Baghdad and Washington deal?

Paris' AL WATAN AL ARABI 3/19/99: "What is going on between Baghdad and Washington? Is there a secret deal being worked out between the two countries?

A number of well-informed experts raised these questions last week because there were new sudden developments that could arouse a great deal of controversy concerning the covert, not the overt, aspect of the conflict taking place between the United States and Iraq.

Overtly, US F-15 aircraft and the British Tornado aircraft were as usual bombing Iraqi defensive targets in northern Iraq almost daily. It is war of attrition which the United States and Britain have been launching against Iraq ever since the launching of Operation "Desert Fox."

The clear aim of these daily sorties is to destroy Iraq's military infrastructure. While US Defense Secretary William Cohen was making his Gulf tour to mobilize Arab Gulf ranks behind a plan to topple Iraqi President Saddam Husayn, Frank Ricciardone, the US diplomat in charge with the affairs of Iraq's liberation, was intensifying his contacts and consultations to unify the Iraqi opposition and to draw up a list of the Iraqi opposition factions which are eligible for US financial and military aid.

Amid this clear escalation of the situation, the Iraqi official newspaper Al-Jumhuriyah surprised its readers with an article which was not threatening the United States or Iraq's neighbors, nor was it warning those who were attacking Iraq with the gravest consequences.

The article called on Washington to change its policy toward Iraq and to stop the air raids.

Moreover, the paper called on the US Administration to adopt another policy in dealing with Iraq by gradually retreating from its aggressive line which proved its failure all the times and exercising a more civilized and a more rational approach showing respect for the other side.

Only those who know what goes on behind the scenes paused at this Iraqi offer three weeks ago and handled it with complete secrecy. In fact, the Iraqi offer is exactly the antithesis of official thinking in Washington, which has said that the countdown for toppling Saddam Husayn has already begun and that the United States is paving the way for an armed popular uprising in northern and southern Iraq or a military coup from within the regime itself.

By making the offer, the official newspaper Al-Jumhuriyah even dared to oppose the newspaper's run by 'Udday Saddam Husayn and the statements made by Iraqi officials that hostile aircraft should be shot down, that the no-fly zones should be challenged, and that neighboring countries should be threatened.

It seems that the most important thing is that the Al-Jumhuriyah article has been interpreted by well-informed people in terms of reflecting progress on what has been happening secretly since last month. But what was exactly happening?

Al-Watan al-'Arabi has learned from well-informed US sources that the United States and Iraq held secret negotiations in the last few weeks with the aim of making a breakthrough in the deadlock. The two countries have reached and overcome this deadlock by a face-saving solution.

The sources have pointed out that the talks have indirectly been initiated through Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit. As far as the details are concerned, the visit which Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq 'Aziz made to Ankara last month focused in particular on conveying a verbal message from President Saddam Husayn asking the Turks to mediate between Iraq and the United States in order to find a way out of the present predicament; to gradually reduce tension and open the way for a serious dialogue that could lead to a solution based on keeping Saddam Husayn and his regime in power; and opening a new, unprecedented page in US-Iraqi relations at the various levels.

Al-Watan al-'Arabi has also learned that the Iraqi deputy prime minister anticipated in advance that the Turkish prime minister and officials would be taken by surprise at the Iraqi mediation request, particularly that US military and political escalation against Baghdad has reached its peak and that the Americans have officially announced for the first time that they were seeking to topple Iraqi President Saddam Husayn.

They have even disclosed part of their plan to liberate Iraq. Meanwhile, it seemed as if Saddam Husayn has blown up all bridges of communication with Washington and made statements to the effect that there was no longer any room for reconciliation.

The informed sources said that 'Aziz came to Ankara carrying a comprehensive plan that would facilitate the Turkish mediation. It seemed that the plan was prepared by the most senior Iraqi officials following a series of meetings which Qusay Saddam Husayn held with Nizar Hamdun, former Iraqi ambassador to the United Nations, who is well informed about all the US terms and demands and is regarded as the top Iraqi expert on how to deal with the Americans.

Together with Qusay, he supervises a committee which seeks to initiate a dialogue with Washington. A report on the details of the meeting between the Iraqi deputy prime minister and the Turkish prime minister said that the latter was surprised at the elaborate presentation made by the Iraqi official to pave the way for requesting Turkish mediation.

