PCPO Poll of Palestinians: 56.0 %:41.4% oppose suicide bombings inside Israel, 89.8% Don’t give up right of return even at cost of agreement

[Dr. Aaron Lerner – IMRA:
Something for Ms. Rice to consider: According to this survey, 2 out of every 5 Palestinians passing through the Israeli checkpoints she has pressed the Jewish State to remove supports suicide bombings inside Israel.]

Poll No. 165 Date: June 18, 2008

The most recent poll of the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion prepared by Dr. Nabil Kukali has revealed that:

(83.0 %) of the Palestinians support at present the Palestinian-Israeli cease-fire. (56.0 %) oppose the suicide bombings inside Israel. (32.9 %) hold Hamas responsible for the schism of the authority between Gaza Strip and the West Bank, (15.5 %) blame Fateh for that. (59.8 %) support the two-state solution as the favored solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (54.3 %) are dissatisfied with the performance of the PA President, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas. (89.8 %) oppose the waiver of the Right of Home Return.

Beit Sahour – The Information Section:

In the most recent poll prepared by Dr. Nabil Kukali, conducted and published by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO) during the period from 25th May to 31st May 2008, a random sample consisting of (1051) Palestinian adults over 18 years old representing the various demographic specimen in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, were face-to-face interviewed. The poll results unveiled that (83.0 %) of the Palestinian public support at present the Palestinian-Israeli cease-fire. Dr. Nabil Kukali, Director of the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, declared that the most significant finding in this poll is that (56.0 %) of the Palestinians oppose at present the suicide bombings inside Israel and added that (32.9 %) hold Hamas responsible for the schism of the authority between Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

Dr. Kukali pointed out that the rate of the Palestinians supporting the holding of the PLC-elections has increased by (20.8 %) in comparison with a poll published in March 2007. Regarding the future of the Palestinian state, Dr. Kukali said that “a majority of the Palestinians (59.8 %), support the two-state solution as the favored solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and (30.4 %) believe that a bi-national state on the territories of the whole historic Palestine would be the preferable solution.

Dr. Kukali added: “in view of these results, we perceive that the Palestinian public opinion has remarkably shifted from the solution of “the secular democratic state” on the whole Palestinian territories to the acceptance of the two-state solution as to pull out Israel from the west Bank and Gaza Strip.

Dr. Kukali also mentioned that “a vast majority of the Palestinians believe that a lasting solution with Israel would be impossible and impractical without a radical solution to the refugees’ problem. Leaning on the results of this poll, we believe that a lasting, comprehensive and just peace will only be possible with the settlement of the refugees’ issue.

A Palestinian – Israeli truce:

Responding to the question: “What’s your attitude towards a Palestinian – Israeli truce at present?” (42.9 %) answered “I strongly support it”, (40.1 %) “I somewhat support it”, (9.0 %) “I somewhat oppose it”, (6.3 %) “I strongly oppose it” and (1.7 %) answered “I don’t know”.

The suicide bombings:

(53.8 %) of the Palestinians are of the opinion that the suicide bombings harm at present the Palestinian national interests, whilst (40.7 %) think that these are of benefit and (4.5 %) declined to give an answer. Regarding the suicide bombings inside the Israeli territory, (56.0 %) are in favor of their halt at present, whilst (41.4%) are for their continuance and (2.6 %) hesitated to answer.

Deployment of multinational forces:

Responding to the question:” Do you support or oppose the deployment of multinational forces in Gaza Strip ?”, (33.4 %) answered ” strongly oppose”, (26.7 %) “somewhat oppose”, (24.0 %) ” somewhat support”, (10.3 %) “strongly support” and (0.4 %) answered ” I don’t know “.

Elections of the Palestinian Legislative Council:

In regard to the question: “Do you support polling at present for a new Palestinian Legislative Council?” (42.9 %) answered “I strongly support”, (32.6 %) “I somewhat support”, (12.5 %) “I somewhat oppose”, (11.2 %) “I strongly oppose” and (0.6 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Evaluation of the performance of the PA President:

(54.3 %) of the Palestinians are dissatisfied with the way Mr. Mahmoud Abbas is running his post as President of the Palestinian Authority, whilst (39.1 %) said that they are satisfied and (6.6 %) refused to respond to the question.

The PA Presidency Elections:

Responding to the question: “Do you support the holding of PA Presidency elections at present”, (36.8 %) said they “strongly support that”, (32.3 %) “somewhat support that”, (19.0 %) “somewhat oppose that”, (10.3 %) “strongly oppose that” and (1.6 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Regarding the question:” If new PA Presidency elections would be held now, and Mr. Mahmoud Abbas would candidate for Fateh, and Mr. Ismael Haniyyeh would candidate for Hamas. For whom would you vote ?”, (40.7 %) said “for Mahmoud Abbas”, (18.6 %) “for Ismael Haniyyeh”, (34.5 %) “wouldn’t participate in the elections” and (6.2 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Responding to the question: ” Should the two rivals, Mr. Marwan Barghouthi for Fateh and Mr. Ismael Haniyyeh for Hamas, run the presidential elections, for whom would you vote ?”, (42.8 %) said “for Marwan Barghouthi”, (18.1 %)”for Ismael Haniyyeh”, (34.0 %) “wouldn’t participate in the elections” and (5.1 %) said “I don’t know”.

The peace negotiations with Israel:

With respect to the question: ” Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose the peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis ?”, (24.5 %) said “I strongly support that”, (49.6 %) “I somewhat support that”, (13.2 %) “I somewhat oppose that”, (12.3 %) “I strongly oppose that” and (0.4 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Responding to the question: “What are your expectations that the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, which are initiated by Annapolis International Peace Conference, would succeed ?

Would these negotiations succeed or fail to end the occupation ?”, only (3.9 %) answered “will certainly succeed”, (27.6 %) ” may be they will succeed”, (36.9 %) “may be they will fail”, (30.1 %) “will certainly fail” and (1.5 %) answered “I don’t know”.

(61.9 %) of the Palestinians believe that the meetings between the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, and the Israeli PM, Mr. Ehud Olmert, who is facing at the moment internal problems, are of no benefit, whilst (32.0 %) believe that they are of benefit, and (6.1 %) didn’t respond to the question.

The preferable Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict:

(59.8 %) of the Palestinian public believe that the two-states option is the preferable solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, whilst (30.4 %) believe that historic Palestine cannot be divided into two states. Subsequently, the bi-national state over the whole Palestine, in which Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal rights and representation quota, is the preferable one. (5.2 %) said that “there is no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” and (4.6 %) declined to respond to the relevant question.

The Refugees’ Issue:

Responding to the question: “Do you believe that the Palestinians should be obliged to waive their right of home return in exchange for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and the conclusion of a peace agreement with Israel ?”, (89.8 %) answered “Palestinians shouldn’t agree to that, even if the price would be the non-conclusion of an agreement with the Israelis”, whilst only (6.8 %) said “Palestinians should agree to that”, and (3.3 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Regarding the additional question:” Should the Palestinian leadership agree to the waiver of the Right of Home Return in exchange of the monetary compensation, would you accept or refuse that ?”, (89.5 %) answered “I would refuse that”, whilst only (7.3 %) said “I would accept that”, and (3.2 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Who is responsible for the continuation of the schism of the Authority ?

