From: "Hebraic.Heritage.Newsgroup@sol.wwwnexus.com"
<Hebraic.Heritage.Newsgroup@sol.wwwnexus.com>
To: Hebraic Heritage Newsgroup <heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>, Hebraic Heritage Newsgroup 2 <heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>
Subject: Israel PM Candidates / PLO Editorial
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 16:37:20 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: Clarence H. Wagner, Jr., International Director - Jerusalem
Bridges for Peace
To: heb_roots_chr@geocities.com
Subject: Meet Israel PM Candidates

ELECTIONS IN ISRAEL - MEET THE CANDIDATES

For the past few weeks the Israeli news has been dominated by
the upcoming elections. After receiving several requests for information
about one candidate or another, we decided to send the following
biographical sketches of the main candidates. (February 5, 1999)

PRIME MINISTER BINYAMIN NETANYAHU

Binyamin Netanyahu was born in Tel-Aviv on October 21, 1949. He
served as a soldier and officer in an elite commando unit in the Israel
Defense Forces (1967-1972). A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, with a bachelors' degree in architecture and a masters in
business administration, Mr. Netanyahu worked in consulting and management
positions in industry in the United States and Israel. Since 1976 he has
been a director of the Jonathan Institute, a foundation studying ways to
combat terrorism.

As Chairman of the Likud Party since 1993, Binyamin Netanyahu was
elected Prime Minister of Israel in May 1996 in the first direct election
of prime minister in Israel. He also holds the Housing and Construction and
Finance portfolios, and held the Foreign Affairs portfolio from January 6,
1998 to October 13, 1998.

Mr. Netanyahu previously served as Israel's Ambassador to the
United Nations (1984-88) and Deputy Head of Mission to the United States
(1982-1984). In 1984, he was a member of the first Israeli delegation to
the US-Israel strategic talks. Netanyahu served as Israel's Deputy Foreign
Minister (1988-1991) and as Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Office
(1991-1992). He was a member of Israel's delegation to the Madrid Peace
Conference in 1991 and to the subsequent peace talks in Washington
(1991-1992). He has been a Member of Knesset since 1988. In the 13th
Knesset (1992-1996), he was a member of the Knesset Committees on Foreign
Affairs and Security, and on Constitution, Law and Justice.

Mr. Netanyahu has edited several books, including: "Terrorism:
How the West Can Win" (1986), and "International Terrorism: Challenge and
Response" (1991). More recently, he has authored "A Place Among the
Nations: Israel and the World" (1993), and "Fighting Terrorism: How
Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorism (1995).

Netanyahu is married and the father of three. (Foreign Ministry
Information Service, IsraelWire, January 17, 1999)

CENTRIST CANDIDATE AMNON LIPKIN-SHACHAK

Amnon Lipkin-Shachak was born in Tel-Aviv in 1944, and is married
with five children. He studied in a military boarding school; is a graduate
of the IDF's Command and Staff College, the National Defense College, and a
Marine Command and Staff College course in the United States; and holds a
degree in general history from Tel-Aviv University.

Amnon Lipkin-Shachak joined the IDF's paratroop brigade in 1962,
fulfilled various command positions starting from squad commander and
eventually becoming brigade commander. He later passed a reorientation
course for the armored corps and served as a commander of both regular and
reserve divisions. During the Six-Day War, he served as a paratroop
commander and during the Yom Kippur War as deputy paratroop brigade
commander under the command of the late Colonel Uzi Yairi.

Following the Peace for Galilee War he commanded the Beirut and
Shouf sectors.

1983 Appointed O.C. Central Command
1986 Became Head of Intelligence Branch, GHQ
1991 Appointed Deputy Chief of General Staff
1995-98 Fifteenth Chief of General Staff

Amnon Lipkin-Shachak has twice been awarded the Medal of Valor.
(IsraelWire, January 18, 1999, Foreign Ministry Information Service)

RIGHT-WING CANDIDATE ZE'EV BINYAMIN BEGIN

Dr. Ze'ev Benjamin Begin, son of the late Prime Minister Menachem
Begin, was born in Jerusalem in 1943.

He earned his B.Sc and M.Sc from the Hebrew University of
Jerusalem and his Ph.D in Geology from Colorado State University in the
USA. Begin served in the Armored Corps from 1960-3 and during 1975-6
volunteered for a lengthy period of military service.

As a geologist, Dr. Begin worked at the Geological Survey of
Israel (1965-88), where he headed the Environmental Geology and Hydrology
Division, and the Mapping, Marine Geology and Computer Center Division. He
was also coordinator of studies on the siting of the nuclear power plant in
Israel.

Since 1989, he has served as the head of the Research Institute of
the College of Judea and Samaria.

Begin has been a Knesset Member since 1988. In the 13th Knesset
(1992-96), he was a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense
Committee.

