Hezbollah's borders

YEDIOT AHARONOT 3/5/99: "Hizballah does not recognize the international border between Israel and Lebanon and, therefore, will continue to fight the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] even after a unilateral IDF withdrawal across the border.

This is the position recently formulated by the senior IDF echelon in the wake of lengthy discussions based on updated intelligence assessments. Recently, it has been reported that Lebanon has territorial claims in the Galilee, and the IDF Intelligence Branch assesses that in the future, Hizballah can be expected to adopt this position.

That is why it is assessed that after an IDF withdrawal from Lebanon, Hizballah will start to operate against confrontation-line settlements in the Galilee. In any case, even if Hizballah does not immediately adopt the position that parts of the Galilee belong to Lebanon, the organization claims that outposts built by the IDF along the international border are located on Lebanese territory, and it will continue to attack them even after the IDF completes its withdrawal.

This means that the fighting along the border will continue in any event and will spill into Israeli territory. Under such circumstances, attacks against Israeli settlements and civilians will be inevitable.

The IDF's present position is that a withdrawal to the international border will be possible only when there is a change in the interests of the Lebanese power factors who support Hizballah's operations against Israel -- and this refers mainly to Syria.

The IDF maintains that as long as these interests do not change, Hizballah will continue its operations against Israel, even after a unilateral withdrawal. The IDF sources say that as the fighting will continue in any event, it is preferable to conduct this fighting from the present line rather than from the international border.

IDF sources further say that the army's mission is to defend our northern settlements, and this reflects on its modus operandi and deployment. If the IDF's mission was otherwise defined -- for example, to wipe out Hizballah -- the IDF's activity would be of a different scope and intensity. In that case, however, it would have been impossible to guarantee normal life in the Galilee."

Israeli attacks on Pentagon computers?

YEDIOT AHARONOT 3/7/99: "Top secret reports by Pentagon security elements indicate that Israel has tried to infiltrate top secret Pentagon computers and information pools, as well as those of other official US Administration bodies." This was published on the Internet on 6 March.

In the wake of the discovery of attempts to infiltrate the Pentagon computers, the ZDNet database, which is considered extremely reliable, quoted official US intelligence elements as claiming that "US Administration data-security personnel know for a fact that during 1996, two countries -- Israel and France -- tried to illegally infiltrate into the Pentagon computer network and top secret information pools, as well as US economic information pools."

Meanwhile, Deputy Minister Mikha'el Eytan, who is in charge of Israel's preparations for the information age, said yesterday that Israel is about to establish a national unit for preventing attacks on computer networks which will operate around the clock and monitor all the classified computer networks in Israel.

"The Israeli Government is closely following the hacking into the Pentagon computers," Eytan added. Eytan claims that Israel, as a highly computerized state, is open to "cyberterrorism" -- terrorism via the Internet."

US political meddling in Israel: the $1.2b in aid

HATZOFE 3/7/99: "Political sources in Jerusalem have accused senior US officials of trying to topple Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. The Israeli sources were reacting to reports that the United States will suspend its special $1.2 billion aid package that Israel was promised after the signing of the Wye agreement.

The political sources in Jerusalem noted that the US Administration is slated to present the special aid request to Congress only in July 1999 or, in other words, after the Israeli elections and that there is no dispute over the fact that Israel's receipt of the aid package is contingent on its implementation of the Wye agreement.

"The money is earmarked for the construction of bypass roads and the relocation of army bases, and if Israel doesn't redeploy, it certainly won't need the money," a senior political source said. The source asserted that there is no chance of Congress' approving aid either for the Palestinians or Israel or transferring the aid allocated for Israel to the Palestinians.

"That is neither possible nor relevant," the source claimed. The source accused elements in the US Administration of leaking tendentious reports as part of an ongoing campaign designed to bring about Netanyahu's downfall in the elections.

Jerusalem sources said these attempts are reminiscent of Washington's support for Shim'on Peres in the 1996 elections, although this time the backing is less overt."

More on political meddling

Paris' AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE 3/5/99: "A senior Israeli official accused elements in the US State Department Friday of meddling in Israel's election campaign in a bid to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, he suggested the US officials were behind an Israeli newspaper report Friday that Washington was holding up payment of 1.2 billion dollars in aid to Israel because of Netanyahu's failure to implement the Wye River peace accord with the Palestinians.

"We have noticed lately that there are those in the State Department who obviously would not like to see Netanyahu return to power," the official told AFP when asked about the newspaper report.

"They feel that this kind of sword being held over the Israeli public, of not receiving 1.2 billion (dollars) because of Netanyahu's policies might help defeat him," he said.

He compared the State Department plot to US President Bill Clinton's widely perceived backing for Labor prime minister Shimon Peres when he ran and lost against Netanyahu in 1996, but said the current campaign was "more subtle."

...An official at the US embassy in Tel Aviv also described the Haaretz article as "inaccurate." "The bottom line is that Congress hasn't voted the money yet and you can't give out money that Congress hasn't voted," he said.

The official added that the grants to Israel and the Palestinians were "one package, so they will go forward together" once the two parties resume implementation of the Wye agreement. In his effort to obtain the Wye accord, Clinton asked Congress for the increased aid for Israel and the Palestinians.

Israel says the funds are necessary to finance security efforts linked to further withdrawals from the West Bank required by the agreement..."

