TROUBLE ISRAELS THROWN OFF LAND

Europe fights plans to give emerging economies bigger say in IMF
07.08.2007 - 09:13 CET | By Renata Goldirova

France, Germany and the UK have joined forces to fight against plans to reform the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which would give a bigger say to emerging economies such as China, India and Brazil at the expense of European states.Proposed reforms of the fund an organization of 185 countries created after the second world war to foster global monetary cooperation are due to be agreed next month, before the current managing director Rodrigo Rato steps down in October. But senior IMF officials told the Financial Times that countries are locked in a dispute which pits Europe against the US and fast-growing economies.

What we hear from European colleagues [is] that they have the right of birth to run this institution indefinitely. This is very disappointing, an executive director said. The EU trio have rejected formulas which would award a country with votes based on the size of their economy – an equation that would strongly boost to the powers of Beijing for example. EU economies are seeking reforms that would not reduce their leading position on the board. The UK, France and, to a lesser extent, Germany, have dug in their heels, a senior IMF official is cited as saying by the FT, adding that Japan also fears being eclipsed by its Asian rivals.On the other hand, the US – reportedly annoyed with the Europeans' intransigence has pushed for more votes to the four most under-represented IMF members – Mexico, Turkey, South Korea and China. Washington is seen as a staunch ally of the first three, and wants to see Beijing change its currency policy. A voting reform needs 85 percent of support in order to fly, but some point out that [Mr] Rato doesn't have the votes to push the policy through before he steps down.

Appointing a successor

All eyes are now focused on whether France succeeds in appointing its former socialist finance minister Dominique Strauss-Kahn for the top IMF job. He has already received Germany's approval but could meet resistance from Italy, which had hoped to see an Italian in the post for the first time, according to some media reports. An unwritten rule says that the IMF's managing director must be European while the president of its sister organisation – the World Bank – must be from the US.Developing countries have also for years protested in vain against this practice as they would like to see a more open competition in the organisation.

Divine inspiration
Published: 06 August 2007

It used to be said that the Labour Party was shaped less by Karl Marx than Methodism. No longer, if the annual survey of MPs' summer reading is a bellwether. This guide into the beliefs of our senators shows they don't have many - beliefs in God, that is. How else to explain the top position among Labour MPs of Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion? Of course, the choice of this volume may simply reflect a kind of subliminal revolt against the ghost of Tony Blair who - even if he did not pray with George Bush - certainly advertised his godliness. It might therefore be seen, paradoxically, almost as a form of exorcism, a way of saying Blair begone!

No doubt our former leader, bridging chasms in the Middle East, couldn't care less. But should it not make the Archbishop of Canterbury tremble a little for the future of a church that was established by act of parliament? Some might find it rather exciting if disestablishmentarianism - one of the longest-sounding political causes in history - was to make a comeback. But it may not come to that, depending on the next election. Godly thoughts, after all, are far from dead on the other side of the benches.If the Tories' favourite book was also Dawkins, the game would surely be up for the Church of England as far as established status was concerned. But while Labour MPs are imbibing atheism in their summer hideouts, their opposite numbers will be doing the opposite; their favourite summer reading - apparently - is William Hague's biography of William Wilberforce. Is either side telling the truth about what they intend to read this summer? God knows.

Swine fever outbreak hits Romania AUG 6,07

The latest swine fever outbreak will not help Romanian meat exports
The Romanian authorities have ordered the slaughter of 20,000 pigs after an outbreak of swine fever at a farm in the west of the country. All farms in Timis county belonging to Smithfield Foods one the largest US meat processors will be inspected for signs of infection, officials say. Road checks have been set up in the area to prevent the movement of meat. Swine fever is a recurrent problem in Romania, which has been banned from exporting pork to other EU countries. Timis official Ovidiu Draganescu said that all 25 farms belonging to Smithfield Foods will be tested for swine fever.