Responding to the question: “According to your opinion, one year after the schism of the authority between Gaza Strip and the West Bank, whom should be held responsible for the continuation of this schism ? Is it Hamas or Fateh?” (32.9 %) said “Hamas”, (15.5 %) “Fateh”, (41.6 %) “both of them”, (6.9 %) “none of them” and (3.1 %) answered “I don’t know”.

Methodology of the Survey Study:

Mr. Elias Kukali, a staff member of the Research and Studies’ Section at the PCPO, said that all interviews of this survey were conducted inside the respondents’ homes, i.e. face-to-face during different working hours, at least 5 hours a day, including the evening time, in order to ensure proper representation of those sub-groups of the population, which would otherwise be difficult to reach and selecting one individual in each household using Last Birthday Method. The choices were taken from a total of (150) election sites, from which (110) sites are located in West Bank and (40) sites in Gaza Strip according to the distribution of the Central Election Commission.

These election sites were randomly chosen by using the method of the simple random sample. These in turn were the beginning of the random sample choice made from those regions in accordance with PCPO’s long experienced methodology.

Mr. E. Kukali has further established that the margin of error was (+/-3.0 %) at a significance and confidence levels of (5%) and (95%) respectively. He added that the rate of the female respondents in this survey was (48.6%) against (51.4%) male respondents. The distribution of the random sample between the Palestinian two major regions was (60.7%) in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and (39.3%) in Gaza Strip, and allocated as follows: (49.1%) for the towns, (32.4%) for the villages and (18.6%) for the camps.

Contact Persons: Dr. Nabil Kukali & Elias Kukali
Tel: 00970 2 277 4846, Fax: 00970 2 277 4892 Mobile: 00970 599 726 878
P.O. Box 15, Beit Sahour –
Palestine Email: kukali@p-ol.com Website: www.pcpo.ps

Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No (28): 75.8% Reconciliation impossible this generation even if Palestinians get all they want

12 June 2008

These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip between 5 and 7 June 2008. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in 127 randomly selected locations.

Margin of error is 3%.

For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org.

5-7 June 2008
www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2008/p28e.html

00 )From among the following satellite news stations, which one you watched most during the last two months? 8.6% 1) Al Arabia 54.8% 2) Al Jazeera 0.2% 3) Al Hurra 4.2% 4) Al Manar 8.9% 5) Palestine TV 12.1% 6) Al-Aqsa TV 6.5% 7) Do not watch TV 2.4% 8) Others 2.2% 9) Do not have a dish 0.1% 9) No Opinion/Don’t know

01)Are you satisfied or not satisfied with the performance of Mahmud Abbas since his election as president of the PA? 6.7% 1) Very satisfied 39.0% 2) Satisfied 35.7% 3) Not satisfied 15.7% 4) not satisfied at all 3.0% 5) DK/NA

02)If new presidential elections are to take place today, and Mahmud Abbas was nominated by Fateh and Ismail Haniyeh was nominated by Hamas, whom would you vote for? 52.1% 1) Mahmoud Abbas 39.5% 2) Ismael Haneyyeh 8.4% 3 DK/NA

03)And if the competition was between Marwan Barghouti representing Fateh and Ismael Haneyyeh representing Hams, whom would you vote for? 60.8% 1) Marwan Barghouti 34.3% 2) Ismael Haneyyeh 4.9% 3) No Opinion/ Don’t know

05)If new elections agreed to by all factions are held today and the same lists that took part in the last PLC elections were nominated, for whom would you vote?

1.0% 1) alternative 2.1% 2) independent Palestine 4.1% 3) Abu Ali Mustafa 0.6% 4) Abu al Abbas 5) Freedom and Social Justice 31.0% 6) change and reform 0.3% 7) national coalition for justice and democracy

0.6% 8) third way 0.5% 9) freedom and independence 0.1% 10) Palestinian justice 43.4% 11) Fateh 16.4% 12) none of the above/ DK/NA

06)Hamas carried out a military step in mid June against security headquarters belonging to the PA in the Gaza Strip and succeeded after that in controlling the Strip. Do you approve or disapprove of what Hamas did? 5.7% 1) Strongly approve 19.0% 2) Approve 48.6% 3) Disapprove 21.8% 4) Strongly disapprove 4.9% 5) DK/NA

07)President Mahmud Abbas dismissed the government of Ismail Haniyeh after the Gaza events about three months ago. But the prime minister of the dismissed government remained in his position in the Gaza Strip. Do you approve or disapprove of his decision to stay in his position? 7.9% 1) Strongly approve 37.4% 2) Approve 36.2% 3) Disapprove 11.2% 4) Strongly disapprove 7.4% 5) DK/NA

08)Moreover, President Abbas appointed an emergency government headed by Salam Fayyad. After the ending of the emergency period and due to the inability of the PLC to convene, the government of Fayyad became a care taker one. Do you approve or disapprove of the continued functioning of this government? 3.8% 1) Strongly approve 37.8% 2) Approve 40.9% 3) Disapprove 10.4% 4) Strongly disapprove 7.1% 5) DK/NA

09)After the separation between Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas and the government of Ismail Haniyeh remained in power in Gaza and considered itself the legitimate government while president Abu Mazin formed a new government headed by Salam Fayyad and it too considered itself legitimate. What about you, which of the two government you consider legitimate, the government of Haniyeh or the government of Abu Mazin and Fayyad? 29.4% 1) Haniyehs’ government is the legitimate one 31.0% 2) Abu Mazin’s and Fayyad government is the legitimate one 7.1% 3) Both governments are legitimate 28.0% 4) Both governments are not legitimate 4.5% 5) DK/NA

10)Fateh and Hamas and the two authorities in Gaza and the West Bank are currently engaged in a competition to win public support and confidence through the use of media such as Palestine TV and al Aqsa TV stations. When you hear news from the two sides, which side you trust more, the news spread by Hamas and Haniyeh’s government or the news spread by Fateh and the Abu Mazin’s and Fayyad’s government? 22.7% 1) Trust Hamas and Haniyeh’s government 19.8% 2) Trust Fateh and Abu Mazin’s and Salam’s governemtn 3.9% 3) Trust both sides 49.1% 4) Trust neither side 4.5% 5) DK/NA

11)In general, how would you describe conditions of the Palestinians in the Palestinian areas in Gaza Strip these days? 0.8% 1) Very good 3.7% 2) Good 7.9% 3) So so 32.6% 4) Bad 53.8% 5) Very bad 1.2% 6) DK/NA

12)In general, how would you describe conditions of the Palestinians in the Palestinian areas in the West Bank these days? 3.1% 1) Very good 21.8% 2) Good 27.3% 3) So so 28.8% 4) Bad 16.8% 5) Very bad 2.3% 6) DK/NA

13)Generally, do you see yourself as: 47.0% 1) Religious 49.6% 2) Somewhat religious 3.2% 3) Not religious 0.2% 4) DK/NA

14)Generally, do you see yourself as: 71.1% 1) Supportive of the peace process 13.7% 2) Opposed to the peace process 14.4% 3) Between support and opposition 0.8% 4) DK/NA

