Israel Resource Review 15th March, 2004


Ariel Sharon Positions Himself at the Beck and Call of the U.S. State Department
David Bedein

For the past decade, U.S. demands for Israel to dismantle Jewish communities in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights and the Gaza strip were sweetened with talk of a " peace process" and economic benefits that would accrue for the Israeli people from such a move.

Now, gone are any such promises of peace when the U.S. calls for Israel to dismantle Jewish communities. Undersecretary of State David Satterfield recently told the media at the State Department that the U.S. simply demanded that Israel dismantle its Jewish communities in areas that Israel acquired in a defensive war in 1967. Period.

As a matter of policy, Israel had offered to trade some of these areas for bona fide peace agreements, and that is precisely what Israel did in 1982, when Israel handed over the Sinai and dismantled 16 Northern Sinai Jewish communities as a part of the formal peace agreement between Israel and Egypt brokered by the U.S.

This is not the first time that the State Department brought pressure to bear against Israel. On September 1, 1982, President Reagan issued a plan that also mandated unilateral Israeli withdrawal from vast areas that Israel had acquired after the 1967 war.

Yet nothing happened at the time. In February 1993, I interviewed the man who was Israel's Prime Minister back in 1982, Yitzhak Shamir. I asked him how it was that the U.S. made demands and nothing happened? Shamir's answer was that "we said no, and they understood the we meant it, and they backed off."

Today, however, the State Department pressure seems to be working.

That is not because Israel has any peace partner or any peace agreement in the offing. It is because the U.S. has new leverage on Israel, which has asked the U.S. for billions of dollars of loans to enable the Jewish state to cope with the loss of foreign investment during the four year guerrilla war of attrition that has wreaked economic havoc.

Ariel Sharon, Israel's current Prime Minister, has announced that he will succumb to State Department policy dictates and dismember the Jewish communities in the Katif district of Gaza.

The question, however, is whether the U.S. and the sycophantic Israeli Prime Minister will now transform a democratic ally like Israel into a banana republic.

Israel is often referred to as the only democracy in the Middle East. Let us hope and pray that it stays that way. After all, it is surrounded by hostile dictatorships where totalitarian rule is the norm and that constantly seek Israel's destruction.

With a system of proportional representative democracy, much like the United Kingdom, the Israeli Knesset parliamentary elections can often produce as many as twenty political parties out of only 120 seats.

The Israeli Prime Minister therefore always presides over a coalition government that consists of a diverse amount of political parties to which he is accountable. Those parties are also accountable to the Israeli Prime Minister.

That is Israel's system of checks and balances which has kept Israel's democracy working through the continual state of war that the Jewish state has coped with since its inception in 1948.

Yet on March 9, 2004, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ignored Israel's parliamentary system of democracy and behaved like a dictator.

On that day, our news agency learned that the Israeli Prime Minister had unilaterally informed officials of U.S. intelligence that he would begin to dismantle the 21 thriving Israeli farming communities and evict 1200 Israeli families of the Katif district of Gaza as early as May 1, 2004.

Prior to his Pentagon leak, Sharon held no cabinet discussion or decision, no Knesset parliamentary discussion or decision and no Israel National Security Council discussion or decision. He acted alone.

And only last week, a member of the Knesset revealed yet another secret plan documented by Sharon to brutally evacuate the Jewish communities of Katif by ordering the cutoff of all their water, electricity and police or military protection.

Sharon's foreign press spokesman would not deny the veracity of that document.

This is not the first time that Sharon has ignored the decision-making process of Israel's democracy. After trying an earlier unilateral move on his own, Sharon in May, 2003, was forced to deal with the Israeli cabinet that ultimately approved the "The Road Map" prepared by the "quartet"-- the U.S., the UN, the EU and Russia-- all of them foreign powers.

The cabinet added fourteen clear reservations, designed to protect Israel's absolute autonomy and security, which include reasonable demands that "The Palestine Authority (PA) dismantle all terror organizations," and that the "end of the process will lead to the end of all claims and end the conflict."

The U.S., however, has ignored Israel's reservations, and Sharon has followed suit by making it a policy of saying and reiterating that "Israel accepts the Road Map," as if it does so without any qualms.