Export ban

The virus has already been found in the Cenei farm, where the slaughter of pigs has already been ordered. Swine fever is a highly infectious disease. Infected pigs must be slaughtered and the carcases buried or incinerated Smithfield - which claims to be the biggest pork producer in the world - bought the Timis farms in 2004. Animal health and food safety standards have been main concerns as Romania and Bulgaria joined the European Union on 1 January 2007. The EU told both countries they would have to eradicate swine fever before they could sell pork in the rest of the EU without restrictions.

Brussels praises prompt response
By Tobias Buck in Brussels August 5 2007 18:14

The British government’s quick response to the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease at a farm in Surrey drew praise on Sunday from the European Commission, which is poised to adopt its own emergency measures to stop the highly contagious virus from spreading to other EU countries.We are certainly very satisfied with the prompt action taken by the British government and with the steps they are taking, a Commission spokesman said. The Commission said it would adopt its own measures today, including a ban on the movement of animals in the UK, and on all shipments of animals, meat and dairy products from the high-risk areas. The precise region hit by the export ban has yet to be determined, but it is expected to centre on the 10km exclusion zone around the affected farm south-west of London.

The EU measures will largely confirm the actions already announced by the British government. These were based on a 2003 European law inspired by the 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak that devastated much of Britain’s rural economy and spread to France, Ireland and the Netherlands.EU officials hope the measures taken by the government over the past three days will avoid a replay of the 2001 outbreak. The biggest question for UK farmers now is how long it will take the Commission to lift the current restrictions. According to the 2003 legislation, the emergency measures in the 3km protection zone must be kept in place for at least 15 days after the last infected animals are killed and the farms disinfected. The 10km surveillance zone must be retained for at least 30 days.The Financial Times Limited 2007

Palestinians struggle with Gaza's three-state solution
By Harvey Morris in Gaza City August 6 2007 03:00

A gaggle of officious but otherwise friendly Hamas militiamen in smart camouflage-blue fatigues has replaced the solitary Fatah recruit who used to snooze at the first Palestinian checkpoint inside the Gaza Strip.With them and thousands of their fellow Executive Force personnel deployed throughout the Strip, a measure of calm has returned after the violence that marked the Islamists' power struggle with the secular Fatah party.But Gaza's 1.4m people have little else to celebrate from the first 50 days of Hamas rule in a territory that is more isolated than ever, both politically and economically.Some can still raise a smile, however, when they note that the Palestinians have leapfrogged the two-state solution to their conflict by securing a three-state solution - Israel, Hamastan in Gaza and Fatahstan in the West Bank.

With unemployment at 40 per cent and rising, the biggest question facing most people is where the next meal will come from. The answer is increasingly that it will come in the form of a foreign food handout.Hamas has said it will pay the salaries of 10,000 people in the largely unproductive public sector who were dropped from the payroll by the Fatah-supported government in the West Bank. But that scarcely compensates for the loss of three times as many wage packets in the dwindling private sector.The paramount concern among what remains of the secular middle class is how far Hamas will go towards instituting Islamic rule. They swap alarmist tales of male sea-bathers threatened with arrest unless they don long shorts and T-shirts, although a glance at the heat-hazed Mediterranean shore indicates beachwear is no more conservative than in Fatah's day. .

Hamas, victorious in battle but stumped for an answer as to what to do with its new power, has so far opted for a soft approach to further Islamisation in an already conservative society.As for the economic decline, Hamas officials blame Gaza's plight on the trinity of Israel, the US and Europe, to which they have now added their new enemy, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president in the West Bank.
We are not responsible for the embargo or the siege, says Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman. Israel and the US and Europe are responsible. What surprises us is that Abu Mazen [Abbas] is now involved in that.Mr Barhoum, a neatly bearded medical graduate in white shirt and black tie, is one of the respectable faces of Hamas, a movement branded terrorists by much of the international community and latterly murderers by Mr Abbas.We are a Palestinian movement, not al-Qaeda. We don't want to be isolated from the US and Europe. Moderate Islam in Turkey gives a good picture of the Islamic model, says Mr Barhoum, referring to Turkey's ruling AKP.

