In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Notes 1. Introduction 1. According to the Peace Index, a project of the Tel Aviv University’s Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research, 44 percent of the Israeli Jewish respondents thought in July that Barak’s positions at Camp David were too conciliatory, and only 35 percent felt they were appropriate. (For the full results, see the Steinmetz Center web page, at .) 2. According to the Peace Index, by July, 65 percent held the Palestinians mainly, or wholly, responsible for the failure of the talks. In August, 76 percent shared the view that “even if Israel were to agree to a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital , attaining a peace agreement would remain uncertain, since the Palestinians would then present additional demands.” Significantly, this view was shared by a clear majority of Barak voters (62%). In October, 73 percent of the respondents estimated that “at this time the Palestinian Authority has no vested interest in peace with Israel.” For the sake of comparison, it should be noted that only four months before, in June 2000, the Jewish public was “evenly divided between those who believed the PA to be interested in peace and those who felt that this was not the case.” An even steeper drop was evident in Arafat’s personal image. In October, 71 percent felt that his behavior was “that of a terrorist.” Two years before, this view was shared by 41 percent. According to the Gallup poll published in Ma’ariv on October 13, 62 percent said Israel does not have “a partner for peace” on the Palestinian side. 3. According to the November 2000 Peace Index, 80 percent of the Jewish public blamed the Palestinians for the outbreak of the Intifada. In the Gallup poll published in Ma’ariv on November 10, 77 percent shared this view. 4. According to the November Peace Index, 78 percent of the Jewish public believed that “the Palestinians have little regard for human lives and therefore persist in using violence, despite the high number of their own casualties.” Eighty-six percent claim that the Palestinians realize “how strongly Israel values human lives” and therefore “persist in their violence, in order to erode Israel’s power to resist.” 5. According to the October Peace Index, only 29 percent believed that political negotiations with the Palestinians should be called off altogether, while 45 percent believed that the talks should merely be suspended until the violence stopped. 6. According to the latest available figures, published in 1995 by the Israel Advertisers Association, 68.7 percent of Israeli readers are exposed to Yediot Ahronot on weekends , and 54.4 percent are exposed to it on weekdays. Note that exposure figures are better indicators of popularity than circulation figures. 7. According to the Israel Advertisers Association figures, 26.7 percent of Israeli readers are exposed to Ma’ariv on weekends and 23.9 percent are exposed to it on weekdays . 8. This notion of relevance is developed in Sperber and Wilson (1986, 1995) and is arguably the most important theoretical notion used in contemporary pragmatics. 2. “Under Arafat’s Baton” 1. Historically, the term “Land of Israel” refers to the entire area between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River—the state of Israel and the occupied territories. In present-day Hebrew, its usage is usually associated with right-wing ideology. Guri’s formulation thus reflects the notion, prevalent at the time, that the riots signify the end of the distinction between the Land and the State. 2. As part of the Oslo agreement, IDF soldiers and Palestinian policemen joined forces patrolling certain sensitive areas. This ended, of course, as soon as the riots broke out. 3. Settlements on high topographical ground, mostly within the Green Line, especially in the Galilee area. Literally, “lookouts.” 4. Chief of Palestinian Security. 5. Armed wing of the Fatah. 3. “Make No Mistake, Yasser” 1. This is the traditional term used to refer to the days between Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year, and Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. 2. The newspapers’ coverage of the background negotiations between Barak and Sharon makes it clear that the papers viewed the possible formation of an emergency government as a necessary step. A picture on page 2 of Yediot Ahronot on October 5, for example, shows Barak and Sharon shaking hands during the parachute brigade’s yearly memorial service. The caption’s first words are: “A moment of unity.” None of the newspapers warn their readers about the negotiations...

Share