During the 12th Knesset (1988-92), he chaired the Foreign Affairs and
Defense Committee's Sub-Committee on National Defense Policy, and was a
member of the Knesset Committee on Constitution, Law and Justice. He is
currently a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

In June 1996 he was appointed Minister of Science and served
until his resignation in January 1997.

Dr. Begin is married and has six children. (Foreign Ministry
Information Service, IsraelWire, January 18, 1999)

CENTRIST CANDIDATE, DAN MERIDOR

Dan Meridor was born in Jerusalem in 1947, and holds a law degree
from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He served in the Israel Defense
Forces as a tank commander in the 1967 Six Day War and continued in the IDF
reserves as a Captain.

A lawyer by profession, he practiced law in Jerusalem from
1973-82. He served as Cabinet Secretary under Prime Ministers Menachem
Begin (1982-83) and Yitzchak Shamir (1983-84). In 1984, he was elected to
the Knesset.

In the 11th Knesset (1984-88), he was a member of the Knesset
Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and the Constitution, Law and Justice
Committee. From 1988-92 he served as Minister of Justice. In the 13th
Knesset (1992-96), he was a member of the Knesset Constitution, Law and
Justice Committee. He has been a Knesset observer to the Council of Europe
and has published articles in academic journals.

In June 1996, Dan Meridor was appointed Minister of Finance, a
position he held until his resignation in June 1997.

He is married to economist Dr. Leora Meridor. They have four
children. (Foreign Ministry Information Service, January 18, 1999)

LABOR CANDIDATE, EHUD BARAK

Ehud Barak was born in 1942 in Kibbutz Mishmar Hasharon. He
joined the Israel Defense Forces in 1959, and served as a soldier and
commander of an elite unit, and in various other command positions
including Tank Brigade Commander and Armored Division Commander, and
General Staff positions, including Head of the DF Intelligence Branch.
During the 1967 Six Day War, Barak served as a reconnaissance group
commander, and in the 1973 Yom Kippur War as a tank battalion commander on
the southern front in Sinai. In January 1982, he was appointed Head of the
IDF Planning Branch and promoted to Major General. During the 1982 "Peace
for Galilee" operation, Major General Barak served as Deputy Commander of
the Israeli force in Lebanon.

In April 1983, Maj.Gen. Barak was appointed Head of the
Intelligence Branch at the IDF General Headquarters. In January 1986, he
was appointed Commander of the IDF Central Command, and in May 1987 was
appointed Deputy Chief-of-Staff.

In April 1991, he assumed the post of the 14th Chief of the
General Staff and was promoted to the rank of Lt. General, the highest in
the Israeli military.

Following the May 1994 signing of the Gaza-Jericho agreement with
the Palestinians, Lt. General Barak oversaw the IDF's redeployment in the
Gaza Strip and Jericho. He played a central role in finalizing the peace
treaty with Jordan, signed in 1994, and met with his Syrian counterpart as
part of the Syrian-Israeli negotiations.

General Barak was awarded the "Distinguished Service Medal" and
four other citations for courage and operational excellence.

Barak holds a B.Sc. in Physics and Mathematics from the Hebrew
University in Jerusalem (1976), and an M.Sc. in Economic-Engineering
Systems from Stanford University, California (1978).

In July 1995, he was appointed Minister of the Interior.
He served as Minister of Foreign Affairs from November 1995 until
June 1996.

Ehud Barak presently serves as the Chairman of the Labor Party and
a Member of Knesset. (Foreign Ministry)

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
WHO ARE WE?
For those who are new to the list, Bridges for Peace is a Christian
charitable organization, headquartered in Jerusalem, Israel. Since 1977, we
have been working to build Christian-Jewish understanding and support for
the people and land of Israel. We do this through twelve different aid
projects to help the people of Israel, while disseminating information
about Israel and teaching Christians about the Hebraic roots of
Christianity. We have national offices in Israel, the U.S., Canada, the
U.K., S. Africa, Japan, Brazil and our Spanish World office located in
Puerto Rico.
To receive more information and our other publications, send your
e-mail and postal mailing address to: BFPISRAEL@CompuServe.com

We also invite you to look at our WEB SITE at:
http://www.bridgesforpeace.com

*************************************************************************

From: Murray Kahl
To: heb_roots_chr@geocities.com
Subject: Varied Aspects in Israeli Elections Viewed

PLO EDITORIAL

Varied Aspects in Israeli Elections Viewed
Fatah WWW in English 15 Jan 99
[Editorial: "Revolutionary Realism in the Balance"]

The date that has been set for Israel's early elections, May 17,
1999, was not arrived at by chance. Earlier dates suggested by the
Labor Party were rejected by the Likud on the pretext that they did
not allow for the required administrative preparations. The date
agreed upon allows the Likud to stay in power for the longest possible
period of time, during which the party hopes to put its house in
order, as well as to work to erode the popularity of the new
candidate, Shahaq.