Gazans with little affection for Hamas are not persuaded by such blandishments. The people of Gaza are effectively hostages, says Imad Abu Dayya, head of a local training institute, and are threatened with a loss of their human rights.Hamas are grassroots people. They can survivefor a long time on cucumbers and tomatoes. But they have to decide whether they're moderates or revolutionaries and they need to state their vision clearly to the public.Mr Abu Dayya and others are even more scathing about Mr Abbas and his refusal to negotiate with the Islamist regime that now dominates their lives. Abbas should sit down with Hamas rather than buy a US agenda that's been around for 50 years, says Mr Abu Dayya of US efforts to restart a peace process that would exclude Hamas. President Bush needs to dismantle terror, not fight it, and that involves not attacking the dignity of the poor.Mahmoud al-Jarami, a secularist and former member of the Marxist Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, who is co-operating with the Hamas regime as a senior foreign ministry official, believes the rival Gaza and West Bank governments have their strengths and weaknesses but that ultimately the government appointed by Mr Abbas in Ramallah is illegitimate. Abu Mazen is not an emperor who can decide for himself.

Like Mr Abu Dayya, he fears the Palestinian president is being dragged into an imposed deal with Israel that will be rejected by the Palestinian people. We were promised a state by 1999, then by 2005. Now Mr Bush is trying to sell us a new illusion.The Financial Times Limited 2007

August 6, 2007
Essential Errors BY ARLENE KUSHNER

This morning here in Israel YNet ran a piece on the upcoming meeting between Olmert and Abbas. It provided almost a template of errors in thinking with regard to what's going on. (Not YNet errors, but errors of those involved.) Primary is this: Israel and the US have both been working to strengthen Abbas so he can realize his authority over the Palestinian territories and combat terror. The objective is to prompt Abbas to reach a settlement with Israel.Prompt Abbas to reach a settlement? That is a mistake of major proportions. Whenever I read something like this I am reminded of the exceedingly pertinent advice of Prof. Moshe Sharon, who says negotiations with the Arabs should be conceived of as a bazaar -- a marketplace. If Israel and the US want Abbas to do certain things more than Abbas wants to, then the cost of getting him to do these things is high. Too high. This is the point everyone seems to miss.

Abbas and his government and those he governs (and I use that term loosely) have to really want a peaceful state with a civic society established next to Israel. They have to want it enough to be willing to make sacrifices to get it. This is simply and incontrovertibly not the case.

~~~~~~~~~~

An Israeli official was quoted thus, we've...just handed over a vast sum of money, released prisoners, provided military aid and authorized outside military aid. We conceived a very handsome package and it bore results, stabilizing Abbas.Huh? Abbas is stable? The explanation is that in spite of pressure on him to do so, Abbas has not fallen in again with Hamas. He understands that going back to Hamas' embrace is a death-blow to the political process.I would not be so certain of any of this. What matters to Abbas more? Having a state in Judea and Samaria, or having interaction with fellow Arabs in Gaza? Yes, Abbas is making all of the right noises regarding his absolute refusal to talk to Hamas, but this is for Western ears. And the West -- eager to hear this and refusing to remain mindful of the Palestinian propensity for a forked tongue -- buys it.

Just days ago I discovered on an Arab website a report that says Fatah and Hamas have already met secretly and forged certain agreements. I have not been able to confirm this -- at least not yet, but it would not surprise me if this turned out to be so. And even if it turns out to be true that there's been no contact in recent weeks between Fatah and Hamas, I remind you of the report yesterday from Israel military intelligence that says there will be fighting between Fatah and Hamas in Judea and Samaria soon. Prime Minister Fayyad has told Israeli officials that the PA is not ready to assume control of Palestinian cities. The security services in the PA have not gotten their act together.No matter how you look at it, Abbas is not stable.