Ecevit was also surprised at the rational Iraqi assessment of the situation. The report asserts that Tariq 'Aziz has focused on the dangerous game being played between Baghdad and Washington, not only for the two countries, but also for its repercussion on the neighboring countries where the situation could explode and the current status quo could be overturned in the entire region.

The Iraqi official pointed out that the continued implementation of the US plan will not prompt Saddam Husayn to capitulate. On the contrary, it will corner him and make him feel that he no longer has anything to lose.

Consequently, Iraq will act in its own way, in the way of "on me and on my enemies." You know that Iraq still has enough weapons to put the whole region on fire, to rekindle the Arab-Israeli conflict and to turn the table over everybody's head.

From a threat of an all-out explosion, 'Aziz moved on to a lesser degree of escalation. He cautioned Turkey against involvement in the US-British plan to topple the Iraqi regime. 'Aziz asserted that before the plan could succeed in toppling the regime, Iraq would have to undergo a process of partition and popular disturbances.

He pointed out that Turkey has no interest in the establishment of an independent Kurdish entity, that it would pay a high price for this, and that no one knows how far the fire which would burn and Afghanize Iraq could reach.

After making his explicit threat to Ankara, 'Aziz went on to brief the Turkish prime minister on US-Iraqi relations and the political and military conflict between the two countries ever since Operation "Desert Fox." The presentation which 'Aziz made was impressive...

'Aziz called on the Turkish prime minister to mediate between Washington and Baghdad so as to pull the region out of the dark tunnel and save it by dialogue, not by war.

After the Turkish prime minister listened at length to the Iraqi deputy prime minister and understood the message, he asked: But what can Iraq offer the United States in case it agrees to open dialogue with Iraq?

'Aziz replied:

"We depend on your political cleverness and shrewdness and knowledge of the issue to convince them with the importance of the dialogue. I am sure that there is a significant group within the US Administration, including perhaps President Clinton, which is thinking in terms of profit and loss and would rather find a way out of this dangerous deadlock which we have all reached."

'Aziz continued:

"You can probably recall that we have entered into a dialogue with the Americans two years ago. The meetings were held here in your country, in Ankara. To indicate that we were taking the matter seriously, our negotiating team was headed by Qusay, son of President Saddam and the official in charge of the security services and the Special Guard.

You undoubtedly know that the Americans made numerous political, security and military conditions and demands. Most important of these was to establish a military base in southern Iraq. Specifically speaking, they wanted to deploy US forces in the al-Kut, which is overlooking the Gulf and Iran.

They demanded that US military advisers be deployed at the office of the Chief of the General Staff in Baghdad. Furthermore, they demanded the political and economic openness of the regime and party and political pluralism in Iraq."

Ecevit replied by saying: "I have information to this effect. I will not keep it a secret from you that we were surprised at the dialogue and the demands and the change in the US position that followed. In fact, the United States stopped demanding the change of the whole regime and began publicizing an idea suggesting that they may accept Qusay as a successor to his father. However, in the months that followed, the situation went back to what it was, because you have turned down the US conditions."

'Aziz replied that "There have been many new developments ever since. I believe that the present situation is opportune for initiating the dialogue again. If an atmosphere of confidence is restored, we could discuss all issues. The information I have is that there are US circles that are willing to bet on a strong and unified Iraq with good relations with the United States, an Iraq that has its position in the new regional arrangements and that can participate in making these arrangements.

We are now prepared for any step, even irrational steps, if no US-Iraqi understanding is reached to lift the sanctions. We are no longer capable of putting up with this situation."

The sources said that Ecevit was cautious in his reply to 'Aziz and committed himself only to conveying the Iraqi offer to Washington and to seeking to carry out the requested mediation.

In fact, the Turkish prime minister requested three of his close advisors to convey the Iraqi proposal to Washington and sound out Washington's reaction as to whether it was prepared to consider a solution to the Iraq problem other than the military solution...