15)Do you think that there is corruption in PA institutions under the control of President Abu Mazin? 76.9% 1) Yes 14.3% 2) No 8.9% 3) DK/NA

16)If yes, will this corruption in PA institutions under the control of President Abu Mazin increase, decrease or remain as it is in the future? 47.2% 1) Will increase 13.0% 2) Will remain as it is 30.5% 3) will decrease 9.3% 4) DK/NA

17)Would you say that these days your security and safety, and that of your family, is assured or not assured? 5.4% 1) Completely assured 38.0% 2) Assured 44.9% 3) Not assured 11.3% 4) Not assured at all 0.5% 5) DK/NA

18)How would you evaluate the current status of democracy and human rights in the Palestinian Authority under Abu Mazin? Would you say it is: 4.0% 1) Very good 29.0% 2) Good 23.1% 3) neither bad nor good 26.9% 4) Bad 14.5% 5) Very bad 2.6% 6) DK/NA

19)How would you evaluate the current status of democracy and human rights in the Gaza Strip under Ismail Hanyieh government? Would you say it is: 3.7% 1) Very good 19.1% 2) Good 15.4% 3) Fair 31.5% 4) Bad 22.9% 5) Very bad 7.3% 6) DK/NA

20)Few months ago, news emerged that mobile phones were smuggled from Jordan into the Palestinian territories in the car of the former speaker of the parliament Rouhi Fattouh. News were also reported about the arrest of the driver for investigation while Fattouh announced his innocence and resigned from his work in the president office. Do you believe the PA handling of this episode demonstrates success on fighting corruption or success in covering up corruption? 16.9% 1) certainly covering up corruption 41.9% 2) covering up corruption 25.2% 3) fighting corruption 2.7% 4) certainly fighting corruption 13.2% 5) DK/NO

21)As an exit strategy for the current crisis between Fateh and Hamas and the split of authority, Hamas’s position is to call for an unconditional dialogue with Abu Mazin based on the current status quo. Abu Mazin’s and Fateh’s position is that he would agree to such a dialogue but under one condition; Hamas must first transfer control of the PA Gaza headquarters to him and return to the status quo ante. Which of the two positions is closer to your view? 32.7% 1) Hamas’s position 37.1% 2) Abu Mazin’s and Fateh’s position 27.7% 3) I disagree with both positions 2.6% 4) DK/NA

22)Tell us how do you evaluate the performance of the dismissed government of Ismail Haniyeh in the Gaza Strip? Is it good or bad? 8.8% 1) Very Good 27.7% 2) Good 21.7% 3) Neither good nor bad 25.9% 4) Bad 9.4% 5) Very Bad 6.5% 6) No Opinion/Don’t know

23)Tell us how do you evaluate the performance of the government headed by Salam Fayyad? Is it good or bad? 3.9% 1) Very Good 29.3% 2) Good 22.3% 3) Neither good nor bad 26.0% 4) Bad

11.9% 5) Very Bad 6.5% 6) No Opinion/Don’t know

24) Who, in your views, is responsible for the continued split in the PA between Gaza and the West Bank? Fateh or Hamas? 17.3% 1) Hamas 16.5% 2) Fateh 56.0% 3) Both of them 3.5% 4) No one 4.1% 5) Other 2.6% 6) No Opinion/ Don’t know

25)The Palestinian Authority carried out a deployment of its security forces in some cities and districts. In your views, did it succeed or fail in enforcing law and order in the areas of deployment? 25.8% 1) succeeded 30.9% 2) somewhat succeeded 34.3% 3) failed 9.0% 4) DK/NA

26) The Palestinian Authority says that the purpose of the security deployment is to enforce law and order while other Palestinian groups say one of the purposes is to disarm the resistance groups. What in your views is the purpose of the deployment? 34.8% 1) enforce law and order 28.4% 2) disarm resistance groups 22.7% 3) both of the above 7.5% 4) none of the above 6.7% 5) DK/NA

27)In your view who is more able to reach a peace agreement with Israel, the Palestinian Authority under president Mahmud Abbas or a Hamas government headed by Ismail Haniyeh? 14.6% 1) a Hamas government headed by Haniyeh 48.9% 2) PA under Abbas 8.1% 3) both equally 25.3% 4) none of them 3.2% 5) DK/NA

28)In your view who is more able to force Israel to make more concession to the Palestinians, a government of Hamas headed by Haniyeh or the PA under Abbas? 41.3% 1) PA under Abbas 24.9% 2) Hamas government headed by Haniyeh 6.9% 3) both equally 24.0% 4) none of them 2.8% 5) DK/NA

29)If the choice was between negotiations conducted by president Mahmud Abbas and negotiations conducted by Marwan Barghouti, who in your view is more able to force Israel to make more concessions, Abbas or Barghouti? 30.6% 1) Abbas 28.1% 2) Barghouti 11.2% 3) both equally 24.6% 4) none of them 5.4% 5) DK/NA

30)If Israel agrees to conduct peace negotiations with a Hamas, do you think the Hamas should or should not negotiate with Israel? 16.9% 1) certainly it should negotiate 42.7% 2) it should negotiate 26.4% 3) it should not negotiate 9.0% 4) certainly it should not negotiate 5.0% 5) DK/NA

31)There is a proposal that after the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and the settlemnet of all issues in dispute, including the refugees and Jerusalem issues, there will be a mutual recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the state of the Palestinians people. Do you agree or disagree to this proposal? 7.4% 1) Definitely agree 48.4% 2) agree 33.6% 3) disagree 9.6% 4) definitely disagree 0.9% 5) DK/NA

32)And what is the Palestinian majority opinion on this issue? Do most Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza support or oppose the recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the state of the Palestinian people at the end of the peace process? 52.2% 1) Majority supports 39.5% 2) Majority opposes 8.3% 3) DK/NA

33)And what is the Israeli majority opinion on this issue? Do most Israelis support or oppose the recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the state of the Palestinian people at the end of the peace process? 41.0% 1) Majority supports 50.1% 2) Majority opposes 8.8% 5) DK/NA

34)Now 40 years after the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, what in your view are the chances for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state next to the state of Israel in the next five years? Are they high, medium, low, or none existent? 31.6% 1) None existent 34.7% 2) Low 27.0% 3) Medium 3.0% 4) High 3.7% 5) DK/NA

35) According to the Saudi plan, Israel will retreat from all territories occupied in 1967 including Gaza the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, and a Palestinian state will be established. The refugees problem will be resoved through negotiation in a just and agreed upon manner and in accordance with UN resolution 194 which allows return of refugees to Israel and compensation. In return, all Arab states will recognize Israel and its right to secure borders, will sign peace treaties with her and establish normal diplomatic relations. Do you agree or disagree to this plan?

