ISRAEL: In its enthusiasm, the applause went way beyond the polite handclapping normally reserved for a speech by the prime minister. The group of mayors being addressed yesterday evening by Ehud Olmert in Tel Aviv burst into rapturous applause as the prime minister declared that Israel had not agreed to a ceasefire in its offensive against Hizbullah in Lebanon and that there would not be one in the coming days.
Throughout the day, speculation in Israel had been growing that an end to the fighting was near after the US persuaded Israel to agree to a 48-hour hiatus in its aerial campaign in the wake of the killing of 54 civilians, of whom 37 were children, in an air strike on the village of Qana on Sunday.
But, like the group of mayors, most Israelis still agree with the fundamental logic of the offensive as spelled out by Mr Olmert when the fighting erupted 19 days ago - that Hizbullah has to be removed as a threat on Israel's northern border.
The view held by many Israelis, that they are fighting what they call a "war of no choice" has been reflected in the almost total turnout of the tens of thousands of reservist soldiers who have been called up for duty. There have also been reports of reservist soldiers who have not been mobilised turning up to volunteer anyway.
The support many Israelis have given to Mr Olmert's decision to launch a military offensive is tied not only to the demand that the two soldiers snatched by Hizbullah on Israel's northern border on July 12th be released. Many Israelis view the current conflict in terms of survival: having withdrawn to the internationally-recognised border with Lebanon in 2000, they say, it has to be made clear that Israel will not countenance any violations of that border.
With Israel having withdrawn from Gaza last year and with Mr Olmert planning a deep withdrawal from the West Bank, they continue, the message that Israeli withdrawals should not be interpreted as a sign of weakness and that violations of Israel's borders will not be tolerated is aimed not only at Hizbullah and its backers, Syria and Iran, but also at the Palestinians.
The sentiment that Israel cannot afford to cease its military operation now, even after the deaths of so many civilians in Qana, was reflected yesterday by many leading columnists.
"The state of Israel embarked on this war to achieve goals that are vital to its existence," wrote military commentator Alex Fishman in the mass-circulation Yedioth Ahronoth. "If Israel fails in this war, it will be impossible to continue living in the Middle East." Ben Caspit, a columnist on the daily Maariv, offered Mr Olmert a proposed text for a speech to the nation and to the world. "Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world . . . There are no words of comfort that can be offered in light of the magnitude of the tragedy [ in Qana]," he wrote. "And still, I look you straight in the eye and say out loud: the state of Israel will continue its military operation in Lebanon."
In its editorial today, the daily Haaretz states that the military must provide the government with achievements on the battlefield, thus strengthening its hand when it comes to negotiating terms for a ceasefire. "Failure to strive for such gains is liable to lead to a stinging defeat that will encourage extremist violence and weaken moderate elements in Arab states and Palestinian society," Haaretz states. "Such a development would also tell Israeli citizens who have spent weeks in shelters due to the Katyusha rockets, or who were uprooted from their homes, that their sacrifice was in vain."