However, informed US sources have told the Al-Watan al-'Arabi that any development in the direction of a dialogue between Baghdad and Washington is unlikely. These sources, however, admit that the real US goals and policies toward Iraq are ambiguous and that there is a large group within the US Administration which is still not yet convinced that the Iraqi opposition factions can be depended on, nor can Washington depend on the plan it has drawn up for toppling Saddam Husayn.

The sources explain that the plan, nevertheless, has been adopted officially and declared publicly. In fact, instructions were issued to carry out the plan.

Therefore, it would be very difficult for President Clinton to make a 180 degree turn regardless of the price, which the Iraqis are offering.

The main reason is not that Washington wants to turn down the Iraqi offer as much as it rests in Clinton's inability to bear the consequences of such a shift in policy and establish a new relationship with Saddam Husayn, who has been portrayed as "enemy number one" of the United States, all the more so because the date of the new US presidential elections is drawing close."

South Africa affairs

Capetown's DIE BURGER 3/23/99: "South African intelligence circles were abuzz yesterday after it was reported that the Israeli ambassador to South Africa, Uri Oren, allegedly had an affair with a senior female Military Intelligence (MI) officer.

There is concern about the possibility that sensitive information could change hands. A defense spokesperson says the SANDF [South African National Defense Force] cannot comment immediately, as the circumstances surrounding the affair are unknown.

Once the army has more information a decision will be taken on whether or not to act against the officer. Oren, a married man, was apparently instructed by his Foreign Minister Ariel Sharon to end the affair. Influential Israeli newspaper Ha-aretz reports that Foreign Ministry Personnel Chief Yossi Regev questioned officials and guards of the embassy and Oren's official residence, during a visit to South Africa.

The paper says that Regev reported to Sharon and the country's Director General of Foreign Affairs, Eitan Bentsur, about the "intimate relationship". According to the report, the woman with whom Oren had the affair, is the "head of a foreign relations division in Military Intelligence.

Oren reportedly slipped away from his guards several times to meet the woman. He confirmed the affair to Ha-aretz, but denied that she worked for MI..."

Members of MI we spoke to, say the possibility exists that the woman is not employed by MI itself, but at the secretariat foreign relations of the army headquarters in Pretoria. Ha-aretz adds that Sharon and Bentsur decided after deliberation that it is definitely a "personal" issue and that Oren can remain in his post.

News of the relationship was leaked after Oren's housekeeper, suspected of theft, told Israeli investigators about several "visits by a woman in her forties who is not the ambassador's wife."

Oren, ambassador in South Africa for approximately two years, is a political appointment by David Levy, leader of one of the smaller parties, the Gesher Party, who formed a coalition with the ruling party after the last election..."

Arafat requests US proposal to postpone

AP 3/25/99: "Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has asked the United States to submit a formal proposal for postponing a Palestinian declaration of statehood and setting a new deadline for a final peace agreement with Israel, a senior PLO official said. Arafat made the request in his meeting with President Clinton earlier this week in Washington, said Hassan Abdel Rahman, the senior PLO representative in Washington.

The Maariv daily said today that Clinton would write a letter to Arafat soon and propose to extend the Palestinian period of autonomy for a year, to May 2000.

This would also become the new deadline for a final peace accord with Israel, the paper said. U.S. Embassy spokesman Larry Schwartz had no comment on the report. In briefings this week, U.S. officials said they hoped to accelerate Israeli-Palestinian peace talks after Israel's May 17 election. The negotiations would not be open-ended, the officials said, but would not set a deadline...In Tuesday's meeting,

"President Clinton asked President Arafat not to declare a state on May 4,'' Abdel Rahman said in a telephone interview.

Arafat did not let on whether he would agree to Clinton's demand, Abdel Rahman said. Arafat told Clinton that the final decision was up to the PLO Central Council, a 125-member institution that is to convene in the Gaza Strip at the end of April..."

Surplus vote agreement

ARUTZ7 3/24/99: "The new nationalist front - comprised of Moledet, Tekumah, and Herut - signed a "surplus vote" agreement with the Yisrael B'Aliyah immigrants party this afternoon.

As a Knesset seat is equal to a specific number of votes, the agreement provides for the transfer of one party's "surplus votes" (after its Knesset seats have been tallied) to the other, should such a transfer make the second party eligible for an additional Knesset seat.

