Jerusalem NO

Ramallah's AL AYYAM 3/15/99: "The European Union [EU] has disregarded an Israeli request to retract a statement, in which the EU asserted that Jerusalem was an occupied city, on which the resolutions of international legitimacy should be applicable. Israel retaliated by endorsing a draft resolution, submitted by the Israeli Prime Minister, stipulating that Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish state and would neither be divided nor internationalized.

Such an Israeli decision has been rejected by the Palestinian Authority [PA]. Faysal al-Husayni, PLO Executive Committee member and the official in charge of the Jerusalem file, told Al-Ayyam that "Israel is not entitled to sovereignty over Jerusalem and its existence there is a form of domination through occupation.

It basically has no right to sovereignty over the city because it is ruling another people." Al-Husayni stressed that both parts of Jerusalem are an issue for final status negotiations. He said Israel has to implement Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, both stipulating withdrawal from the territories Israel occupied in 1967.

He said, "Israel should withdraw from the territories it occupied and should immediately start to negotiate the fate of the eastern and Western parts of the city."

He added, "Israel's consent to negotiate the issue of Jerusalem is an admission that there are question marks on both parts of the city and that its occupation of the city in 1948 was inadmissible, according to all international resolutions."

The Israeli Government yesterday approved a decision by the Israeli Prime Minister, in which he says: "Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people. This fact has been established in the basic law of Jerusalem, which stipulates that the city is the capital of Israel."

He adds:

"Israel would not agree, under any circumstances, to re-divide or internationalize the city. It will remain forever under the sovereignty of Israel alone." Al-Husayni, who paid tribute to EU position, stressed that Israel could not enforce its sovereignty on the city because this violates the Oslo agreement and all international resolutions, something reasserted by the EU just few days ago.

It is noted that the Israeli Prime Minister has vowed to act toughly against what he called "any violation of Israeli sovereignty in the city."

Al-Husayni responded to that by saying:

"Israel is not entitled to any sovereignty over Jerusalem. Its existence there is a form of domination through occupation. It basically has no right for sovereignty because it is ruling another people."

Jerusalem YES

THE JERUSALEM POST 3/19/99: "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, in consultation with Defense Minister Moshe Arens and Foreign Minister Ariel Sharon, yesterday decided to revoke the travel documents of three Palestinian Authority officials:

Ziad Abu Ziyad's VIP card, and Hanan Ashrawi's and Faisal Husseini's special travel privileges. The decision followed a meeting between the three PA officials and 10 consuls-general in Jerusalem's Orient House.

"In light of the provocative participation of these three members of the PA in a diplomatic activity in Jerusalem, which is a complete breach of the agreements we have reached on Jerusalem, it has been decided to take these steps," the Prime Minister's Office said in a statement.

"It has further been decided that, if the PA continues with such provocations and blatant breaking of the law in Jerusalem, our capital, Israel will respond with the utmost severity."

Abu Ziyad's VIP pass had allowed him free entry into Israel; Husseini's and Ashrawi's had permitted them to pass through checkpoints from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The privileges were revoked several hours after Husseini had hosted foreign diplomats, including representatives of Germany, France, Britain, Italy, Spain, Sweden, other EU nations, Canada, and Australia, at Orient House, in defiance of Israeli requests to refrain from diplomatic contacts in Jerusalem.

US Consul-General John Herbst did not attend. Husseini warned his guests that the peace process would be jeopardized by a US move to transfer its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

"If the US is interested in the progress of the peace process, it must refrain from doing this," he said.

A law passed by Congress in October 1995 gave the US administration until this May to move the embassy. But President Bill Clinton is likely to exercise a waiver by which he can postpone the move in the interests of national security.

Husseini told reporters that the meeting was routine and had nothing to do with the Israeli elections. He also said that "there will be two capitals in Jerusalem, one in east Jerusalem that will be the capital of Palestine and another in west Jerusalem that will be the capital of Israel."

The rescinding of the PA officials' privileges came after a day in which politicians from both the Center Party and Labor scoffed at Netanyahu's claim that his government had managed to put an end to PA diplomatic activity in Jerusalem...

Netanyahu's communications director, David Bar-Illan - who earlier in the day had echoed Netanyahu's and Sharon's statements that the Orient House meeting was meaningless - said that Abu Ziyad's participation had not been known to the government at first.

