(Israel Government Press Office)

Ma'ariv notes that today is the anniversary of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, according to the civil calendar, and claims that "Israel is perhaps the only country in the world in which it is possible to evaluate historic diplomatic decisions in terms of mathematical laws. After almost 66 years since the founding of the state, there is an unchanging paradox here. A right-wing prime minister can make peace and win the support of most of the public. A left-wing prime minister can go to war and win an almost automatic majority. But if this political absurdity is upset, a national tragedy occurs. Yitzhak Rabin paid with his life for this anomaly." The author believes that "Today, Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of the right, can make a historic peace agreement with the Palestinians and the Arab world and win the support of the public," and predicts: "The entire center and left will line up alongside him and perhaps parts of the right as well." The paper concludes: "Netanyahu needs just deep faith and a lot of daring. Does he have it?"

Yediot Aharonot suggests that there have been no leaks from the peace talks with the Palestinians because "Nobody believes that anything will come from these talks and few are showing much interest in them." The author writes: "Netanyahu is convinced that he is riding the horse. Obama needs him. Soon he will go to Congress in order to persuade its members to ease the sanctions on Iran. Netanyahu could enlist Israel's friends in Congress for a bitter war against the President or, alternatively, he could express cautious reservations regarding the easements and allow the President to have his way. Several commentators previously thought about a deal of Busheir for Yitzhar: The Americans would bomb Busheir and we would evacuate Yitzhar. Even Netanyahu toyed with this for a time. The deal that Netanyahu is pushing today is Busheir plus Yitzhar: Israel will accept the existence of Busheir, and the Americans will not blame Israel for the existence of Yitzhar; the negotiations with Abu Mazen will end how they end, but Israel will not be punished. Nobody will discuss this deal openly, nobody will hold a ceremony for it on the White House lawn, but the way Netanyahu is going, we will yet reach this arrangement."

Yisrael Hayom discusses the next of round of talks between Iran and the major powers, which is due to be held in Geneva later this week. The author says that the effectiveness of the sanctions regime will be seen not in Iran's "agreeing to negotiate, but in agreeing to stop its military nuclear program and provide credible guarantees that the agreement will not serve Iran as a 'safe passage' to a bomb." The paper declares that until Iran makes its intentions clear, "The West must treat the statements and smiles with skepticism and demand a substantive change in policy backed by actions, and prepare for a scenario in which it will have to raise the price for Tehran's foot-dragging."

The Jerusalem Post comments on last week’s White House briefing of officials of American Jewish organizations on its efforts to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons. The editor notes that despite “contradictory versions of precisely what was said and what was promised during the meeting, as if America’s sanctions policy vis-à-vis Iran was basically dictated by ‘the Jewish lobby,’”. . . “it is the substance of the issues and the opinions Americans form about them that determine US foreign policy decisions – not the lobbying efforts of AIPAC, the AJC, the ADL, the Presidents’ Conference or other Jewish organizations.”

Haaretz contends that “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent decisions show that he remains determined to perpetuate the distorted priorities he followed in his previous term,” i.e. the prioritization of the trinity of security, settlements and Haredim, and states that “The priority given to these sectors comes at the expense of the rest of the public, which is forced to pay high taxes and suffer dismal public services due to a lack of civil investment.” The editor asserts that “Israel deserves a different agenda, one that will guarantee its future as a democratic and prosperous country,” and states: “What is needed is just leadership that wants to change direction, and such leadership does not exist today in Israel.”