A spokesman for the as-yet unnamed nationalist federation declared that the agreement shows that the party is not only Eretz Yisrael-oriented, but also has a social agenda. A spokesman for Yisrael B'Aliyah said that the positions of the two parties on the issue of the Land of Israel are close.

He noted the votes of Minister Yuli Edelstein against the withdrawal from Hevron and against the Wye agreement, and the activities of Minister Natan Sharansky on behalf of the Yesha communities' development."

More votes…

ARUTZ7 3/25/99: "Another surplus-votes agreement has been signed: Ehud Barak's One Israel party and Meretz. After each of their Knesset seats are tallied following the upcoming election, the surplus votes of one party will be added to those of the other if it will enable the second party to thus gain an extra seat."

PA helps thwart terrorist attack

ARUTZ7 3/24/99: "The Palestinian Authority aided Israel in thwarting a mass terrorist attack in Tel Aviv some three weeks ago. Israeli security elements are of the opinion that the PA is not interested in terrorist attacks before the elections, in order not to bolster the electoral chances of Prime Minister Netanyahu."

Public on strike

THE JERUSALEM POST 3/25/99: "The public sector strike enters its second day today, with the Histadrut and Treasury still far apart on the wage dispute that triggered the walkout by some 400,000 workers.`A Histadrut official said the strikers will temporarily halt the strike for the weekend, before manning the barricades again Sunday morning if no settlement is achieved by then.

No real negotiations took place yesterday, except between lower-level staff, although Histadrut Trade Union Division head Shlomo Shani and Treasury Wage Director Yuval Rachlevsky met last night to discuss what form negotiations will take in the future.

The talks broke down soon after they started. Histadrut officials claimed a victory over those who say the strike is politically motivated, when Jerusalem Labor Court Judge Ronit Rosenfeld issued her detailed decision refusing to grant the government an injunction barring civil servants from joining the strike...

The cost to the economy of each strike day was estimated by Manufacturers Association managing director Yoram Blizovsky at NIS 20 million...

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, interviewed on Israel Radio - which itself was affected by the strike, with only Reshet Bet, Russian, Amharic, and the Arabic language programming broadcasting - blasted the strike, saying:

"We can't have a situation where, in a democracy on the eve of elections, a gun is put to the head of the public regarding false claims, and an effort made, essentially, to extort the public coffers. We have to defend the public and the economy. I could have followed the path the Labor Party followed in the last election, and take great sums from the public coffers and cause terrible damage."

Peretz fired back:

"The prime minister should take responsibility and stop dealing with political matters. He should call on all sides to try to resolve the matter in a realistic way, by studying the data and making decisions as a prime minister should do. The government is the only one responsible for everything that is happening today, the Treasury which is refusing to listen, and my friend [Finance Minister] Meir Sheetrit, who has been sucked into the same atmosphere that has existed at the Treasury for many years now."

The dispute between the two sides focuses on wage increases to compensate for inflation, with the unions demanding 14 percent to cover inflation in 1998 and 1999. Sheetrit said he is not prepared to offer more than 3.1%. Treasury officials insist that real wages in the public sector increased last year, despite 8.6% inflation..."

Center platform

THE JERUSALEM POST 3/25/99: "The Center Party began the presentation of its platform yesterday, holding a press conference in which the four party leaders laid out their stand on diplomatic matters.

Others sections of the platform will be presented in the coming weeks, a party spokeswoman said. The platform, which was written under the guidance of Knesset candidate Uri Savir, calls for a separation between Israel and the Palestinians.

While it does not explicitly mention a Palestinian state, it leaves the possibility of one open, saying this will be considered only during final-status negotiations.

Party leader Yitzhak Mordechai said that "this party, this government will consider the matter of a Palestinian state. The Palestinians do have a right to demand that."

Savir added that, when the time comes for the negotiations on Palestinian statehood, the party "will stand up for our national and security needs... when determining the final borders of Israel."

The platform clearly says that there will be no return to the 1967 borders, and no acceptance of UN Resolution 181 regarding the right of return of refugees.

Mordechai said the party plans to reach an agreement with the Syrians, even if this requires "territorial concessions" on the Golan Heights.