7.5% 1) Certainly agree 59.5% 2) agree 22.4% 3) disagree 6.0% 4) Certainly disagree 4.6% 5) DK/NA

36)The US, Russia, the European Community and the UN, the so called “Quartet”, have put forward a “Roadmap” for the implementation of a final settlement within 3 years. The plan includes political reforms in the Palestinian Authority, including a constitution and election of a strong Prime Minister, stopping the incitement and violence on both sides under the Quartet’s supervision, a freeze on settlements and the establishment of a Palestinian State within provisional borders. The next phase will see negotiations on the final borders under the auspices of an international conference. Do you support or oppose this initiative? 2.8% 1) Strongly support 46.7% 2) Support 37.1% 3) Oppose 9.8% 4) Strongly oppose 3.5% 5) Don’t know/No answer

37B)When Palestinians and Israelis return to final status negotiations the following items might be presented to negotiators as the elements of a permanent compromise settlement. Tell us what you think of each item then tell us what you think of all combined as one permanent status settlement

1. An Israeli withdrawal from all of the Gaza Strip and the evacuation of its settlements. But in the West Bank, Israel withdraws and evacuates settlements from most of it, with the exception of few settlement areas in less than 3% of the West Bank that would be exchanged with an equal amount of territory from Israel in accordance with the attached map {show map}.

2. An independent Palestinian state would be established in the areas from which Israel withdraws in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip; the Palestinian state will have no army, but it will have a strong security force but an international multinational force would be deployed to insure the safety and security of the state. Both sides will be committed to end all forms of violence directed against each other.

3. East Jerusalem would become the capital of the Palestinian state with Arab neighborhoods coming under Palestinian sovereignty and Jewish neighborhoods coming under Israel sovereignty. The Old City (including al Haram al Sharif) would come under Palestinian sovereignty with the exception of the Jewish Quarter and the Wailing Wall that will come under Israeli sovereignty.

4. With regard to the refugee question, both sides agree that the solution will be based on UN resolutions 194 and 242 and on the Arab peace initiative. The refugees will be given five choices for permanent residency. These are: the Palestinian state and the Israeli areas transferred to the Palestinian state in the territorial exchange mentioned above; no restrictions would be imposed on refugee return to these two areas. Residency in the other three areas (in host countries, third countries, and Israel) would be subject to the decision of the states in those areas. The number of refugees returning to Israel will be based on the average number of refugees admitted to third countries like Australia, Canada, Europe, and others. All refugees will be entitled to compensation for their “refugeehood” and loss of properties.

5. When the permanent status agreement is fully implemented, it will mean the end of the conflict and no further claims will be made by either side. The parties will recognize Palestine and Israel as the homelands of their respective peoples 6. The Palestinian state will have sovereignty over its land, water, and airspace. But Israeli will be allowed to use the Palestinian airspace for training purposes, and will maintain two early warning stations in the West Bank for 15 years. The multinational force will remain in the Palestinian state for an indefinite period of time and its responsibility will be to insure the implementation of the agreement, and to monitor territorial borders and coast of the Palestinian state including its international border crossings.

Now that you have been informed of each element of the permanent compromise settlement, tell us what you think of each of its item. Do you agree or disagree with it.

37-1B)Item #1: withdrawal to 1967 borders with territorial swap 5.6% 1) Strongly agree 57.1% 2) Agree 25.5% 3) Disagree 9.4% 4) Strongly Disagree 2.3% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know 37-2B)Item #2: a state without an army but with international forces 1.4% 1) Strongly agree 26.5% 2) Agree 54.3% 3) Disagree 16.4% 4) Strongly Disagree 1.4% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know 37-3B)Item #3: East Jerusalem as capital of the state of Palestine after it is divided 1.0% 1) Strongly agree 36.9% 2) Agree 44.5% 3) Disagree 16.4% 4) Strongly Disagree 1.1% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know

37-4B)Item #4: refugees with five options for permanent residence 1.7% 1) Strongly agree 39.3% 2) Agree 41.8% 3) Disagree 14.7% 4) Strongly Disagree 2.4% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know 37-5B)Item #5: end of conflict 5.2% 1) Strongly agree 50.3% 2) Agree 31.7% 3) Disagree 11.1% 4) Strongly Disagree 1.8% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know 37-6B)Item #6: a sovereign state with security arrangements 2.3% 1) Strongly agree 35.5% 2) Agree 45.3% 3) Disagree 14.9% 4) Strongly Disagree 2.0% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know

37-7B)Item #7: the combined elements as one permanent status settlement 1.5% 1) Strongly agree 44.2% 2) Agree 38.8% 3) Disagree 13.5% 4) Strongly Disagree 2.0% 5) No Opinion /Don’t Know

38-1B)And what is the Palestinian majority opinion on this combined package for a permanent status settlement? Do most Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza support or oppose this combined final status package? 49.4% 1) Majority supports 40.7% 2) Majority opposes 9.9% 3) DK/NA

38-2B)And what is the Israeli majority opinion on this combined package for a permanent status settlement? Do most Israelis support or oppose this combined final status package? 36.8% 1) Majority supports 50.5% 2) Majority opposes 12.7% 3) DK/NA

39) If a peace agreement is reached, and a Palestinian state is established and recognized by Israel, would you support or oppose the efforts to reach full reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinian state? 9.4% 1) Would strongly support 63.1% 2) Would support 20.5% 3) Would oppose 5.8% 4) Would strongly oppose 1.2% 5) DK/NA

40) And what are your expectations regarding the chances for the success or failure of the negotiations launched by Annapolis conference? Will it succeed or fail in ending Israeli occupation? 0.7% 1) certainly will succeed 15.6% 2) will succeed 51.0% 3) will fail 25.0% 4) certainly will fail 7.7% 5) DK/NA

41) The joint statement issued by the Annapolis conference stated that the two sides will seek to conclude the permanent status negotiations before the end of 2008. Do you think they will indeed succeed in achieving that on the period indicated? 0.5% 1) certainly will succeed 14.4% 2) will succeed 53.8% 3) will not succeed 25.6% 4) certainly will not succeed 5.7% 5) DK/NA

42)In your view, is it possible or impossible these days to reach a compromise permanent status agreement with the Olmert government? 0.7% 1) Certainly possible 21.5% 2) Possible 47.5% 3) Impossible 27.6% 4) Certainly impossible 2.7% 5) DK/NA

43)With regard to meetings between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA President Mahmud Abbas, do you see them beneficial and should be continued or do you see them unbeneficial and should be stopped? 27.0% 1) Beneficial, and should continue 68.4% 2) Unbeneficial and should stop 4.6% 3) NO/DK

44)How soon do you think will a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians be achieved? 42.0% 1) A political settlement is not possible ever 21.9% 2) Only in many generations to come 8.9% 3) Only in the next generation 5.8% 4) Only in the next decade 15.6% 5) Only in the next few years 5.8% 6) No Opinion /Don’t know

45)After reaching a peace agreement between the Palestinian people and Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state that is recognized by Israel, how soon do you think will reconciliation between the two peoples be achieved? 42.9% 1) Reconciliation is not possible ever 20.5% 2) Only in many generations to come 12.4% 3) Only in the next generation 6.3% 4) Only in the next decade 11.4% 5) On the next few years 6.5% 6) No Opinion /Don’t know

46)There is a talk about conducting Palestinian-Israeli negotiations on an interim settlement whereby a Palestinian state is established in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip while other issues, such as refugees, would be postponed. Other people prefer negotiations that would lead to a comprehensive settlement that would lead to permanent peace and end of conflict with all issues, including refugees, resolved. Which of the two positions do you prefer: the interim settlement or the comprehensive one? 2.3% 1) definitely the interim 12.9% 2) the interim 60.2% 3) the comprehensive 20.4% 4) definitely the comprehensive 4.1% 5) DK/NA

