 
October 2000 events, hundreds protested in much more peaceful 
ways than today's settlers protestors, and ended up with 13 
martyrs, while here, we have 40,000 violent protestors who went 
back safely to their homes without so much as a scratch..." 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
Freedom of Movement? Depends Which Bus You Are On 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
7.  While thousands of disengagement opponents gathered in Kfar 
Maimon for the July 19 - 20 protests, many others did not reach 
their destination, since their buses were halted en route by 
Israeli security authorities.  As demonstrations grow in size and 
strength, Israeli political leadership and the security 
establishment appear to be taking no unnecessary chances, 
evidenced by the precautionary closure of the Gaza strip to all 
non-residents.  Some opinion makers, such as Ofer Shelah of 
Yediot Ahronot, comment that such actions are undemocratic.  He 
writes on July 19,"There is no justification for restricting the 
freedom of movement of thousands of people, when there is no 
proof that all of them plan to use violence, to block traffic or 
any other act that could justify preventive action....This was 
political stupidity, but that is not the main point. 
Disengagement was approved by a cabinet decision and a Knesset 
vote.  The executive authorities must do their best to carry it 
out.  [...]If somebody organizes a demonstration without a 
permit, the law contains enough authority to punish them. But 
from this to preventing people trying to go from Kiryat Shmona to 
Netivot to attend a march, the distance is long."  Uri Orbach's 
concurring opinion is stated more forcefully in Yediot Ahronot. 
"The great danger to democracy is actually being voiced now by 
the intellectual riffraff that is pitting the state and its 
institutions against the demonstrators, in the name of the law, 
of course.  With such liberals, democracy really doesn't need 
enemies." 
 
----------------------- 
Rabbi or Rabble Rouser? 
----------------------- 
 
8.  Vigorous debate between the secular and religious publics has 
always been a prominent part of Israeli culture and politics. 
Surrounding the issue of disengagement, however, the debate has 
grown contentious.  Several leading rabbis have not only 
encouraged their followers to disobey orders, they have 
distributed instructional guides to facilitate disobedience. 
This problem has been particularly pronounced among religious 
soldiers participating in the "hesder yeshiva" program, an 
arrangement between the IDF and religious students, which allows 
them to fulfill a shortened period of military service while also 
pursuing their studies.  As Yossi Yehoshua explains in Yediot 
Ahronot on July 18, Rabbi Elyakim Levanon of the Hesder yeshiva 
Elon Moreh, has distributed a guide for IDF soldiers, which 
explains how to avoid carrying out the evacuation order. It 
instructs the soldiers what to say to commanders who ask them to 
take part in the evacuation, suggesting that the soldiers refrain 
from saying that they are disobeying orders, "but rather that 
they are unable to carry out the order: `When asked `so do you 
refuse?' answer: `I do not refuse, I demand not to be forced to 
carry out an order that contradicts the Torah I have studied, the 
education I have been given and my Jewish morality.'" 
 
9.  Anat Gov of Yediot Ahronot expounds on this issue on July 19. 
"In Hebrew, there are two meanings to the word rav [rabbi].  One 
is an adjective that means:  Teacher, well-versed, wise, 
important, scholarly and learned.  The other is a verb that 
means: Chastising, rabble-rousing, agitating, challenging, 
fighting, provoking, quarreling, struggling and inciting. Which 
of these two meanings is more suitable for the former chief 
rabbis, Rabbi Shapira and Rabbi Eliyahu, who ruled last weekend 
that religious soldiers should refuse to serve at Gush Katif 
roadblocks?  ...Now, at the very time when we are in the greatest 
need of spiritual and moral authority, one that will behave 
responsibly, in order to help us get through this crisis safely, 
then in a place where there are so many rabbis-not a single one 
endeavors to be a rav, a true rabbi."  Amnon Dankner and Dan 
Margalit of Maariv reiterate this criticism of Jewish religious 
leaders.  They write on July 14,  "Whether it be because embers 
of extremism burn in their hearts or because they are being 
dragged in the wake of the extremist section of the public they 
head, one thing is eminently clear: except for a few of them 
(rabbis), they incite their followers to do everything that is 
wrong....And so, with criminal irresponsibility, with arrogance 
and a poisonous tongue, too large a part of the rabbis of the 
national-religious public speak evil...." 
 