Following Sharon's meeting with three top U.S. officials on Thursday, I asked Sharon's official spokesman if the Prime Minister had brought up Israel's reservations to the Road Map. The spokesman whispered "yes". I then asked if the reservations would be mentioned in the press release following the meeting. The PM spokesman said, "no", giving "space consideration" as the reason, and saying that the press release would be very short.

Sharon has therefore formally relinquished Israel's independence, placing it instead under the thumb of outside powers and financial interests that may not have Israel's best interests in mind.

In the words of Dr. Uzi Arad, the head of the Herzlia Interdisciplinary Center of Strategic Studies, "It was predictable that the concept of a 'unilateral' withdrawal would never work . . . The result is that Israel has fallen prey to strange bedfellows."

Indeed, the French and British governments, the European Union and the government of Egypt have all been discussing the possibility of deploying troops to Gaza to fill the void that would be created by a pullout of Israeli communities from the area.

Hence, the comparison to a banana republic.

The question has been asked: Can Sharon implement such a radical policy without the approval of the Israeli Government, Knesset or Israel National Security Council? Remember he is a democratically elected leader of a robust democracy on par with the United States and Great Britain.

The answer is that he just might be able to get away with it:

Both the Arabs and the Jews of Gaza still live under military rule. Thus it would be no problem to make life so uncomfortable for the Jews in Katif that they could not survive there for one day.

At this point, that means that Ariel Sharon challenges Israel's democratic system, for only in a totalitarian country would we normally witness a regime that would force its citizens out of land and homes that they have lawfully bought and farmed.

Katif's 21 Jewish farming communities represent one of the most prosperous and productive contributions to Israel's free market economy. These competitive farming communities often beat out the Israel Labor Party's socialist Kibbutz collective farms for produce contracts for export abroad. Indeed, 65 percent of Israel's tomatoes for export abroad emanate from Katif. Within domestic Israeli society, a conflict of interest exists for farming concerns within Israel's 1948 green

line who stand to benefit from such a removal. Most Americans and Europeans are unaware of this.

The Israel Labor Party, instead of fulfilling its responsibility as the leading opposition party to the imperious way in which Sharon is handling his role as Prime Minister, is waiting in the wings to join the new government if and when the National Religious Party and National Union Party decide to leave his control. Those parties are not where he normally draws his support. A survey of Sharons's ruling Likud party shows that a majority of the 41 Likud Party members now oppose Sharon's policy.

Thus the only effective option against Sharon's plan centers on his own Likud

party members and cabinet ministers opposing him.

And only when Likud members and their staffers are literally swamped with telephone calls to their cell phones and their Knesset offices or forced to stand in line at the post office to sign for hundreds of registered letters each day can things be turned around.

The Free World can and should make its voice heard.

Katif should be understood by the entire free world community as being under the threat and the black cloud of eradication as a sop to the Arab world.

At a time when the Prime Minister of a democracy has announced his intention to oppress some of his own citizens, those citizens need to know that the free world has not forgotten them. Katif is no different than the Sudetenland of Czechoslavakia at the start of World War Two that was given away by Neville Chamberlain.

History is repeating itself in the War On Terror.

Members of Israel's Knesset can be reached by writing the name of the Knesset member c/o Knesset, Jerusalem, Israel.

All members of the Knesset are listed at

Printer friendly version of this article

Return to Contents

Arafat's Fatah: Bombed Occupied Ashdod
Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA
(Independent Media Review & Analysis

Israel Television Channel Two Arab Affairs Correspondent Ehud Yaari emphasized in his report of the terrorist attack on March 14th at Ashdod that murdered at least 7 Israelis that the Fatah announcement after the attack termed Ashdod as occupied territory - a change in the terminology typically used by Arafat's Fatah when referring to targets within the Green Line.

The announcement noted that while the suicide bombers were from the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip that this was a refugee camp and their true home was the "Palestinian town that is now Israeli occupied Ashdod".


Printer friendly version of this article

Return to Contents

Dov Weissglass -
"Consiglieri" of the State of Israel

Ben Caspit
Features Reporter, Maariv

He despises the Chief of the General Staff, doesn't appreciate the head of the Israeli Security Agency and his comments about the Head of Intelligence Directorate are not fit for print.

  • While the heads of the defense establishment were discussing the disengagement plan, he was already settling things in Washington.

  • How Dov Weisglass was transformed from an attorney specializing in shady deals into one of the people with the most influence on the history of the Middle East.