~~~~~~~~~~

And so what was the result of the meeting today between Olmert and Abbas in Jericho? Olmert began with a statement about the goal of the meeting being to create two states for two people as soon as possible. One has to wonder what Olmert's intent was here. Possible is not going to be any time soon. Abbas made his anticipated requests regarding removal of checkpoints, more humanitarian aid, and amnesty for additional terrorists, and Olmert agreed to consider them. Questions regarding Palestinian institutions and issues of Israeli security were apparently discussed as well. What was not discussed were the core issues of borders, Jerusalem, settlements and refugees, as much as Abbas was eager to put these on the table.There were great photo ops. And the two agreed to talk again, to work towards normalizing ties, and to ultimately discuss fundamental issues.Over in Gaza, former PA prime minister Haniyeh said that the meeting in Jericho was a public relations gimmick that would yield nothing. It looks a bit like that from where I sit, as well.

~~~~~~~~~~

A large army and police contingent is preparing today to evict two Jewish families from a marketplace in Hevron, where they took up residence recently. The likelihood of violence is great.It is important to set the record straight with regard to this painful -- and shameful -- situation, as so much disinformation is being circulated:
This market stands on Jewish land. It was purchased, in front of Arab witnesses, in 1807 by Rabbi Haim Bajaoi, at a time when there was a thriving Jewish Quarter in the ancient city; the five dunams he purchased were adjacent to the Quarter and dedicated to the use of the Jewish community. Jews disappeared from Hevron in 1929, after a horrendous Arab massacre (instigated, it should be noted by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Muhammad al-Husseini, who was Arafat's mentor). Those Jews who survived were moved out by the British, who then controlled the area under the Mandate for Palestine: It was easier to remove them than protect them.

In 1948, the Jordanians occupied this area; an Arab market was established on the land that Bajaoi had purchased. When Israel secured control of Hevron in 1967, the Arabs were permitted to continue to operate the market -- even though they were on privately owned Jewish land. This was so even after Jews moved back into the city, into the old Jewish area, known as the Avraham Aveinu neighborhood. Twelve years ago, for security reasons, the IDF evicted the Arabs who maintained the stalls in the market. The market stood empty.By 1998, as part of the Oslo Accords, Israel had pulled out of 80% of Hevron, but the 20% that remained in Israeli hands included the Avraham Aveinu neighborhood and the adjacent market place.The Hevron Jewish community petitioned the Israeli government several times to be permitted to rent the remaining structures left in the market place but their request was consistently denied.

~~~~~~~~~~

In March of 2001, a one-year old child, Shalhevet Pass, was shot point-blank in the head by an Arab sniper who had positioned himself in the area of the empty market. The Hevron Jewish community then decided that a Jewish presence there was necessary. They invested many thousands of dollars in converting the old market stalls into small apartments. Nine Hevron families moved in, and a religious study hall was established. This area was named Mitzpe (outlook) Shalhevet, in memory of the child.Once the Jewish residents moved in, Arabs went to court claiming the buildings. The attorney general responded that the Arabs had no further claim, but that the Jewish trespassers would be evicted; the court accepted this and made no additional ruling. Eviction orders were issued by the attorney general's office.

~~~~~~~~~~

Before eviction could take place, the Jewish community appealed. Then the court ruled that the land was privately owned by Jews (the family of Rabbi Bajaoi had produced papers and indicated their desire that the Hevron Jewish community use the land). However, they also ruled that the market stalls, which had been put up by Jordan, were captured property that legally fell under the jurisdiction of the Israeli government. The court recommended that the structures be leased by the government to the residents of Mitzpe Shalhevet. Attorney General Mazuz refused, determined to punish those who had used this property without permission. He pushed for eviction.Eighteen months ago, when that eviction was about to take place, there was a gathering of protestors and violence seemed imminent. Crisis was averted when IDF officials on the scene -- headed by General Yair Golan -- negotiated a compromise with the residents, saying that if they moved out peacefully, legal Jewish occupancy of the market would be expedited and Jews from Hevron would soon be permitted to move in. Based on this agreement, the residents moved out voluntarily. Subsequently, Attorney General Mazuz voided the agreement, saying that the IDF had no right to negotiate it. Mitzpe Shalhevet stood empty.