47)Some people think that a solution based on the establishment of a Palestinian state along side Israel, known as the two-state solution, is difficult to achieve and that Palestinians should struggle for another solution, one in which Israel is unified with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to establish one state whereby Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews would be equal. In your view, which of the two solutions is more difficult to achieve? 35.7% 1) two-state solution 37.5% 2) the one-state solution 24.8% 3) both equally difficult 1.9% 4) DK/NA

48)Regardless of its difficulty, which of the two solutions do you support? 57.6% 1) the two-state solution 27.0% 2) the one-state solution 10.4% 3) another solution (specify ——– ) 5.1% 4) DK/NA

49)Do you support or oppose the launching of rockets from the Gaza Strip against towns and cities inside Israel, such as Sderot and Ashkelon? 17.3% 1) Certainly support 39.9% 2) Support 33.0% 3) Oppose 6.5% 4) Certainly oppose 3.2% 5) NA/DK

50)Concerning armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel, I. 15.9% 1) Strongly support 38.9% 2) Support 37.2% 3) Oppose 4.5% 4) Strongly oppose 3.4% 5) DK/NA

51) Hamas is currently negotiation with Israel via Egypt to conclude a ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip. Do you support or oppose a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip? 13.9% 1) certainly support 63.7% 2) support 18.2% 3) oppose 3.0% 4) certainly oppose 1.2% 5) DK/NA

52_1)If the ceasefire is restricted to the Gaza Strip, and does not cover the West Bank, would you support or oppose it? 2.1% 1) certainly support 20.7% 2) support 64.9% 3) oppose 10.6% 4) certainly oppose 1.7% 5) DK/NA

52_2)What if the ceasefire did not stipulate an immediate opening of the crossings, especially the Rafah crossing to Egypt, would you in this case support or oppose it? 2.2% 1) certainly support 17.6% 2) support 64.7% 3) oppose 13.9% 4) certainly oppose 1.7% 5) DK/NA

53)There is talk of indirect Israeli-Syrian negotiations. If significant progress is made in these negotiations or if a peace agreement is reached between the two countries, do you think such a development would represent an impediment to the success of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, would contribute to successful Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, or would have no impact? 31.8% 1) will contribute to successful Palestinian-Israeli negotiations 25.8% 2) will represent an impediment to successful Palestinian-Israeli negotiations 34.6% 3) will have no impact on Palestinian-Israeli negotiations 7.7% 4) DK/NA

54)What do you expect to happen between Palestinians and Israelis, if indeed a cease fire agreement is achieved with Hamas? 19.9% 1) Negotiations will resume soon enough and armed confrontations will stop 39.5% 2) Negotiations will resume but some armed attacks will continue 34.9% 3) Armed confrontations will not stop and the two sides will not return to negotiations 5.8% 4) DK/NA

55)Last month, Hezbollah took control of West Beirut by force and said that its action was aiming at protecting the arms of the resistance. In your view, was the action of Hezbollah a legitimate or illegitimate use of arms of the resistance? 21.3% 1) certainly a legitimate use 30.7% 2) a legitimate use 28.3% 3) illegitimate use 8.0% 4) certainly illegitimate use 11.6% 5) DK/NA

56)Despite the Doha agreement between the Lebanese factions, some people are concerned that developments in Lebanon could take a turn toward a return to civil war, this time between Sunnites and Shiites. Do you expect or do not expect such a development toward civil war in the future? 8.9% 1) certainly, a civil war between Sunnites and Shiites will take place 36.0% 2) a civil war between Sunnites and Shiites will take place 37.7% 3) a civil war between Sunnites and Shiites will take not take place 6.3% 4) certainly, a civil war between Sunnites and Shiites will not take place 11.0% 5) DK/NA

57)If such a civil war takes place, who in your view will win it: the Sunnites under the leadership of the Future Trend or the Shiites under the leadership of Hezbollah and Amal movement? 36.9% 1) Shiites 18.1% 2) Sunnites 29.1% 3) neither one 15.9% 4) DK/NA

58)If such a civil war takes place, which side would you support: the Shiites under the leadership of Hezbollah and Amal movement or the Sunnites under the leadership of the Future Trend? 21.2% 1) Shiites 34.1% 2) Sunnites 35.1% 3) neither one 9.6% 4) DK/NA

59)Which of the following political parties do you support? 0.2% 1) PPP 4.0% 2) PFLP 32.3% 3) Fateh 21.7% 4) Hamas 0.6% 5) DFLP 1.6% 6) Islamic Jihad 0.1% 7)Fida 0.5% 8) National Initiative (Mubadara) 3.1% 9) Independent Islamists 3.7% 10) Independent Nationalists 31.5% 11) None of the above 0.6% 12) Other, specify

Source: PSR Poll No. 28: Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No (28)

‘Army Of Islam’ Terrorists Killed In Israeli Airstrike

Jerusalem – As part of a joint Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli intelligence operation yesterday, Israeli aerial attacks were carried out in which the IDF identified hitting Army of Islam terrorists involved in recent attempts to execute a large-scale terror attack against Israeli targets.

Among the terrorists killed were Ma’ataz Dagmesh, 29, resident of Gaza; Mahmud Shandi, 25, resident of Al-Hawa; and Muhamad Asaliya, 21, resident of the UNRWA refugee camp of Jabaliya – three senior terrorists within the organization.

Mr. Dagmesh, whose brother is the Army Of Islam commander in Gaza, was the leader and planner of the thwarted terror attack. Mr. Asaliya served as the organization’s senior “terror attack planner.”

The Army of Islam is an Islamist organization that represents al-Qaida in the Gaza Strip, while advocating worldwide jihad. The organization was involved in numerous attacks against Israel, including:

* The abduction of the Israeli soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit in a joint attack with Hamas on Kerem Shalom Crossing, June 25, 2006, killing two other soldiers.

* The abduction of British reporter Alan Johnston, who was incarcerated for four months, released only on July 4, 2007.

* A joint attack with Hamas in December 2005 in which five Israeli civilians were killed.

* In February 2006, the organization attempted to carry out a car bomb attack on the Karni crossing.

In late September 2007, the organization was planning a terror attack by sea. The attack was thwarted when several of the terrorists were killed.

David Bedein can be reached at dbedein@israelbehindthenews.com. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

©The Bulletin 2008

Report: Iran Moves Assets Out Of Europe

Jerusalem – Iran has suddenly withdrawn $75 billion of assets from Europe, anticipating threatened European Union sanctions over Tehran’s alleged nuclear ambitions, the credible gulfinthemedia.com news Web site reports.

Iran’s refusal to suspend nuclear-enrichment activities, a process that can create fuel for power plants or material for nuclear weapons, has drawn three rounds of U.N. sanctions since 2006.

President Bush and other NATO leaders had threatened Iran with punitive measures if it presses on with the enrichment of uranium. On Saturday, Iran again ruled out suspending uranium enrichment despite an offer from six world powers to help the nation develop a civilian nuclear program if it ends activities the United States and others suspect are designed to produce weapons.

The offer – agreed to last month by the United States, Britain, Russia, China, Germany and France – is a revised version of one rejected by Tehran two years ago.