  • Last Friday, the Chief of the General Staff Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon called a meeting of his think tank. Members of the forum include selected generals from the General Staff and other experts. Every week they focus on a relevant issue, attempt to re-analyze it and develop creative concepts or solutions. This time, Ya'alon asked the participants to leave everything else aside and focus on the million-dollar question: the disengagement plan, an outline of its character and plans for implementing it in the field.

While they were still discussing the issue, Brigadier General Mike Herzog, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz's military attaché, took the role of the small child, who sees "the emperor's new clothes" and said, "Here you are discussing disengagement but you are out of touch. Duby Weisglass has already laid out all the details in Washington, you're spinning your wheels".

The Chief of the General Staff and many of his top brass went berserk. It wasn't the first time that they received a report on the adventures of the Weisglass and Condoleezza in the big city. Last week Mofaz hosted two meetings to work on operational plans for the evacuation of the Gaza Strip. Members of the defense establishment are trying to build professional work plans, learn the lessons of the escape from Lebanon, weigh the data, synthesize all of the intelligence and information with the demands of the government when along comes Weisglass and settles everything in America. They are thinking, weighing, considering - and he is doing.

Supporting Daddy

The real tension that has developed during the last few months between the upper echelons of the military and the political leadership focuses, more and more, on the Prime Minister's Bureau Chief, Dov Weisglass, who is known in some security forums as "consiglieri". Many things could and are being said about Weisglass but he is not Chief of the General Staff, yet. However, according to information circulating around military headquarters in Tel Aviv, he in fact is. He unrolls maps, draws lines, explains movements, moves military forces, uproots settlements and grinds them against each other.

Ya'alon and more than a few other generals see what there is to see, hear what there is to hear and are furious. For now, they are relatively quiet. When Sharon reprimanded Ya'alon on television this week, it was just the trailer. The full-length, dramatic action film is yet to come.

To Weisglass's credit, let it be said immediately, that he is [only] fulfilling his boss's desires. At every opportunity, Sharon makes it clear that he is not being lead, not being convinced and not being deceived. He, Sharon, and no one else, is making the decisions. Weisglass has also made it clear that Maj. Gen. Giora Eiland is the person describing the operational, military aspects to the Americans. However, from a semi-historical perspective, there is no doubt that the presence of Dov Weisglass in the Prime Minister's bureau during this critical period has given Sharon a significant thrust forward and converted desires into plans on the ground and given a turbo-charged boost to his cranky engine.

Not everyone close to Sharon supports the format that the disengagement plan has taken. Many of them, inside and outside of the bureau, thought about evacuating Netzarim and maybe one or two more settlements in the Gaza Strip and nothing more, before returning in peace to [Sharon's] Sycamore Ranch. Just enough to prove that it can be done, to hear the cheers, receive the compensation and collect the rewards while still preserving the coalition.

But Weisglass took it full speed ahead. One of his chief allies, by the way, is Gilad Sharon. Of all the people in the world, Gilad Sharon is the one his father relies on the most, in these fateful days when the destiny of the disengagement plan will be determined. The process could turn disengagement into entanglement. The situation is very delicate. Every voice counts. Every move is influential.

During the last year, without any advance planning, Dov Weisglass has become one of the people with the most influence on the history of the region. Many credit him with this achievement. Others (fewer in number), consider it the improper, disaster-prone take-over of an elite attorney, a specialist in shady deals from smoky rooms, who is leading an entire country to an undefined destination. To his credit, Weisglass supplies the goods for everyone. Unlike members of the General Staff, he has a sense of humor, a very good sense of humor. He despises the Chief of the General Staff (the feeling is mutual), doesn't appreciate the head of the Israeli Security Agency (in the bureau Dichter is called "the watchmaker" and gets good grades for preventing attacks but very low ones for strategic thinking and perception). His comments about the Head of Intelligence Directorate are not fit for print.

On the one hand, it is not nice to behave this way. On the other hand, it is refreshing. For a change, a senior government official does not accept everything the top brass says as if it were divine revelation, does not automatically revere their doctrine, thinks independently and helps his boss clear the obstacles from his difficult path up the mountains against large (possibly larger) forces and all odds. Ehud Barak was the last one who did it, went he withdraw from Lebanon against the advise of the army. The results remain controversial to this day.