"The decision [to revoke the travel privileges] was made after we heard of Abu Ziyad's participation, and after we had heard Ashrawi and Husseini's diplomatic declarations," he said...

US special Mideast envoy Dennis Ross, meanwhile, has asked to meet with PA Chairman Yasser Arafat, before his scheduled meeting with Clinton next week, a US official said.

The official added that there is some concern in Washington that Arafat and Clinton are coming into their meeting with differing expectations regarding what the US can offer the Palestinians in return for a postponement of a declaration of statehood..."

Israel selling technology to Cuba

GLOBES 3/17/99: "The Israel Electric Corporation [IEC] is conducting secret negotiations for selling know-how and providing advisory and supervisory services for governmental electric companies in Cuba, with whom Israel does not maintain diplomatic relations.

This has been learned by Globes. IEC chairman Rafi Peled and Eli Landau, chairman of the IEC's board of directors, held a secret visit in Cuba approximately two weeks ago and were hosted by these companies.

In the last few years the IEC has made efforts to sell know-how to countries abroad with the encouragement of the National Infrastructure Ministry.

This venue enables the IEC to expand its operations, a thing which it cannot do in Israel because of restrictions stemming from the fact that it is a monopoly.

The IEC plans to provide the Cuban companies with services to the tune of millions of dollars, including technical advising in all spheres.

In the next few years, the Cuban companies want to introduce significant technological improvements, and for this they require the assistance of an advanced electric company.

Israel and Cuba do not maintain diplomatic relations, but recently economic relations are being developed between Israeli companies and this country, albeit secretly. In addition, Israelis can enter this country as tourists.

In the last few years, the United States has boycotted foreign businesses who maintain contacts with Cuba, this due to the prolonged political dispute between the two countries.

The United States claims that foreign elements find themselves in situations wherein they hold business contacts in areas that the US claims have been unilaterally annexed by the Cuban Government.

The IEC has confirmed that Landau and Peled visited Cuba in order to discuss potential relations. The IEC emphasized: "We will act in accordance with the laws of the state of Israel."

Hezbollah and General Gerstein

Paris' AL WATAN AL ARABI 3/12/99: "...we should examine the recent operations carried out by the Lebanese resistance movement against Israeli targets in south Lebanon. The details of these operations have not yet been published. However, it should be recalled that this is the first time in 17 years in which the Lebanese resistance movement managed to kill the military commander in charge of all the activities of the Israeli army in south Lebanon.

He is regarded as the real military and civilian governor of the occupied border strip. How was the Israeli general killed?

Sources at the Lebanese resistance movement gave exclusive information to the Al-Watan al-'Arabi to the effect that the surveillance teams of Hizballah were daily and even hourly following up the movements of the Israeli military officials inside the occupied border strip.

The surveillance teams even monitored the areas adjacent to the military posts of the Israeli army and submitted their reports to their military superiors, who in turn issued specific instructions to these teams.

Surveillance teams were assigned in recent weeks to watch General Gerstein. In fact, the Lebanese resistance movement had been focusing on General Gerstein ever since he took over the command of the Israeli liaison unit.

General Gerstein was known to be a confrontational personality, tough with the enemies of the Israeli "empire." He was brought to this post to manage and win the game of open conflict with Hizballah in view of his close knowledge of south Lebanon.

He was also the top assistant of General Ariel Sharon, the present foreign minister of Israel, when General Sharon decided to storm Beirut in 1982. Gerstein accompanied Sharon to Beirut and encircled the Palestinian refugee camps...

The surveillance operations began by monitoring the daily movements of General Gerstein, including the number of cars used and the roads he traveled on to and from Hasibyah, Marj 'Uyun garrison and Kawkabah.

The monitoring of his movements was so close to the point that in some cases it included the observation of the days of the weekend when the general stayed in the border strip and did not travel anywhere. It is noteworthy that the Israeli security services camouflaged his movements in a very clever way. Contrary to his predecessors who spent the weekends inside Israel, Gerstein spent his weekends at the border strip.

