|
|
| By Ellis Shuman June 29, 2001 |
|
| |
When Prime Minister Ariel Sharon met with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House this week, both sides at first were full of praise for each other. "[Israel has] got no better friend than the United States," the President said, and Sharon responded by saying, "We regard your administration to be a very friendly one."
But when the niceties were out of the way, the two leaders expressed conflicting opinions over how and when it would be possible to advance the Middle East Peace Process. This candid exchange of different views was played out in front of the media, which was quick to report the public clash at the meeting.
"The diplomatic sparring took place at a photo session, with reporters present, before the two went into a private session."
Washington Post
"Sitting side by side in the Oval Office, Bush and Sharon appeared to disagree openly on how to advance the peace plan at the center of urgent consultations."
MSNBC
"The honeymoon between George W. Bush and Ariel Sharon appears to be over less than half a year after both men took office. The tough old Israeli prime minister and the U.S. president were on very different tacks when they met for talks in Washington Tuesday."
Martin Sieff, UPI Senior News Analyst
Clash or disagreement?
Different descriptions of the Sharon-Bush meeting could be seen in the varied headlines that appeared in the media.
"Sharon, Bush disagree over violence"
The Associated Press
"Bush, Sharon clash publicly over next steps"
Ha'aretz
"Bush and Sharon spar over Mideast"
Washington Post
"Bush pushes, Sharon digs in"
Chicago Tribune
What is the next step?
"Violence on the ground and public comments by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon Tuesday indicated the road back to the peace table could be a long one. Sharon and President Bush, meeting at the White House Tuesday, appeared at odds over the next step on that road."
CBS News
"US President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon expressed starkly different views about the state of the cease-fire yesterday, with Sharon emphasizing the continuation of Palestinian terror and Bush saying the administration believes "progress is being made.""
Jerusalem Post
Commentary on what happened
"Sharon expected strokes and coddling. Instead he got a humiliating public blow from the president. Sharon says that Arafat is not doing anything? Bush insists that there is significant progress. Sharon is demanding 100 percent results? Bush will be satisfied with 100 percent effort, maybe even less."
Hemi Shalev, Maariv
"The president's attack on Sharon was meant first and foremost to convey a message to the Arab countries friendly to the United States and the Palestinians: the present administration is not in Israel's pocket."
Nahum Barnea, Yediot Aharonot
"But what American officials portrayed as a minor rift between allies was seen by many commentators [in Israel] as a sudden yawning chasm between Mr. Sharon and a president who had seemed reflexively supportive of the prime minister."
New York Times, registration required
The Washington Times seemed to miss the mark in its coverage, written by Ben Barber.
"President Bush yesterday threw his support behind Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's insistence on an end to Middle East violence before Israel meets Palestinian demands for an end to settlement growth and a reopening of Arab towns."
Washington Times
Commentary on what should come next
"Let the Palestinian leader arrest the known ringleaders, close down the suicide training centers and bomb factories, confiscate the small arms illegally in the hands of his paramilitaries, stop his media incitement and publicly announce that no heaven awaits killers. Then would he soon approach "100 percent results," or close enough to "zero violence" to permit negotiations to resume."
William Safire, New York Times, registration required
"Sharon has set the bar high: He insists on 10 days of total cease-fire, plus six weeks of "cooling off" -- nearly two months of complete calm -- before Israel makes any goodwill gestures as a prelude to a possible resumption of peace talks? In the view of American, European and Israeli analysts, Sharon's demand for weeks of Palestinian quiescence before making reciprocal moves is unrealistic. It gives Arafat nothing to show his followers, they point out, in return for calling for an end to resistance to the Israeli occupation of land they regard as the locus of their future state."
Lee Hockstader, Washington Post
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