------------- 
The Day After 
------------- 
 
10.  Several "day after" scenarios are also getting play in the 
media, from doomsday predictions to hopes for restarting road map 
negotiations.  These headlines have generally taken a back seat 
to the more colorful news of orange-clad protestors.  Editor in 
Chief Lutfi Mashour wrote in Arabic language newspaper A-Sennara 
on July 1, "There is no doubt that today the Jewish Israeli 
people is going through a real ordeal, which they made themselves 
through their leaders and political plans through the past 
decades. [...]What is happening today is a real test, and might 
be the biggest and most dangerous test for the entity of the 
Jewish people... In any case, the Palestinian people will have a 
major influence on the development within the Jewish 
society...Let us not forget how many times the Palestinians have 
saved the Israeli governments!" 
 
11.  According to Ben Caspit of Maariv, the battle between 
religious Zionism and the state is being redefined.  On August 3 
he writes, "Could it be that it's over?  One of the settlers' 
leaders, in a moment of openness, told me yesterday, `It is clear 
that we are no longer battling about Gush Katif. The war is about 
the next stage.  About home.  About Judea and Samaria.' The 
energy is still there, but is beginning to fade."  Independent, 
left leaning Arabic-language Panorama appears to have adopted a 
position of cautious optimism looking toward the future.  Editor 
in Chief Bassam Jaber writes on July 29, "The progress in the 
relationship between the Israeli government and the Palestinian 
Authority is reflected in the recent agreements between the two 
sides, which have never been seen before... We don't want to 
foresee the future, but it seems like there are good intentions 
to strengthen the `calming' and open the doors also to European 
and international participation in the Middle East peace 
process...."  Commentator Marina Rozenblit wrote in conservative 
Russian-language daily Vesty (August 2):"...as the implementation 
date of the disengagement plan approaches, the argument that 'it 
will not happen because it can never happen' ... becomes 
irrelevant....  An undercover dialog conducted between Prime 
Minister Sharon's closest supporters and religious leaders of the 
opposition [to disengagement] is additional evidence that 
although the latter are continuing the struggle ... to express 
their protests, they are actually almost reconciled with the 
inevitability of [disengagement]." 
 
12.  Opinion makers have also commented on logistical 
preparations for the "day after," including the future of border 
crossings which were discussed by Nahum Barnea in Yediot Ahronot 
on July 15.  "The Israelis are convinced that the passages they 
are currently building alongside the fence are a wonderful 
example of a humanitarian act of charity.  Instead of spending 
half a day in an exhausting line in front of a soldier, instead 
of waiting for a week until goods are released, the pedestrian 
will wait one or two hours at the crossing -- and the freight no 
longer than one day.  For this purpose, Israel is investing two 
billion shekels [around USD 440 million] in new, spacious, 
sophisticated, and civilian crossings...." 
 
13.  Also addressed in the press:  plans for a linkage, either by 
road or by train, between Gaza and the West Bank; a future 
airport and seaport; the fate of settler greenhouses and homes; 
and security responsibility for the Philadelphi corridor between 
the Gaza Strip and Egypt.  Commentators have also highlighted the 
cooperation and coordination efforts, or lack thereof, between 
Israeli and Palestinian leaders on these issues among others. 
Middle East affairs commentator Guy Bechor wrote in Yediot 
Aharonot on July 28, "Astonishingly, it turns out that Israel's 
decision-makers have recently agreed to the opening of an 
independent seaport and airport in the Gaza Strip.  At that very 
moment, the discussion about the Philadelphi route and the 
Egyptian security strip evaporated, since the Palestinians will 
no longer have a need to smuggle weapons in unfeasible ways 
through tunnels in the Sinai; they'll be able to do so directly, 
openly, and elegantly using their own planes and ships..." 
 
14.  Comment:  During recent weeks anti-disengagement 
demonstrators have been spotlighted in the media as they gather 
in mass demonstrations, heeding the call of Jewish religious 
leaders, determined to disrupt public order and infiltrate the 
Gaza strip leading up to disengagement.  According to many 
leading opinion makers, these acts and actors are symbolic of the 
larger battle being waged, that of religious Zionism vs. the 
state of Israel.  The outcome of this battle, unlike the outcome 
of disengagement, which is now accepted as inevitable, will be 
played out in the months and perhaps years to come as "day after" 
scenarios play out. 
 
KURTZER