Reports were submitted to the Hizballah command containing these accurate details. The latest of these reports said that the Israeli liaison unit was preparing for a pre-emptive commando raid on one of the villages of western al-Biqa' to abduct a number of Lebanese resistance commanders from that village in retaliation for the killing of the deputy commander of a paratroop force and two of his assistants of the elite force in Birkat Jabbur.

The reports said that the Israeli political leadership gave the green light to Gerstein to carry out the operation. Immediately after the Hizballah command received its information, it issued orders to its explosives' units to watch for the car of the Israeli commander on the road and blow it up.

The orders were communicated to the units by secret codes and figures. Consequently, these units began to watch these locations and roads according to the maps available for the area.

Before the motorcade of the Israeli commander moved from Marj 'Uyun garrison, the explosives' unit concerned sent a message to the Hizballah command that there was a convoy of four vehicles traveling on the said road and that a remote control explosion in this case would target no less than 20 Israeli soldiers and Lahd men.

The Hizballah command answered back, requesting the unit to wait for the Gerstein motorcade because it was he who was the target this time; no one else.

Finally, the Israeli commander's motorcade began its trip. For camouflage purposes, there were three motorcades traveling on the road. Gerstein alternated from one motorcade to the other throughout the road extending from Marj 'Uyun to Hasibyah.

However, the surveillance teams of Hizballah were monitoring the alternation and keeping pace with it moment by moment. Suddenly, the monitors of the explosives' team sent a message that one of the cars in Gerstein's motorcade had doubled its speed to the degree that the accompanying two-troop transport carriers could not catch up with the car.

At this point, the unit made its final preparations and followed up the movement of the speeding car until it was a few meters from the explosive charge which had been planted on the road.

The crew then detonated the charge by remote control. The explosive charge weighed 10 kilograms of C-4, which is equivalent to 100 kilograms of TNT and contains a large quantity of incendiary materials. The car caught fire and plunged into the deep valley.

The killing of Brigadier General Erez Gerstein is viewed as another painful blow to the Israeli army in Birkat Jabbur in the western al-Biqa'. The same Israeli elite unit that was ambushed by the Lebanese resistance men in Ansaryah on the night of 3 September 1997 was ambushed again on the night of 23 February 1999.

Three of its officers were killed and l0 of its men were wounded. The remaining members of the unit withdrew, carrying their l0 wounded with them after a sophisticated showdown at a critical political moment.

Al-Watan al-'Arabi has received information to the effect that the Israeli military command requested its security services to prepare for a surprise attack against Hizballah under the guise of "preventive action" in retaliation for the announcement by the Lebanese resistance movement two weeks earlier that it had uncovered an espionage network working for the Mosad, and that it had begun interrogating some of them.

It was decided to assign an experienced unit of paratroopers who are familiar with the geography of the region to carry out the mission. In fact, the unit infiltrated at night into a sensitive security area in the al-Biqa' hills to lay an ambush for the Lebanese resistance men who were present in that rough area which is inaccessible by walking on foot.

The result was that the infiltrators themselves fell in the ambush they had laid. Their sophisticated military technology and field experience did not help them. After fighting a battle with the Lebanese resistance men, they finally managed to withdraw, carrying with them their killed or wounded and leaving behind their arms in the theatre of the battle.

This Israeli story is told by Gaby Ishkinazi, the Israeli military commander of the southern command. The story says that the ambush laid by the Hizballah was not planned in advance. What is meant here is to say that operations carried out by the Israeli forces outside the "border strip" area were so secretive that there was no way by which Hizballah could know about them and confront them.

Yet the story of the Lebanese resistance movement is different. Field details given after the operation was suggested that the Lebanese fighters knew in advance about the plan of action of the Israeli commandos from the very beginning to the very end. In fact, Lebanese surveillance teams were spread out in the area on a wide scale.

They were fully alert and could closely monitor the nature of the land and the locations fit for laying ambushes. These characteristics have now become part of the Lebanese resistance movement.

Consequently, its fighters are qualified to know Israeli plans of action in advance. Yet there is another reason for the success of the Lebanese resistance movement in that region. Hizballah managed this time also to convey to the Israelis wrong and provocative information through one of its Lahd agents with a view to luring the Israelis to head for the spot of confrontation chosen by Hizballah.