EU diplomats have said the bloc is preparing to freeze European-based funds and assets of Iran’s biggest bank, the state-owned Bank Melli, but was waiting for Tehran’s responded to the new offer.

“Part of Iran’s assets in European banks have been converted to gold and shares, and another part has been transferred to Asian banks,” said Mohsen Talaie, Iran’s deputy foreign minister in charge of economic affairs, the Iranian news weekly Shahrvand-e Emrouz reported, and that the withdrawals were ordered by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Iran is making windfall gains from record global oil prices and said in April its foreign exchange reserves stood at more than $80 billion.

Western countries suspect Iran hopes to manufacture nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its discrete program is purely aimed at generating energy.

David Bedein can be reached at dbedein@israelbehindthenews.com. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

©The Bulletin 2008

Improved Kassam Missile With 11-Mile Range Strikes Ashkelon

Jerusalem, Israel – The terror of Kassam missiles from Gaza has continued to expand.

Palestinian terror organizations on Monday broke a new record when they fired an improved version of the Kassam missile 11 miles. This rocket belongs to the fourth generation of Kassam missiles. The previous generation of Kassams had a five-mile range only.

The improved Kassam missile landed in an open field between the collective family farms Mevoim and Zaroa.

Another missile, which landed in Ashkelon, left one resident, a man in his forties, with severe injuries. Another two missiles landed in an open field near Sderot.

The Israel Military Industries experts were not surprised by the improved range of the Kassam missile. The improved quality of the Kassam missile has been readily apparent for quite some time. Experts say that the footage of the launchings show, for example, that the missiles leave the launchers with greater precision than they used to.

The Kassam missiles still do not have the range that the Grad rockets do. However, the terror organizations have only a limited supply of Grads and they use them sparingly.

The Kassam missiles, alternatively, are manufactured in the Gaza Strip and are more readily available to the terror organizations. Experts say that the improved range of these locally manufactured missiles will result in more missiles fired at longer range. The experts also believe that improvements made in the rocket will be seen in the warheads, which will be more lethal, and the ability to fire a number of rockets simultaneously.

Monday’s missiles were fired from Gaza only a few hours after President Shimon Peres visited the Gaza periphery communities. In the course of that tour, Mr. Peres met with senior security officials, who told him that Hamas terrorists were packing houses in the Gaza Strip with tons of explosives as part of their preparation for an IDF operation. “Even the pillars of the buildings have been wrapped in explosives in order to turn them into a fire trap for IDF troops,” said one source.

Meanwhile, the residents of the Gaza periphery communities began an original form of protest against the continued Kassam missile fire.

They established a new state, called the “State of the Western Negev and the Gaza Periphery Communities.”

They intend to issue their own ID cards, to hold demonstrations, to raise funds and to boycott official representatives of the State of Israel. The new Jewish state has already published its own official newspaper.

“We aren’t disengaging from the state. It’s the government that has caused this severance,” said one of the leaders of the protest movement, Ofer Lieberman from Kibbutz Nir Am. “We understand that and are going to have to manage on our own.”

Shlomo Goldwasser: We Hope It Ends Well

The Regev and Goldwasser families of the two Israeli POW’s in the hands of Hezbollah – were closely following Monday’s media reports quoting Lebanese media that a prisoner exchange deal is expected to be carried out already at the end of this week or at the beginning of next week. Even though the date has not been confirmed here in Israel, the families of Udi Goldwasser and Eldad Regev sounded more optimistic than they had ever sounded.

On Monday, the two families called at the Ramat-Gan office of the IDF unit for the location of missing soldiers, for a meeting which had been scheduled in advance, but received intense media attention as a result of the reports. The unit has been in touch with the families since the day of the abduction, and the families said the visit had nothing to do with the reports in Lebanon. “We hope it ends well,” said Udi’s father, Shlomo Goldwasser. “Kuntar, like any other prisoner, is a tool in Israel’s hands, and tools have to be used. We are hoping for the best.”

Udi’s mother Miki Goldwasser, said the family had not been informed about any new developments. “All the reports we learned from the news media,” she said. “I believe that my son is alive. Of course there is tension, but we live in hope. In the meantime, we do not know about anything new that is taking place.”

Zvi Regev, Eldad’s father, also voiced hope. “We hope that in the end it will turn out for the best and that we will see them alive,” he said. “We have faith and hope that it will happen. I keep my spirits up.”

Micky Leibowitz, chairman of the society for the kidnapped soldiers, and a close friend of Udi Goldwasser, on Monday called on Prime Minister Ehud Olmert not to be afraid to make courageous decisions on the issue. “If the reports about a deal in the north are true, not just another media spin aimed at covering up other failures, we will be the first to back up the prime minister and we will offer him all the public support that is needed,” Mr. Leibowitz said.

Obama On His Way To Israel, Iraq And Afghanistan

The Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama, announced on Monday that he was going to visit the battle areas of Iraq and Afghanistan prior to the elections in November. The candidate also intends to visit Israel and to meet with President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, as well as with the defense minister and the foreign minister. A meeting with Opposition Chairman Binyamin Netanyahu, with whom Mr. Obama spoke on the telephone recently, is also possible, as is a visit to Sderot, which has been been under constant missile attacks from Gaza. Republican candidate John McCain visited Sderot in March.

David Bedein can be reached at dbedein@israelbehindthenews.com. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

©The Bulletin 2008

U.S. Synagogue Organization Responds To Rice’s Remarks

One of the largest synagogue organizations in the United States, The National Council of Young Israel, made the following statement yesterday in response to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s attacks on the Israeli government for constructing additional Jewish homes in northern and southern Jerusalem:

“The National Council of Young Israel is extremely disturbed by the readiness of Secretary of State Rice to heap criticism on Israel for its plans to build additional housing for its citizens, within the boundaries of its own capital city. Israel has the right to build in its capital, wherever and whenever she chooses. The Secretary of State must realize that as the eternal capital of Israel, the holy city of Jerusalem cannot and will not be divided. In fact, the United States Congress has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and has acknowledged that the U.S. should move its embassy there. Yet, despite the assurances of President Bush, the embassy has not yet been moved, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the indivisible capital of Israel is being repeatedly challenged by Secretary of State Rice…

Any proposed agreement that would tear the heart and soul out of theIsraeli people and the Jewish nation is wholly unacceptable and would be strongly condemned. The National Council of Young Israel’s position is that there can be no division of Jerusalem at any time, under any circumstances.”

David Bedein can be reached at dbedein@israelbehindthenews.com. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

©The Bulletin 2008

IDF: Jenin forces not fighting terror

Hours after US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived in Jerusalem on Sunday, top defense officials and IDF officers slammed a recently-launched US initiative, under which Palestinian soldiers have deployed in Nablus and Jenin.

According to the officials, terrorist activity has increased in Ramallah since some 600 Palestinian soldiers were allowed to deploy in the West Bank city last month.

On Sunday morning, a 20-kilogram explosive device detonated next to an Israeli military force operating in the city without causing any casualties.

Sources in the IDF Central Command said that the large bomb was set off by an advanced detonation system.

“The PA forces in the city are not combating the terrorists,” one source said. “They are taking action to enforce law and order but they are doing nothing about terror which has grown in the past month since they deployed in Jenin.”