The May 17 date was also suggested for symbolic reasons related
to the counter coup staged by the Likud in 1997, when they won the
elections. The Labor Party wants to remind its electorate that it is
time they regained power as the real builders of Israel.

Finally, the Likud selected this date because it hopes that by so
doing it may prevent the PLO and PNA [Palestinian National Authority]
from declaring a Palestinian state on May 4, 1999.

However, the month of May, and in particular mid-May, has a
symbolic value in Palestinian history, too. In 1947, UN Resolution 181
set the date of May 15 as the date for establishing the Palestinian
state alongside the state of Israel. Palestinian institutions, then,
might declare the state on May 4, while May 15 could be the actual day
of its realization. The second date reminds the world of the previous
commitment made to the Palestinian people.

For our part, we only wish to put an end to the politics of
deception that Netanyahu's government practices. Saying this is not to
deny that the Labor Party is engaged in similar practices, albeit to a
relatively lesser degree, during the days of Rabin and Peres.
Certainly, we expect the Labor Party to continue in the same vein.
There is, however, a difference between a party that sees its interest
in peace and one which sees its interest in the destruction of peace.

The strength of the Palestinian position rests on its grounding
in realism. Solidly based on the knowledge that all its goals, as well
as all the accords and protocols signed despite the prejudice they
involve, are in line with a legal framework that calls for the
application of international law, the Palestinian position is a good
one from which to pressure those whose interests are different.

We will continue to recruit international support for
implementation of these internationally sponsored agreements, while
the Israeli side will continue to be condemned for its failure to keep
its promises. This failure, unfortunately, has become a feature of all
the agreements both sides have signed, to the tune of the Israeli
slogan, "No date is sacred".

Among the most important of the dates referred to in all
agreements, including the Wye River Memorandum, is the date on which
the interim period is to end, May 4, 1999. On this day, the
Palestinian people will be freed from the restrictions they accepted
under the Oslo Accords. On that date, they will be free to implement
all international resolutions issued concerning their rights --
including the right of return and the right to self-determination and
the establishment of the Palestinian state.

As we know, the right of return is one of the final status issues
and cannot be implemented unilaterally. This right, however, is one
which concerns the Palestinian people only. It is the sacred duty of
the PLO to respond to the will of its people.

After May 4, 1999, the PLO becomes the party that is formally
delegated to pursue the legal aspects of the Palestinian declaration
of statehood. This delegation of power to the PLO has been approved
already by the Palestine National Council. Well before the collapse of
Netanyahu's government, the president of the council and the
committees concerned were requested to, and did, make the final
arrangements.

Just how apathetic Netanyahu can be towards international
relations is made clear in his attempt to use the early elections as a
pretext for not implementing the Wye Memorandum. That gesture also
makes clear the position Netanyahu has selected in a bid to ensure his
reelection. This position will be seen to have been a tragic mistake.

And what, after May 4, 1999, Palestinians may wonder, shall we
do? Into this discussion come our reliance on realism and our
knowledge of the bargaining power which is in the hands of the PLO.
We've adhered to all peace agreements, and now we are free. Some may
call for the adoption of a "pragmatic" position, involving postponing
the deadline until after the Israeli elections. Such a position, in
our view, rewards Netanyahu's procrastination and implies that we have
succumbed to his will.

It was revolutionary realism that caused Fatah to launch its
first attack on January 1, 1965 -- an attack that most Arab regimes
and even some Fatah movement leaders opposed. It was that same realism
which provided the movement with the energy to undertake its second
attack on August 28, 1967, after the 1967 war, despite the opposition
of the majority in the Arab world. It was just that realism which made
possible the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in Algeria on
November 11, 1988, in response to the intifadah.

To those who are reluctant, we say this: Failure to realize our
independence, to realize the state which already enjoys the support of
legal resolutions, could only provide Netanyahu with the victory he
wants so badly. If we were to back down, Netanyahu would only impose
his will on the Palestinian people, rank and file. He would persuade
the Israelis that he had managed to lower the expectations of the
Palestinian people, in contrast to his predecessor, Peres, who avowed
that "a successful peace depends on a successful Palestinian state."
Such will be the tenor of Netanyahu's political discourse.

Netanyahu could, some of his advisors believe, achieve a double
objective if he were to implement the second stage of the Wye
Memorandum. Doing so would, on the one hand, postpone the
re-affirmation of the existence of an independent Palestinian state,
while on the other bringing Netanyahu more votes from those who would
see in the action an instance of his commitment to peace.