~~~~~~~~~~

This brings us to the current crisis. Recently two families grew tired of the waiting, and the failed promises, and moved back into Mitzpe Shalhevet. And once more the government is out to remove them. We've been fooled too many times, the families are saying, This time we're not going peacefully. The community is mindful of the fact that the court had provided a way out with its recommendation, and the government refused to take it, preferring confrontation.Defense Minister Barak is making the decision in this regard now. Responding to pressure from the left (and mindful, undoubtedly, of elections coming up before too very long) he has decided to take action against these two families. What makes this even more shameful is that the representatives of seven factions within the Knesset had appealed to Barak to not go this route. Last month they wrote a letter to him:

We are marking 78 years since the 1929 riots, you are faced with a fateful decision concerning one of the sites which represents, more than anything else, the murder and the thievery [committed upon] the Hebron Jewish community of those days: the site of the 'shuk' [market place] in Hebron, where presently several families are living…We are dealing with Jewish-owned land, which was stolen as a result of the terrible slaughter. It is incumbent on the government to act to return the stolen property as would be expected in relationship to stolen Jewish property anywhere in the world. We the undersigned, chairmen of various parties in the Knesset, turn to you with this request to refrain from expelling these Jewish families living in the shuk'and to study alternative ways to resolve Jewish quarters at this site, legally…
The residents of Hebron prevented violence and conflict...when they voluntarily moved out of these homes, based upon promises that they would be allowed to return, honoring and respecting promises of representatives of the state, IDF officers. This type of approach is to be encouraged and rewarded, not discouraged…

For all the above reasons, we request, that you order that the issue of Jewish residency in the shuk be studied seriously, and that in any case, you prevent, for the time being, any eviction of Jewish residents from the site.Barak's decision, then, is shameful. I titled this posting Essential Errors, and without a shadow of a doubt, what Barak is doing qualifies in this respect.see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

The European Ideal
From war's s wreckage came the visions of a unified Europe
By Jay Tolson 8/5/07

Today, 50 years after its birth, the European Union is a 27-member association of nations that functions as something more than a single market and something less than a full-blown political confederation. Defying the predictions of naysaying Euro-skeptics, it boasts a combined $15.7 trillion gross domestic product and is governed by an array of institutions—executive, legislative, judicial, and monetary—to which member nations surrender at least part of their sovereignty. Given its hybrid and evolving character, it is perhaps fitting that the EU originated in a document that was little more than a sheaf of blank pages when it was signed on March 25, 1957.

VISIONARY. Jean Monnet, the architect of the European Union(Corbis Bettmann) Yet the Treaty of Rome was no stab in the dark. Representatives of the six signatory nations—France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg—had painstakingly crafted the foundations of what was initially called the European Economic Community. But according to a recent BBC documentary, the signers were so anxious to get the treaty signed that they couldn't wait for Italian printers to produce it.

Obstacle. The cause of that anxiety was a single person: Gen. Charles de Gaulle. Backers of the proposed community feared that the imperious wartime leader of Free France would soon be returned to the French presidency. And once back in power, they knew, de Gaulle would almost certainly quash the project that he believed jeopardized France's leading role in post-World War II Europe.

Urgent and somewhat improvised, the conditions of the treaty's signing would almost perfectly epitomize the precarious nature of the union's subsequent development. A concatenation of political accidents leading to a convergence of interests, as University of Virginia historian Stephen Schuker described it, the treaty allowed the vision of a relatively unknown Frenchman, Jean Monnet, to prevail over that of his more illustrious fellow countryman.

Born in Cognac, the heir of a modest-size brandy firm, Monnet never attended university but quickly demonstrated a genius for making deals and cultivating international networks both in business and in various appointive offices. Serving as an official representative to England during World War I and later as deputy secretary-general of the short-lived League of Nations, Monnet arrived at a fervent belief in international cooperation and institutions.

During the Second World War, while orchestrating U.S. aid to Free France, Monnet had his first discussion with de Gaulle about the future shape of Europe. The latter, dreading American influence almost as much as Soviet aggression, favored a federation of nations with France at the helm. Monnet, once a believer in such a federation himself, proposed a more modest economic collective with nations enjoying equality under an international body controlling basic industries.

As a first step, Monnet settled for an arrangement that gave France limited control over the coal industry in Germany's Saar district. Soon, though, he turned to designing a more substantial plan for French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman. Integrating the French and German coal and steel industries under a common High Authority, the Schuman Plan invited other European countries to join in. In all, six nations emerged as the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1952—the very six that would eventually sign the Treaty of Rome. As first president of the High Authority, Monnet could now test his proposition that economic cooperation could drive other forms of association.

Ironically, it was repeated disappointments on those other fronts that spurred movement toward the EEC. Foremost was the failure of the European Defense Community, a proposed supranational force that would absorb small-size German units into its ranks. But France balked, unwilling to go along with any kind of German rearmament. That opened the way to a U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which brought West German forces into a larger alliance resisting the Soviet threat.

Even the ECSC proved disappointing. High Authority technocrats imposed inefficiencies on industries that were being buffeted by international developments, including the Korean War. And the increasing availability of oil made coal a less crucial source of energy.

Single market. But if the disappointments were great, the ECSC was a crucial first step toward bringing part of Germany into a community of democratic European nations. After the failure of the European Defense Community, says Charles Kupchan, a professor of international relations at Georgetown University, European elites felt they should focus on where they could advance—on a single market.

And then, as Schuker points out, there were those happy accidents: a Socialist coalition government briefly in power in Paris and eager for some good news after France's Suez Crisis debacle; a German chancellor yearning for stronger ties with the West; an unusual willingness on the part of the other ECSC nations to grant France its special demands, including extensive subsidies for its agricultural products; an equal willingness on the part of France and Germany to include inducements to the smaller nations.

No wonder, then, that supporters of the treaty felt such urgency to close a deal that could so easily have gone up in smoke. And, indeed, when de Gaulle returned to power in 1958, he initially stood in the way of EEC progress, vetoing England's first bid to join the market. But even de Gaulle would come around and push to dismantle all internal tariffs ahead of the scheduled date.

As it evolved, expanded, and changed names (eventually to European Union), this unique institution showed its power as an economic engine. Trade within the community grew more than sixfold even before Britain entered the club in 1973. While the original institutions underwent transformations, the Commission (established as the executive body in the original 1957 treaty) would consistently be the generator of ideas and efforts to advance integration, most dramatically through the creation of a single currency and a European passport.

But in one important sense, the EU has fallen short. Were they alive today, says Kupchan, the original designers of the EU would probably have been disappointed. They had federalist expectations and would have expected, by 2007, something closer to a United States of Europe.

HERE WE GO TROUBLE TO COME NOW, AMERICA WILL HAVE SOME BIG DISASTER IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE AND WHOEVER ELSE IS INVOLVED IN THESE ISRAELIS BEING DRIVEN OFF THEIR LAND.

Israel Forcibly Removes Hebron Settlers
Jewish Settlers Clash With Israeli Police; Olmert Denies Land Swap Plan
HEBRON, West Bank, Aug. 7, 2007

Israeli police officers carry a Jewish settler as he is forcibly removed from a house in the West Bank town of Hebron, Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2007. (AP Photo/Sebastian Scheiner)

Quote

Soldiers of the Jewish people are coming to do what the worst enemies used to do to Jewish people, but they are doing it to their own brothers and sisters.Avinoam Horowitz, Evicted Jewish settler

(CBS/AP) Israeli police, using sledge hammers, chain saws and power clippers, stormed a building in the West Bank town of Hebron early Tuesday and dragged out hundreds of settlers who had holed up there illegally, hoping to expand the Jewish presence in the volatile biblical city. Settlers spit and hurled stones, water, oil and concrete powder as police, backed by army troops, broke through fortified doors and carried out the squatters one by one. Three settlers sealed themselves inside a concrete bunker built for the standoff. This is a crime against justice and against Jewish history, said Noam Arnon, a spokesman for the Hebron settlers. I am sure we will return. Hebron has a long history and we will return.

Danny Poleg, a police spokesman, said four soldiers, 14 police officers and 12 settlers were injured during the evacuation. One settler and six police were hospitalized. Eleven settlers were briefly detained and two arrested. Hebron, a frequent flashpoint of tensions between Israelis and Palestinians, is home to about 500 Jewish settlers living in heavily guarded enclaves among some 170,000 Palestinians. Clashes are frequent. Israel controls the center of the city, including a hotly disputed holy site holy to both Jews and Muslims — the traditional burial site of the biblical patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and three of their wives. Its large military presence often hinders the movement of Palestinians.