The 600 PA soldiers, who underwent training by US defense contractors in Jordan, deployed in Jenin in May Israel gave its consent for the deployment in March ahead of a meeting between Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Rice and

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad. Barak at the time approved the deployment as part of Israeli efforts to bolster Fayad and PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

Another defense official said that even those terror suspects that were arrested by the PA forces were usually released days or even hours later. “There is no effective judicial system in the city,” the official said.

A top officer in the Central Command also warned that weapons the US was providing to the PA forces were finding their way to Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists in Jenin as well as in Nablus, where 3,000 PA policemen and soldiers have deployed over the past year. In addition, terrorists have infiltrated the PA police and military ranks, he said.

The training of the force in Jenin and Nablus has been overseen by Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton, the US Security Coordinator to Israel and the PA. Dayton has overseen the deployment in Nablus up close and was also involved in the recent deployment of PA forces in Jenin.

Source: www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212659734963&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Lack of Authority and Unwarranted Tampering with International Law

Two distinct issues exist: the issue of Jerusalem and the issue of the Holy Places. Cambridge Professor Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, Judge ad hoc of the International Court of Justice and a renowned editor of International Law Reports concluded:

“Not only are the two problems separate; they are also quite distinct in nature from one another. So far as the Holy Places are concerned, the question is for the most part one of assuring respect for the existing interests of the three religions and of providing the necessary guarantees of freedom of access, worship, and religious administration [E.H., as mandated in Article 13 and 14 of the “Mandate for Palestine”].

“As far as the City of Jerusalem itself is concerned, the question is one of establishing an effective administration of the City which can protect the rights of the various elements of its permanent population – Christian, Arab and Jewish – and ensure the governmental stability and physical security which are essential requirements for the city of the Holy Places.”

Israel reunited Jerusalem as one city in 1967, after Jordan joined the Egyptian and Syrian war offensive and shelled the Jewish part of Jerusalem.

Israeli leaders vowed the city would never again be divided. Despite the disgraceful treatment of the Jewish Quarter and the Mount of Olives under the Jordanians and despite the Arabs’ violation of their pledges to make all holy sites accessible to Jews and Christians, one of the first acts Israel undertook after reuniting the city was to guarantee and safeguard the rights of all citizens of Jerusalem.

This included not only free access to holy sites for all faiths but also represented an unprecedented act of religious tolerance. Israel granted Muslim and Christian religious authorities responsibility for managing their respective holy sites – including Muslim administration of Judaism’s holiest site, the Temple Mount. Eventually, however, the Waqf, which holds administrative responsibility over the Temple Mount, violated the trust with which it was invested to respect and protect the holiness of the Temple Mount for both Muslims and Jews.

Palestinian terrorism has targeted Jerusalem particularly in an attempt to regain control of the city from Israel. The result is that they have turned Jerusalem, literally the City of Peace, into a bloody battleground and have thus forfeited their claim to share in the city’s destiny. Secretary Rice’s positions on Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria including Jerusalem defies international law and make Palestinian Arabs believe that terror works.

The outcome of consistent Arab aggression was best described by Professor, Judge Schwebel, a former President of the International Court of Justice:

“As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.” [italics by author]

“… no legal right shall spring from a wrong.”

Jerusalem – the spiritual, political, and historical capital of the Jewish people – has served, and still serves, as the political capital of only one nation – the one belonging to the Jewish people.

Inbal Hotel Apologizes for Flying PLO Flag

In response to dozens of letters of complaint, the manager of Jerusalem’s Inbal Hotel says he feels he had no choice, but he’s sorry for flying the flag of the Palestinian Liberation Organization- Palestinian Authority last month.

The flag was flown for two days at the end of May, when the hotel hosted the International Security Forum, chaired by Public Security Minister Avi Dichter of Kadima. Government representatives from various countries, as well as from the Palestinian Authority, took part, and flags of each participating country – or “political entity,” in the case of the PA – waved proudly in the breeze of the hotel.

News of the enemy flag adorning the popular Jerusalem hotel spread quickly after Arutz-7 blogger Yisrael Medad published a letter by Yonatan Adler informing of the Inbal-PLO flag display. Various grassroots organizations quickly took up the gauntlet, and letters by citizens expressing extreme concern began arriving at the Inbal Hotel.

By last week, Inbal’s General Manager Rodney Sanders had answered at least a few of them. His first letters expressed regret that the letter-writers were offended, but by the end of last week, at least one writer received a straight-out apology.

Sanders wrote, “I, too, felt uncomfortable when asked, even by the Israeli government, to fly the colors of the Palestinian Authority at the hotel… We were instructed by the Israel Ministry of Public Security and the organizing committee to fly the flags of all those participating in the conference, including that of the Palestinian Authority.”

Sanders explained that Minister Dichter “chose the Inbal Jerusalem Hotel to be the venue for the International Security Forum, a conference on ‘Challenges to Homeland Security,’ of which MK Avi Dicter was the chairman. US Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertkoff and a dozen other internal security ministers from Europe and beyond were invited and Minister Dicter also invited the Palestinian Minister of Interior.”

“While not meaning to add to anybody’s distress,” Sanders continued, “I think it important for me to mention that other prominent hotels are often asked by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs to host Israel-Palestinian negotiating sessions. Sometimes this also involves flags.”

*Apology *”I would like to apologize for placing the flag on the building,” Sanders then wrote, adding, “I have now since learnt how sensitive this issue is to the feelings of our nation and our people, but I believe I had no choice but to follow the request of the Ministry.”

*Response *Susie Dym, spokesperson of the Cities of Israel grassroots organization, commented afterwards, “Our activists feel that the people of the Inbal Hotel must be proud Israelis with a strong backbone. If the manager of the hotel had acted so, Minister Dichter of Kadima would have learned how to straighten the national back, and the peace negotiations would have gained greatly from this. We will not respect a hotel that does not know how to respect itself and its country

An Assessment: One Year Later, Hamas Is The Unchallenged Ruler Of Gaza

Jerusalem, Israel – The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority (PA), is based in Ramallah and propped up by the Bush Administration, under the premise that it would be fighting the Hamas regime in Gaza.

Yet that same Fatah dominated PA continues to provide funding for Hamas under the premises of the Mecca accord that was reached between the Fatah and Hamas in Mecca, the capital of Saudi Arabia, in March 2007. The Mecca accord mandated that Hamas and Fatah would divide the public funds at the disposal of the Palestinian Authority, and that is the case today.

The U.S. government and the Israeli government know that the Palestinian Authority continue to fund Hamas. Yet neither government will do anything to stop it.

Since June 2007, Hamas has consolidated its position in the Gaza Strip and has become the sovereign authority. Hamas has captured the universities, the chambers of commerce, the news media, the public institutions and the Gaza population.

Although elected to its position of preeminence under American-sponsored elections in January 2006, Hamas imposes its hegemony by dictatorial powers that leave no room for insurrection or even expression of protest.

Meanwhile, Israel sells products to Gaza that keeps Gaza from falling into a humanitarian crisis.

The European Union pays for the fuel from the Israeli gasoline monopoly known as DOR ALON, and also covers the cost of the operation of the one power station in Gaza.