The calculations proved to be very accurate. The Israelis were lured into the spot of confrontation and the ensuing duel achieved its objectives for the Lebanese resistance.

Information derived from Lebanese security sources which followed up the interactions of the showdown from the "border strip" indicated that three senior Israeli officers arrived in the Marj 'Uyun garrison, which belongs to the south Lebanon army, and began to immediately investigate several Lahd officers, particularly those who belonged geographically to the western al-Biqa' region, and knew the mountainous landscape of the region well.

The Israeli investigators asked these officers a number of very delicate questions. The Israeli military command was convinced that detailed information was conveyed to the Hizballah elements stationed in the al-Biqa', making it easy for three Hizballah fighters to lay an ambush for the Israeli commando group.

The Israeli military command was shocked at the operation, particularly since the Israeli army media had proudly announced three days earlier that the new field measures applied by the Israeli forces within the "security belt" had substantially reduced the ability of the Lebanese resistance to act and would help reduce the number of casualties in the next phase.

What the Israeli media did not say in this connection was that Hizballah conveyed to the Israeli intelligence service accurate information which lured the Israelis into falling into the trap Hizballah had set. It should be recalled that the Lebanese resistance movement has recently opened a special "operations room" in this rough, rugged, and rocky mountainous area.

Operations carried out in south Lebanon and al-Biqa' are run from this "operations room." The new "operations room" enables the Hizballah fighters to communicate with their political leadership in Beirut.

The "operations room" is equipped with sophisticated equipment, particularly the equipment used for air and land surveillance of all Israeli movements.

This information "leaked" at the request of Hizballah through collaborators in the "border strip" to the specialized Israeli services. Therefore, the Israelis began to monitor the area on a semi-daily basis through surveillance flights being carried out.

The Lebanese resistance reacted to these Israeli activities with coolness, because it realized that the Israeli fish had bitten the bait. Hizballah deliberately de-escalated the heat of confrontation on the western al-Biqa' front. Consequently, the degree of Israeli alertness was lowered, after Israel made several attempts to sound out Hizballah's preparedness in that area.

After weeks of inaction and reluctance to retaliate for the Israeli letter bombs on the part of Hizballah, Israel took the measure of annexing the town of Arnun to the border strip and planted mines and barbed wire on the periphery of the town. But the Lebanese resistance did not retaliate.

At this point, the Israelis realized that the Hizballah interest had perhaps shifted to another area, and that the time was opportune for crossing into the new "operations room" and dealing a deadly blow to Hizballah.

The Israeli moves in the field were, to a very large extent, harmonious with the perception of the Lebanese resistance of the way the Israeli mind operates. The Birkat Jabbur operation came to reaffirm once again Hizballah's preparedness and correct field calculations in the south and in the al-Biqa' all along the area occupied by Israel.

The Israeli elite group failed to achieve the necessary penetration and the Israeli security services failed to submit sufficient information. Meanwhile, the Lebanese resistance succeeded in luring the Mosad into a showdown in which the former chose its time and venue.

The success of the Lebanese resistance in this endeavor was due to a perfectly devised camouflage plan, reinforced by the fact that the Lebanese fighters were in full control of the land. The evidence of this is that the exchange of fire between the two parties was taking place from a short distance.

Again the Israelis were alarmed to discover that confidence was lost between their security services and the Lahd army, and that the number of the "allied" Lahd army men who are now suspected of collaboration with the Lebanese resistance is perhaps more than the number of loyalists...

There is other information that says that the disappearance or theft of military documents from the office of General Gaby Ishkinazi, commander of the Northern Region, four weeks ago is still causing confusion to the Israeli military command and could be another reason for the present Israeli retreat with the hope of coming back to the field with alternate plans.

However, the Lebanese army is taking its own precautions against the likelihood of such an Israeli come-back. Moreover, the Lebanese resistance is on a general state of alert in anticipation of any surprises.

The political results of the recent developments have now begun to appear. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has announced that Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon is possible and that there are two options available in this respect.

The first option is negotiations with Syria on the possible price which Israel might be getting for its withdrawal. The second option is a unilateral Israeli withdrawal one year after the formation of the new government. Meanwhile, Israeli Labor Party leader Ehud Baraq is saying that he would be willing to withdraw from south Lebanon before June 2000 in case he wins the election.