Israeli invites Assad for talks

TEL AVIV — Israeli President Moshe Katsav yesterday invited Syrian President Bashar Assad to Jerusalem for peace talks, breaking with the policy of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and inflaming a debate among Israeli leaders over whether to negotiate with Mr. Assad.

The Syrian government swiftly rejected the public invitation, but not before leading Israelis across the political spectrum had weighed in on the wisdom of accepting peace overtures from Damascus.

The issue had been simmering since Mr. Assad told the New York Times in a fall interview that he wished to resume talks about returning the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for security guarantees.

Mr. Sharon told reporters on Sunday that he was prepared to talk to Mr. Assad only after the Syrian president “stops helping terror,” an apparent reference to the radical group Hezbollah.

But Mr. Katsav, whose position largely is ceremonial, startled Israel’s political community when he declared in an interview with Israeli radio yesterday: “I, the president of Israel, invite [Mr. Assad] to Jerusalem to meet with the leaders of the state without any preconditions. We will welcome his visit.”

The conflicting messages underscored Israel’s dilemma over how to respond to Mr. Assad’s proposal. Mr. Sharon and many others view the peace bid with deep suspicion, but others say Israel cannot ignore a chance for peace with Syria.

A succession of five prime ministers held intermittent peace talks with President Hafez Assad, the deceased father of the current president, starting at a peace conference in 1991 in Madrid. The central dispute between the countries is control over the Golan Heights, the strategic plateau seized by Israel during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

The talks have been on a permanent hiatus since early 2000, when then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak refused Damascus’ demand that Syrian territory extend to the Sea of Galilee.

Most Israeli decision-makers today think that by opening talks with Syria, the government would help Bashar Assad avoid U.S. pressure for a crackdown on terrorism.

“Syria is serious about getting out of the trouble it’s in. The question is whether Syria is planning the kind of long-lasting peace that Israelis envision,” said Dore Gold, an adviser to Mr. Sharon.

“As long as [Syria is] backing Palestinian terrorist groups and supporting Hezbollah … it’s hard to see how that could be regarded as consistent with a serious quest for peace.”

Israel’s military says Syrian support is becoming more critical to Palestinian militants who are responsible for the campaign of bombings inside Israel.

A senior intelligence officer this week accused Syria of playing host to Hamas and Islamic Jihad command centers and allowing Hezbollah to funnel money to armed cells associated with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s Fatah party.

After the suicide bombing of a Haifa restaurant in early October, Israeli warplanes bombed what Israel said was an Islamic Jihad training base in Syria.

But Israeli military intelligence chief Aharon Ze’evi recommended at a recent Cabinet meeting that the government take the Syrian offer seriously. And Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom issued a statement yesterday that he supports “direct negotiations with Syria without preconditions.”

Opposition leader Shimon Peres yesterday taunted Mr. Sharon over his reluctance to engage the Syrians. “When [former Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu sent [cosmetics heir Ron] Lauder to talk with Assad, there weren’t problems? What are you afraid of?”

Mr. Shalom suggested that Israel is reluctant to negotiate simultaneously with Syria and the Palestinians. Previous governments tried to reach a peace deal with Syria, thinking it would weaken the Palestinian bargaining position, but Israel now seems to be favoring the Palestinian track.

Former army intelligence chief Uri Saguy warned against ignoring the Syrian overture, saying Israel had erred by ignoring Egyptian messages in the months before the 1973 war. Even if Mr. Assad’s media appeal was an unconventional method of Middle East diplomacy, Israel has an obligation to respond, Mr. Saguy said.

“It’s true that this is no way to create a dialogue, but on the other hand this kind of talk shouldn’t go unanswered,” Mr. Saguy said. “I would say that it’s unwise and even irresponsible not to answer this proposal.”