The health and education services are paid for by the PA in Ramallah, run by the Abbas/Fayyad government. The PA in Ramallah covers unemployment compensation for 78,000 unemployed people.

Iran covers the military expenses of the PA. At present the Hamas army has about 16,000 soldiers. According to a senior source in Israeli intelligence, the Hamas army is modeled on Hezbollah’s military structure.

Many of the troops leave the Gaza Strip through the Rafah tunnels and are sent to Iran or Syria for military training.

Since it seized power a year ago Hamas has turned the Gaza Strip into a huge armory, hundreds of its people have been trained in Iran, Lebanon and Syria, and when they came back they passed on their new military know-how to thousands of others in local training camps.

With every month that passes, Hamas builds its power so that it will eventually threaten the Israeli port city of Ashdod, and will soon be able to reach Beer Sheva.

The latest weapons acquisitions consist of advanced Iranian intelligence facilities that were smuggled in from Sinai and installed in the Gaza Strip.

A Lull In Stages

The outline for a planned “lull” of fighting between Israel and Hamas has three stages.

The Israeli POW, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, in Hamas hands in Gaza will not be included at first, and after three days of quiet, all the crossing points in Gaza will be opened except the one in Rafah.

In the second stage, accelerated talks will begin, with mediation by Cairo, for the kidnapped soldier’s release.

The third stage involves the opening of the Rafah crossing point and the lifting of the blockade – after Cpl. Shalit’s release.

On Saturday, the London-based Arabic newspaper Asharq al-Awsat quoted an Egyptian source as saying that in principle, Israel has already agreed to the lull and that Egyptian Intelligence Minister Omar Suleiman, who is responsible for the mediation, convinced Israel not to include Cpl. Shalit’s release in it.

The Egyptian source said that Mr. Suleiman promised that Cpl. Shalit’s release, in exchange for Palestinian convicts, will be the first subject to be discussed immediately after the lull is announced. “Israel and the Hamas movement accepted this,” said the report.

Hamas operatives have reiterated that the organization is interested in a lull agreement on condition that it also include the opening of Gaza’s crossing points.

The Israeli POW, Cpl. Shalit, say Hamas operatives, is not part of the agreement. “Egypt understands very well that these are two separate subjects,” a Hamas spokesman said.

Cpl. Shalit’s father, Noam Shalit, heard the reports in the media that his son would not be included in the agreement. “We received a promise from official sources in the government that Gilad is part of the topics that Israel views as part of the lull agreement,” Mr. Shalit said. “We were given to understand that Gilad would be included in any agreement that Israel may reach, and that there will be no agreement without him. A lull agreement can be an opportunity to move his release forward. We have gone for almost two years and, regrettably, nothing new has happened.”

Mr. Shalit said that he is in contact with officials, and he had been told nothing different.

Meanwhile, a high-ranking Israeli officer warns that the continued trend of removing roadblocks in Judea and Samaria under American pressure could lead to rocket fire from there as well. “If Israel gives in to American pressure, we could soon see high trajectory fire on the Israeli home front,” the officer said. “The Palestinian police do not deal in security, but rather in law and order. They deal with rapists, murderers and thieves. They do not arrest terrorists or get into conflict with Hamas.”

Another Israeli officer criticized the Palestinian Authority, claiming, “On the one hand, more than 700 police officers are operating in the Jenin sector, but on the other hand they have no judicial system or jails. So they arrest and release.” According to the officer, the Palestinians arrested people involved in terrorism only several times, but released them very quickly because “they have no system that can incorporate such a matter.”

“We must understand,” an Israeli security official explained, “that the Palestinian police officer can have one brother in Hamas and another in Islamic Jihad…We have no high expectations from the Palestinian police officers.”

‘The Abductors Are Moving Gilad Every Two Days’

Despite denials, reports intensified over the weekend regarding the formalization of a truce agreement – one without Cpl. Shalit. “Sadly,” says a senior officials in Egypt, “we don’t know where Gilad Shalit is and it is our understanding that Israel does not know either, seeing how he is in constant motion.”

According to an Egyptian source, the abductors are concerned that Israel will attempt to rescue the abducted soldiers and are therefore making every possible effort to thwart any possibility of an operation by Israel’s elite forces. “Gilad Shalit has been on the move ever since the abduction,” says the source “and the abductors are moving him from place to place in Gaza every two or three days. They have devised a sophisticated system of transferring him without its being possible to track the transfer.”

The Egyptian source further said that Hamas Political Bureau Director Khaled Mashaal has instructed the abductors unambiguously that no harm should be inflicted to the Israeli soldier “because he is the key to the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners.”

Despite this, the Palestinian mediators are refusing to accept any packages or letters for Cpl. Shalit from Israel and even from his relatives.

Their Patience Paid Off

Any cease-fire – whether as part of an official declaration or by silent consent – will be pointed out by Hamas as yet another victory over Israel. It will also gain them more time to solidify their hold on Gaza.

It is no secret that Hamas’ leaders are very much interested in a cease-fire. And yet, much like in the matter of Cpl. Shalit – which they also want very much to resolve – they are the ones dictating the terms. In both cases, they are conducting negotiations from a position of strength and with very few concessions. The most vital point for Hamas is its insistence on a cease-fire with a sense of victory, a balance of terror as well as a military equilibrium with the IDF – especially by the firing of Kassam rockets and the successful imitation of Hezbollah’s model of warfare.

Gaza sources observe the behavior of Sderot’s residents and the way the rockets break their resolve with much satisfaction.

More than anything, Hamas are gloating amid the Israeli government’s stuttering and inability to reach a resolution.

Because of this, they are not at all afraid to fire barrages of rockets and mortars: Hamas’ leaders know well that at most the Israeli response will be to bomb one of their facilities, which in all probability they have long since evacuated.

Israel’s code of military ethics forbids Israel from firing into a civilian area, even if missiles have been fired from that area, so Hamas has transformed the Israeli military code of ethics into their latest human shield similarly to how the Hezbollah did in Lebanon, during the summer 2006 attacks on Israel, when Hezbollah fighters launched massive mortar attacks from the cover of Lebanese villages that were protected by Israel’s military code of ethics.

An Israeli intelligence source also notes that Hamas’ sense of victory also interprets Israel’s inability to decide on a military operation as being the result of Israel’s fear harbors of a military debacle. Hamas’ spokesmen take the opportunity to declare in front of every open microphone that “Gaza will be a graveyard for Israeli soldiers,” and they call on Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to “prepare the coffins,” and announce with much arrogance and vanity: “We are prepared to face a military operation.”

After a year in power, Hamas is now saying that “saber” and “somud,” the Arabic terms for “patience” and “endurance,” play an important part in the Palestinian ethos, and particularly in Hamas’, have in fact forced Israel’s resolve toward a “hudna,” the Islamic concept of a cease-fire.

The authoritative Islamic Encyclopedia (London, 1922) defines “hudna” as a “temporary treaty” which can be approved or abrogated by Islamic religious leaders, depending on whether or not it serves the interests of Islam; and a hudna cannot last for more than 10 years. A hudna means no more than a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces.

David Bedein can be reached at dbedein@israelbehindthenews.com. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

©The Bulletin 2008