Division over Israeli upgraded F-16 aircraft

GLOBES 3/4/99: "A severe difference of opinion has surfaced in recent days between US concern Lockheed-Martin and the consortium of Israeli defense industries, which is backed by the Ministry of Defense, following the concern's objection to international marketing of the Israeli upgraded version of Lockheed-Martin F-16 aircraft, according to senior consortium sources.

The sources said that Lockheed-Martin objects to the intention of the consortium, which includes Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI), Elbit Systems, El-Op and Elisra of the Tadiran group, of presenting the Israeli upgraded airplane at the Air and Defense Show in Paris -- the world's most important exhibition in the field.

The show, scheduled to be held in June, has been defined as the launching of the airplane's international marketing.

"The concern's objection stems from the fact that Lockheed itself developed an upgraded version of the obsolescent aircraft, called 'Middle Life Upgrade' (MLU), and our airplanes will compete with them," the sources said.

"There is no intention of withdrawing the proposal to present and market the airplane. A recent market survey on upgrading of this kind related to projects likely to amount to hundreds of millions of dollars and more."

In response, Lockheed-Martin said, "We are continuing close cooperation with the Israeli consortium for the upgrading of F-16s, on the basis of an agreement signed in October last year.

We regard the cooperation as an important task for us and the Israeli defense industry, and we have no differences of opinion with that body."

Secret discussions on Lebanon pullout

MA'ARIV 3/4/99: "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has been saying in closed forums that the option of a unilateral IDF [Israel Defense Forces] pullout from south Lebanon should be seriously contemplated.

Yesterday he openly declared that "the possibility of a unilateral pullout from Lebanon exists, but it must be coupled with the proper security arrangements."

It's been a few weeks that Netanyahu has been making such statements in closed forums. Nevertheless, senior political sources say he will steer a unilateral withdrawal only if the consent of the security establishment is obtained.

A few weeks ago the political-security cabinet decided to set up a special ministerial committee to look into "changing the redeployment and the situation in south Lebanon."

The existence of this committee has been kept secret to date. Its members are the prime minister, the foreign minister, and the defense minister (Yitzhaq Mordekhay at the time it was established).

Its job description includes looking into the possibility of a unilateral pullout from south Lebanon.

Aviv Bushinsky, the prime minister's media adviser, said yesterday:

"Contrary to reports, there has been no change in the Prime Minister's position on the question of a pullout from Lebanon. The possibility of a unilateral withdrawal has existed for a long time, and it is only one of the options examined by the cabinet.

In any event, a unilateral pullout hinges on the attainment of the appropriate security arrangements.

"The Prime Minister has made no new decision whatsoever on the issue, and he aspires to get Israel out of Lebanon on condition that Lebanon does not get into Israel.

"Under no circumstances whatsoever does the prime minister plan to effect a withdrawal without securing an agreement with the Lebanese Government to assume responsibility for the evacuated area. The prime minister does not plan to gamble with the lives of the inhabitants of the north."

Responding to Netanyahu's remarks, Labor Knesset Member Yosi Beilin said:

"I don't believe what Netanyahu says about a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon. Netanyahu behaves as if he had not been the prime minister in the past three years.

Israel's citizens must make up their minds whether they want to remain stuck another four years in Lebanon with Netanyahu, or get out of Lebanon within a year with Ehud Baraq."...

Hamas denial on talks with PA

Amman'sa SHIHAN 3/5/99: "Ibrahim Gawshah, official spokesman for Hamas [Islamic Resistance Movement] in Jordan, denied holding talks with officials in the Palestinian National Authority in the capital Amman with the aim of reaching an agreement to topple Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He said that the Hamas office in Amman carries out political and media activities and takes cares of ties with Arab countries. It has nothing to do with such an agreement, he said..."

Sha'ath interprets US position on Wye as PA state

Ramallah's AL AYAM 3/5/99: "Dr. Nabil Sha'th, Palestinian Minister of Planning and International Cooperation, has said that the US position during the Wye River negotiations was based on acceptance of the Palestinian state intended to be proclaimed on 4 May.

He said that President Clinton and Chairman 'Arafat spent nine hours of talks discussing the question of the proclamation of the Palestinian state during these negotiations.

Sha'th made the remarks at a seminar on the proclamation of independence held yesterday at the al-Rawdah school in Nabulus.

He said the Americans sought during these negotiations to reach an agreement based upon returning to the Palestinians all the territories agreed upon in the transitional period, opening the safe passage, the airport and the port, releasing the Palestinian prisoners, and initiating the final-status negotiations six months before the 4th of May.

The Palestinian minister went on to say that President Clinton addressed the Israeli Prime Minister in front of us saying: "You have to complete everything before 4 May."

...Sha'th reasserted that the Palestinian leadership upholds its right to proclaim the independent Palestinian state on 4 May when the period set for the transitional agreement expires.

However, he did not deny the possibility of resorting to other options.

He said in this regard:

"We are being advised to postpone the proclamation of the independent Palestinian state until we can secure the recognition of the independent state by the European countries and Japan.

These are questions that could be discussed. However, our right to proclaim the independent Palestinian state is not negotiable." ...

Dr. Sha'th pointed out that there was a major breakthrough in Palestinian-US relations. He recalled that when President Clinton visited Gaza, he asserted the "right of the Palestinians to self-determination over their free land."

He also pointed out that the bilateral US-Palestinian committee was formed during that visit. Underlining the significance of the bilateral committee, Dr. Sha'th noted that the United States has similar committees with only four other countries of the world.

The Palestinian minister said that the US side in the committee explained to the Palestinian side in the last meeting the US policy toward Iraq since the Palestinians are partners in international politics.

He said: