Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Reporter's Notebook

Aired April 20, 2002 - 09:31   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Now, for more insight and analysis out of the latest developments out of the Middle East this morning, we're taking your e-mails and your phone calls. You can send your comments or your questions to wam@cnn.com, or call the number on your screen, 404-221-1855.

Now, from Jerusalem, CNN's Jerrold Kessel, and joining us from Washington, CNN congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl. And Daniel Klaidman, the Jerusalem bureau chief for "Newsweek" magazine. Gentlemen, good to see all of you.

We're going to get right to the e-mails, as you can imagine. We continue to receive hundreds of them when we talk about this subject matter. Here's the first e-mail. "Why is the U.S. dragging its feet to support an investigation of the actions taken by Israel in the Jenin refugee camp and in the West Bank in general?" That comes from Skip.

Jonathan, why don't you start us off.

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I'm not so sure if the administration would agree with that characterization. After all, yesterday the White House quite clearly said that they were in favor of such an investigation, and now it looks like we're going to have a U.N. investigation into what happened in Jenin. So foot dragging no more, at least that's the U.S. view.

PHILLIPS: This is along the same lines. Debbie asks: "How will the investigators actually know if bodies found were results of Israel's attacks or the Arabs' own doing?" Daniel.

DANIEL KLAIDMAN, "NEWSWEEK": Well, these investigations are very tough. There are people out there who have a lot of experience investigating war crimes. There are forensic experts who go in and look at the destruction and the bodies and try to make determinations as to how they were killed. And they'll be doing a lot of interviewing on both sides. Whether that will yield the answers is hard to say, because people on both sides of this conflicts have very different narratives.

PHILLIPS: Speaking of these two different narrative, Jerrold Kessel, what's it like there in Jerusalem, what's the talk with regard to this investigation? JERROLD KESSEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think we should point out, it's not an investigation as such, Kyra, but more of a fact- finding mission as they're terming it. And I think it's not just semantics. The fact that the Israelis paved the way for the 15-0 vote at the Security Council was significant, because what happened was Foreign Minister Shimon Peres telephoned Kofi Annan, secretary-general of the U.N., to say that Israel would certainly welcome or certainly accept and play ball with a fact-finding mission. And that's what paved the way for such a mission to take place.

So they haven't gotten a brief, you could say, a thorough investigation. All they can try to do what was spelled out there, to try to get as much of the facts as possible of precisely who were the fatalities on the Palestinian side. That's of course is the most contentious issue, were they gunmen, were they civilians, were they killed during the week or so of fighting or subsequently, were they killed randomly in what the Palestinian charge has been heinous acts of war crimes nature, and as much as possible of the detail of trying to find out who precisely was killed, how many and in what circumstances.

It will be an awfully difficult task, but at least they started on that direction. And the fact that the Israelis say they don't have anything to hide suggests that they're willing to play the ball. It will be an interesting exercise, to say the least, to try to distinguish between polemics and the reality.

PHILLIPS: All right. Let's take a phone call from Tennessee. Brenda, go ahead.

BRENDA: Yes. My question is, can President Bush give the Palestinians the $80 million that he said he was going to without the consent of Congress?

PHILLIPS: Jonathan.

KARL: Well, it's interesting you ask that, because there's a resolution that was just proposed in Congress yesterday -- actually on Thursday -- that would ban any U.S. aid whatsoever from getting to the Palestinian Authority. This was sponsored by Mitch McConnell and Dianne Feinstein. And the idea is to actually not only put a ban on any money going to the Palestinian Authority, but also to put sanctions on the Palestinians, to downgrade the PLO office here, say no visas for Yasser Arafat or other senior Palestinian officials should they want to come to the United States.

Very tough anti-PLO measure. And Congress has the power to cut off that money, to cut off any money that would be going forward. But it's also unlikely right now that Congress will go forward with anything like that. The general mood up in Congress, even with those who feel that the administration has been muddled in their Middle East policy, the general mood is to let the president, let Colin Powell go forward. It's a very sensitive time, obviously, and the U.S. right now doesn't need 535 secretaries of states all weighing in from Congress. They need one secretary of state. That's the general mood up there, not to have Congress interfere at this time. PHILLIPS: All right. I just printed this e-mail right off my screen here. This comes from Cheryl in Yonkers, New York. It says: "Israel constantly compares itself to the U.S. and our fight against terrorism. Will they rebuild the Palestinian infrastructure as we are doing in Afghanistan? If so, will they do it with their own money or more of ours?" Daniel.

KLAIDMAN: It's an interesting question. Shimon Peres, the Israeli foreign minister, who was in the United States has actually said that Israel would like to be able to help the Palestinian areas economically. That's not necessarily to say that they're going to help rebuild the Palestinian Authority's infrastructure, but they would like to do what they can to improve conditions and to alleviate some of the suffering -- that's what Peres said.

Whether it happens is -- remains to be seen. There may be opposition within the Israeli government. But there is -- there are obviously parallels that that the Israeli government has wanted to draw between the United States and its war on terrorism and the Israeli experience. But there are also differences, and the primary difference here is that Israel is essentially in a state of war against the Palestinian Authority, and so it's a little bit of apples and oranges in some ways.

KARL: And, you know, Kyra, Henry Hyde, who is the Republican chairman of the House International Relations Committee, had proposed something even more broad. He's proposed a Marshall plan for the Mideast, where the United States and other countries around the world would give money and resources into the West Bank, into Gaza, to rebuild the Palestinian areas, but we're so far from that point -- we are in a state of war -- it's hard to talk about a rebuilding. First, you've got to stop -- cease that state of war.

PHILLIPS: Gene from New Jersey is on the phone.

KESSEL: You know, Kyra, if I can...

PHILLIPS: Go ahead, Jerrold. Go ahead, Jerrold.