The Palestinians control the rest of Hebron.

Meanwhile, a widely-read Israeli newspaper reported Tuesday that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is considering a new peace plan that calls for a land swap with the Palestinians, reports CBS News correspondent Robert Berger. The report comes a day after Olmert met for private talks with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in Jericho, in the West Bank. The visit made Olmert the first Israeli leader to meet officials in a Palestinian town in seven years. According to the report in Haaretz, Israel would offer the Palestinians the equivalent of 100 percent of the territories captured in 1967. Israel would annex 5 percent of the West Bank for major settlement blocs, but equivalent territory elsewhere would be transferred to a Palestinian state. Haaretz said Olmert has not rejected the proposal's main concepts, but the prime minister's office issued a statement expressing amazement at this erroneous article. Such a plan has not been considered, nor is it being raised for discussion in any forum, the statement said.

In other developments:


Twelve Orthodox Jewish soldiers have been court-martialed by the Israeli army after they refused to take part in the evacuation of settlers from Hebron, reports Berger. The soldiers said the Torah forbids evacuating Jews from the biblical Land of Israel. The mutiny underscores a dilemma facing religious Israeli soldiers — whether to take orders from their commanders, or their rabbis. Security officials are warning Israeli citizens traveling in Egypt, Jordan and other Muslim countries to leave immediately due to a concrete and severe threat of terror attacks. Israel's National Security Council says Israelis anywhere in the world should also be alert to the danger of being kidnapped by operatives from Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group. The announcement on the council's Web site is a renewal of a travel advisory issued twice a year.

An Israeli driver was shot and seriously wounded Tuesday in central Israel while traveling on a highway adjacent to the separation barrier with the West Bank, police said. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said the shots came from the Palestinian territories and struck the Israeli driver in the chest as he was making his way on Route 6, a cross-country toll highway. The man was evacuated to hospital in serious condition. Police set up roadblocks and were searching the area. You're Hamas people, one Israeli settler screamed repeatedly at police while being dragged from her illegal home in Hebron. The reference was to the radical Islamic group that controls the Gaza Strip and is sworn to Israel's destruction. After forcing one of the building's doors, police encountered 30 youths singing songs who cursed the soldiers as they entered. Many sat atop a 4-foot-high concrete bunker in which three settlers had barricaded themselves. It took police three hours to bore through the neighboring wall to remove them.

Avinoam Horowitz, a local resident and high school teacher, called the eviction a tragedy.Soldiers of the Jewish people are coming to do what the worst enemies used to do to Jewish people, but they are doing it to their own brothers and sisters, he said. The two-story building evacuated Tuesday stands in the city center's marketplace, which the army shut down in 1994, after Jewish militant Baruch Goldstein opened fire at the Tomb of the Patriarchs and killed 29 Palestinians. The settlers initially moved into the structure — a vacant store — more than six years ago, variously evacuating and re-entering it as the case made its way through the Israeli court system. Israel's Supreme Court ruled that the settlers' presence there was illegal, but they ignored orders to evacuate. Hundreds of supporters moved into the building in recent days, reinforcing the doors and windows with metal and concrete in preparation for the raid.

Settlers claim the property was owned by Jewish families for decades until Jordanian authorities seized it after the 1948 Israeli war of independence. Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in 1967. Elsewhere in the city, settlers have whipped up tensions by moving into a four-story building that is a gateway to the nearby Jewish settlement of Kiryat Arba. The settlers say they want to create a land link between the two communities. The operation Tuesday followed the highly publicized refusal of several Orthodox Israeli infantry soldiers to take part in the evacuation. The army sentenced a dozen soldiers, including two commanders, to brief jail terms for refusing orders. Neither side expected Tuesday's eviction to be the last word. We have lots of patience, said Horowitz, the teacher. We'll do it again until we get back our property.CBS Interactive Inc.