One of the principles that has distinguished Fatah has been its
policy of non-interference in the local affairs of other countries.
Article 28 of the Basic Law of Fatah, however, used the term "local",
as different from "internal" affairs, a distinction which has allowed
the movement to act whenever a country's "internal" affairs could
positively influence our cause. Such interference has never been
direct, but has, rather, been undertaken through certain local forces
to ensure apositive effect on the Palestinian question. Certain
mistakes has been made, but the Palestinian cause has always been the
sole beneficiary of all our efforts.

Israeli elections are internal affairs the results of which will
have a direct influence on the entire peace process. As we have seen,
these elections were timed to release Netanyahu from his obligations
within the peace agreements. If he is re-elected, Netanyahu may well
impose his own version of "peace": Autonomy for Palestinians within
the land of Israel.

In short, these elections directly and forcibly influence our
fate as Palestinians. Together with all Arab peoples, then, wemust do
our utmost to ensure that Netanyahu is not re-elected, while
recognizing that even if this goal is achieved, it still represents
only a somewhat lesser evil.

The PNA may decide to adopt a neutral stance toward the Israeli
elections, especially after the negative experience it underwent
following its obvious support for Peres in the last elections. At that
time, the PNA agreed to allow postponement of the Israeli troop
withdrawal from Hebron, in the hope that the delay might help Peres
win the elections.

Inside Israel, Arab forces need to close ranks to ensure the
strongest representation of the Arab population. Pluralismneed not
prevent these forces from adopting a working program that pushes
toward the implementation of all UN resolutions concerning Palestine,
the Golan Heights, and South Lebanon.

Unfortunately, the language used by the two main contenders,
Baraq and Netanyahu, is the same as to final status issues.It differs
only regarding the issues of the interim period, the period that
Netanyahu has just about killed off. His reelection platform includes
the following:

No more land should be transferred to the Palestinians, since
doing so would endanger Israeli security.

A Palestinian state must not be allowed to exist, since such a
state would be used to launch armed attacks against Israel in an
attempt to get Israel to accept the 1947 UN Resolution 181, and
thereby re-take some of the territory now called Israel proper.

There will be no withdrawal from the Golan Heights, because of
the dangers such a withdrawal would pose to the security of Israel.

As for Baraq, who does not outright oppose the establishment of a
Palestinian state and who is willing to concede somewhat more land,
his election platform is based on the following:

There will be no return to the 1967 borders.
A foreign army cannot be positioned to the west of the Jordan River.
Settlements will remain under Israeli sovereignty.
Both positions, clearly, contract all agreements made as part of
the peace process, as well as UN Resolutions 242 and 338, and the
principle of land for peace. These positions, representing an Israeli
consensus, should in turn help us to create a Palestinian consensus on
final status issues. We can achieve this by means of a national
dialogue involving all Palestinian forces and factions. Such a
dialogue would determine those principles, or constants, from which
none of us would deviate and which none of us would overlook.

Achieving a Palestinian consensus regarding the establishment of
a state at the end of the interim period should help opena new chapter
in the relationship between the various Palestinian factions,
including the PLO and other Islamic or Pan-Arab movements. The
discussion should lead to a clear formulation of our united position
on the establishment of a state andon the adoption of a collective
national work program. Such a consensus should assure the continuity
of our struggle to free the territories occupied in 1967; to secure
the return of our refugees; to take control of our natural resources,
borders and points of crossing into other countries; and to put an end
to the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank
and Gaza. Agreeing on such a program before the actual creation of the
state would require the existence of PLO and PNA institutions strong
enough to carry out our mission, including the plan of action already
set by the two bodies. Again, we emphasize the importance of village
and city councils. Local elections should be considered in order to
reinforce both our national unity and democratic institutions at the
local level.

Some of the unfortunate practices that accompanied the Arab local
elections in Israel might have strengthened theposition of those
arguing against elections and in favor of the appointment of local
heads of councils. The latter practice can only reinforce individual
loyalties and decisiveness. Needless to say, Zionists favor the
practice of appointment rather than elections in the Arab "sector" of
Israeli society, as a way of weakening the unity of the Arab community
in general and especially as Arabs support the cause of their brothers
and sisters across the Green Line.

No one denies the existence of social ills within our society.
Tribal affiliation gives rise to some of these. But the deliberate
manipulation of religious sectarianism is a new and dangerous
development which must be fought. We in Fatah try our best to minimize
the effects of tribalism on movement conferences. We realize the
importance of re-shaping our social fabric so that loyalty is foremost
to the nation, rather than to the family or the tribe. The future of
our nation is based on our belief that victory is inevitable and
sacrifice willingly made. These twin poles will be the means to obtain
a prosperous future and the establishment of a Palestinian state, with
Jerusalem as its capital. Revolution until victory!

************************************************************************