KESSEL: I just wanted to say one thing. They're absolutely right to say this is way down the line about rebuilding, but I think it's also in a sense the shape of things to come may well be taking shape just in the coming week or so, and that involves both those questions of whether the U.S. will be involved in trying to send money to help restore the Palestinian Authority and whether Israel will take part in it.

I think the critical question for the next week or two will be what shape the Palestinian Authority will take, with or without Yasser Arafat, but essentially whether they'll be again there to be the partner of Israel in the possible rebuilding.

The fact that possibly CIA chief George Tenet will be here next week to discuss exactly the shape of the Palestinian Authority and particularly its police forces in the rebuilding of this Palestinian structure vis-a-vis Israel could be the critical moment in how any efforts to stabilize this situation go forward.

And on that could rest the question of money coming in, either from the United States or from Israel.

PHILLIPS: Good point. All right. Gene from New Jersey. Go ahead, what's your question?

GENE: My question is that how can any meaningful negotiations take place between the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab nations that (UNINTELLIGIBLE) first accept Israel's right to exist?

PHILLIPS: Jerrold, you want to start with that?

KESSEL: Well, that's essentially what President Bush was saying, was the meaning of the Saudi peace proposal. And I think that when the United States heard that Saudi peace proposal a couple of months ago, I think that's exactly what they latched on to. They said this is all about -- as President Bush said -- it's all about recognizing Israel.

Once that has happened, once that is a tangible fact, then everything can be built on. Now, that's kind of got lost in the wash of the -- in the sense of the diluting down of the Saudi peace proposal and its acceptance by the rest of the Arab League, and of course in this fierce military confrontation and violent confrontation that you've had becoming even more violent over the last month or so.

But the very fact of that recognition is the key, as it seems, certainly by the United States. And I dare say it would be seen that way by Israel. And that could really change the contours of things and put a cat among the pigeons in how the Israelis respond to such a genuine peace overture, if you like, of the most fundamental and very basic elemental nature.

PHILLIPS: And Ambassador Richard Murphy was even saying this morning that that Saudi view has to be the benchmark, but it can't be the Saudis that are leading this mission. Daniel, would you agree with that?

KLAIDMAN: Yeah, I would. But one thing I'd like to add to what Jerrold just said, one thing I have heard from the Israelis is that while they certainly would like to hear Yasser Arafat say over and over again that he condemns these terrorist acts and suicide bombings against civilians, in some ways what would be more important is, even though the Oslo Accords -- under the Oslo Accords, the Palestinians implicitly accept Israel's right to exist -- if they heard Yasser Arafat make a political statement that he believes that Israel has a right to exist, that Israel and Palestine should be able to live together, that they do not covet Haifa and Tel Aviv, that that would -- and that would be Yasser Arafat putting his political capital on the line, that that would be a courageous statement for him to make at this time and might go some ways toward building confidence and trust between the two sides.

So that's something that I've heard Israelis say. Now, whether it would ultimately make a difference it's hard to say, but I thought it was an interesting point that people have been saying lately.

PHILLIPS: This e-mail comes from Sonny. And the question is: "Why do American media always fail to expose Israeli terrorism against the Palestinians, while so many other news organizations around the world have?" Jerrold, I'm going to let you start off responding to that one.

KESSEL: I'm not sure if we don't. I think we have been very upfront in saying exactly what Israel has been doing over the last three weeks and beyond. And before that, in what was called the targeted killings or the assassination policy when Israel -- before this all erupted in such an explosive manner, when Israel was going off to select leaders and assassinating them, we told the story as it was.

Whether we designate that, as many Palestinians indeed, many in the Arab world, call it state terror, that's another matter. I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't actually call it -- don't need to call it by any designated term, just to describe it as it happens. And I think we, for one, have done that, and I think most American news organizations, as far as I know, have done just the same in describing what has happened.

Characterizing it is another matter, but that's a question for those who want to characterize things in one way or another. But certainly describing what has happened I don't think that's been any shortcomings on that account.

PHILLIPS: I think we can all agree it's a very difficult subject matter to cover, no doubt. And we do strive so hard to be fair and balanced.

Todd on the phone from Kentucky. What's your question?

TODD: Well, my question was that what is for -- through the years, what is the current status of the 1948 U.N. agreement, and has anyone thought about saying, hey, why don't we just use that?

PHILLIPS: Daniel, you want to begin?

KLAIDMAN: Well, I'm not sure what he's referring to when he says the 1948 U.N. agreement. There was a 1947 U.N. partition, or proposed partition, between Israel and Palestine, which would have divided mandatory Palestine into two countries, giving the Jews their state and the Palestinians their state.

That was rejected by the Arab countries. They invaded. There was the 1948 War. Israel ended up with much more territory than they would have gotten under that proposal, and then ultimately gained more territory in 1967.

So if that's what he's referring to, that is essentially null and void, and has been since the War of Independence in 1948. The question is, where we go on from here.

PHILLIPS: Go ahead, Jerrold, really quickly. KESSEL: You say null and void, but in a way you almost wish that the politicians and the statesmen would get back to that very basic question. It's a pretty good question. And what this war and you can almost say is about is Israelis believing that the Palestinians are trying to eradicate their independence from 1948; the Palestinians believing the Israelis are denying them their independence in the West Bank, and if the two sides, falling on what was said a little while ago, two sides would just come out and say this is their ultimate objective for our own selves and not to deny the other side, we may be able to start from there, and that's maybe where the Saudi initiative comes in and on which maybe the United States may choose to build, from some simplistic and very simple beginnings, but something that could lead in a dramatic direction, rather than going back and saying, this doesn't count anymore.

PHILLIPS: Jerrold Kessel, Daniel Klaidman and Jonathan Karl, thank you all so much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com