Over the years, Shimon Peres regularly complained about the army's take over of diplomatic, intellectual, ideological and political life in Israel. His advisor Avi Gil disparaged this situation in meetings with Ariel Sharon, Uzi Shani and Omri Sharon, throughout his entire term of office. Behold, how strange history can be. Sharon, through Weisglass, is the one who made the radical change.

The plan is currently being developed.

The Americans were here and went home. Weisglass was there and returned home. Sharon is supposed to follow (not definite). A draft of the Security Council's disengagement plan was published in Maariv on Thursday but we mustn't forget that the ball is now in Sharon's court. If he wants, he could dribble it into the opposing court. If he wants, he could kick it into the stands. The Prime Minister could get cold feet at the last moment, change direction, freeze the process or maneuver it into the depths of forgetfulness. Everything is still possible. Nothing is irreversible. Weisglass will always be there to explain everything in the best possible way.

Back to the Chief of the General Staff. His comments at the Erez checkpoint about the connection between terror and the talk of disengagement were cautious. In an ordinary situation, the Prime Minister would not take the time to call Amnon Abramowitz to the phone while Lt. Gen. Ya'alon was enjoying himself at the theater. However, the situation Monday night was not ordinary. Ya'alon's words reached eager ears in the government and supported comments by other officers (GOC Southern Command and commander of the Gaza Division.

Girding up his loins

On Sunday and Monday, government ministers who were considered potential supporters of the disengagement plan or "soft" opponents who could be influenced, began calling and quoting officers, especially the Chief of the General Staff. The bureau began to panic. They began to count votes. The chance that the Prime Minister would be able get the disengagement plan through the Likud ministers, the government and the party were going up in smoke. The only one who could reverse the trend was Minister of Defense Shaul Mofaz. However, at that very moment Mofaz was meeting with Jacques Chirac's tough Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie and explaining the main points of disengagement plan to her.

From there, Mofaz was scheduled to continue to Washington for meetings with Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and others so that he could explain it to them also. However, it suddenly became urgent for him to return home and explain it to us, first. Weisglass and Sharon found themselves longing for Mofaz like they had never done before. Monday afternoon, someone in the bureau toyed with the idea of having Mofaz return to Israel immediately, in order to calm Ya'alon and his generals and provide a counterweight to their buzz. With all due respect to the Americans, the house was on fire at home and it needed to be extinguished before it spread. Phones in Paris began to ring but it was finally decided not to change the Defense Minister's schedule, to make due with the available resources at home and begin to attack.

The offensive began on the 8 o'clock news on Channel 2. Mofaz spent that night on the telephone, calling the various bureaus, calming angered spirits and cooling the atmosphere. Mofaz is well acquainted with this situation. During Sharon's previous administration, he was Chief of the General Staff and annoyed the Prime Minister on more than one or two occasions. For now, the end came out well but all is not well. Next week, Mofaz will return home and need to gird up his loins in order to help Sharon and Weisglass, who is considered his political patron, against the mounting political criticism.

The British initiative

Now that it is clear that Maj. Gen. Eiland recommends leaving the Philadelphi Route between the Gaza Strip and Egypt in Israeli hands (and even widening it) and not evacuating the three northern most settlements in the strip, the task ahead of Weisglass and Company seems harder than ever. Silvan Shalom's assumption that the disengagement will necessarily bring about early elections is taking shape before our eyes. Shimon Peres would gladly join Sharon's Likud government but it isn't clear that the Likud would stay.

Meanwhile, the earth continues to shake. News about the disengagement plan startled the region, especially Egypt. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, who has been investing great effort in the Egyptian project, went to Cairo for the first visit of an Israeli Foreign Minister in Egypt during Sharon's administration. The role of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip could and should be critical. A change in Egyptian policy towards Israel, that began hesitantly a few months ago, is becoming more stable as time passes. Mubarak asked for a discrete meeting with American Jewish leaders when he visits George W. Bush in Houston, Texas next month. The Egyptian are willing to invest in the retraining the Palestinian forces and are making a tremendous investment in the effort to ensure that the Gaza Strip does not fall into the hands of Hamas when Israel leaves. In private conversations, the Egyptians, especially General Omar Suleiman. They have no intention of letting the Hamas flourish in their backyard. The question is, what is the Hamas planning.

British involvement is also gathering steam. The British security initiative that was revealed here several weeks ago, became known this week during Prime Minister Tony Blair's meeting with his Palestinian counterpart Abu Ala, in London. A high-level British source said that Blair stubbornly returned Abu Ala to the subject of security three times during their conversation. The plan currently referred to as the "Palestinian initiative" is based on the principles of British plan.

The goal is to establish situation rooms, unify the security forces, stop the bickering between the heads of the services and get to work, under British supervision, with European and American assistance. According to the British, the plan will be expanded based on results, not based on promises. Israel will act if necessary. If things actually begin to move, Israeli is supposed to remove approximately 200 members of the Al Aksa Brigade, who officially agree to lay down their arms, from the list of wanted terrorists. This would be a potential confidence-building step and the beginning of something bigger: the possible renewal of negotiations between the sides. The Palestinians are supposed to use this potential momentum in order to stop the disengagement and restart negotiations based on the road map. As of now, Israeli is watching developments with skepticism mixed with scorn, based on passed experience. As usual, time will tell.

Counting teeth

This was not an easy week for Ariel Sharon but the previous week was much worse. The Prime Minister is still licking his wounds from the publicity of his factual, proven connection with Elhanan Tennenbaum. Sharon continues to claim that he didn't know, didn't hear, didn't understand, didn't think and didn't imagine that the woman and two children with whom had met for the last three years (Tennenbaum's wife and children) were the daughter and grandchildren of his former partner Shimon Cohen. All this despite, the facts, declarations, recordings and evidence the contrary, despite it all.

Sharon's bureau was busy counting teeth this week. With assistance from Maj. Gen. Yoav Gallant's protocol (that made its way to Yediot Ahronot) we progressed from extracting one tooth, to three teeth. Is it important that on the way we also slightly soiled the reputation of Ilan Biran who is an honest and upright officer? The goal is the main thing. How Sharon jumped from three teeth to "they have extracted all his teeth and fingernails, he is dying and losing his mind," we may never know. Yossi Sarid said these things on October 7, 2002. He had heard the story about "three teeth" four months earlier, in June. Perhaps he heard something else in between? Who gave the information? Who takes responsibility? Maybe next week, they will manage to gather a few more teeth somewhere. Thirty more are needed to obtain a toothless mouth.

In the meantime, it has been decided that the State Comptroller will investigate. That is good. We should hope and believe that the comptroller will be able to reach all of the witnesses who are threatened, all of those who, for the last few days, are afraid to leave their homes and go to their offices. All those who shared the secrets (not so long ago) and told the truth about the connections between Sharon's family and Simon Cohen's family, including, Tennenbaum himself.

Sharon himself has rightfully been injured by the publicity. He earned this injury honestly. The Prime Minister's reliability has been shattered in recent months. How could it be that the IDF Spokesman's office called the Prime Minister's bureau on Monday night and were told that they don't now anything about Abramowitz's texts, which he had received from Sharon himself? How can the Prime Minster, in his own voice, deny things that he said, in his own voice, to this writer, only three weeks earlier regarding the exchange of densely populated Arab-Israeli areas? It is impossible to not know, not recognize, deny and gaze skyward all the time. Sometimes, the cup runnet over.

Sharon is confidently making his way to the media standing that his predecessors Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak each earned for themselves in their day. We need to hope and pray that a direct connection between Sharon and Tennenbaum and the obsession that possessed him with regard to the prisoner exchange deal [can be explained?]. However, when the questions begin to pile up, we must demand, loudly and clearly, that they be investigated. It is no less important to investigate the functioning of all branches of the defense and security establishment who fell asleep on the watch and continued dose, even after the alarm was sounded. These issues cannot be left unresolved.

The comptroller's inquiry does not exempt MK Yuval Shteinitz, Chairman of the Subcommittee for Intelligence and Secret Services, from responsibility, He is usually a fair and honest man but now, for some reason, he is silent. Quick and loudly, he initiated an investigation of the defense and intelligence establishments' functioning with regards to the war in Iraq, which did not cause major damage. This case, which stinks to high heaven, he has buried deep in his drawer. It is the nature of cases like this to continue smelling and dirtying everyone around them, including the owner of the drawer.

This article appeared in Maariv on March 12, 2004

Printer friendly version of this article

Return to Contents

Go to the Israel Resource Review homepage

The Israel Resource Review is brought to you by the Israel Resource, a media firm based at the Bet Agron Press Center in Jerusalem, and the Gaza Media Center under the juristdiction of the Palestine Authority.
You can contact us on