This is a new ministry set up in Israel and its task is
to lay down the infrastructure for economic and cultural cooperation
between Israel and the Arab world in the new era of peace.
Everyone agrees on the importance of having this ministry
but when it gets close to the other ministries' authority
and prerogatives, everyone objects. No matter how much he
tries to hide this, signs of anger and pain are seen quite
clearly on his face.
Netanyahu's fall pleased him but he is not happy with Baraq.
The new Prime Minister is trying to appear as the "first leader"
and the "independent" who does not need the advice of old
or experienced leaders and all this is specifically at the
expense of Peres.
Baraq is indulging Rabbi 'Ovadia Yosef, Leader of Shas,
the party of Torah observing Jews, wooing the Likud, appeasing
his colleagues from his party, and pampering David Levi. But
when it comes to Peres, he marginalizes him at times and humiliates
him at others.
The "belated ministry" is not the only evidence of this.
Baraq has totally excluded him from the management of the
peace negotiations or from leading them. Peres feels that
Baraq is ungrateful. He was the one who brought him to the
world of politics when he took off his military uniform. Rabin
proposed him and Peres went to negotiate with him. He gave
him the foreign ministry portfolio in his government. Yet
Baraq is turning his back on him.
But Peres seems to have become used to dealing with ungrateful
people. He was the Israeli leader who built the nuclear reactor
in Dimona and is at the same time the architect of the peace
process. Yet the public treated him unfairly and he has almost
become the closest person to whom the proverb "a prophet is
not honored in his own country" applies.
The day we met was the day when the Israeli army commanders
in the West Bank were handing over to their Palestinian counterparts
the management of civilian affairs in 7 percent of the land
that was transferred from Area C to Area B.
On that same day, David Levi and Mahmud 'Abbas opened the
final status negotiations. We did not ask him about these
developments only but also about his views on the overall
developments in the peace process since Baraq's election.
His reply was diplomatic but you could still smell his dissatisfaction
in it. He said:
[Peres] I am satisfied that we have started to implement
the Wye Plantation agreement because the time has come to
do so. The difference between the previous government and
this one is that this one is fulfilling its promises.
[Majli] You did not say that you are satisfied with the
peace process as a whole. This is just the start of the final
status negotiations that must be finalized within five months.
[Peres] I am satisfied with the results achieved so far.
I believe that there is no room for delaying the negotiations
on the final status. But I am not sure that these negotiations
will be completed in five months. But never mind, the important
thing is that we have started.
[Majli] Do you not believe, like us, that the past two months
were wasted in futile procrastination?
[Peres] It would have been undoubtedly better if we had
reached an agreement two months ago as there would have been
more enthusiasm and eagerness for the process from both sides.
But this did not happen. The important thing is that we have
started it...
[Majli] Do you believe that the Sharm al-Shaykh agreement
signed by 'Arafat and Baraq will be definitely implemented
on time and in its entirety?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] Will not Baraq refuse to implement this or that
clause on the pretext that the Palestinians are not fulfilling
their obligations?
[Peres] No. [Majli] Never?
[Peres] Look, there is an agreement involving obligations
from both sides. Each side has to fulfill its obligations.
But I am totally convinced that both sides are eager to implement
this agreement.
[Majli] Do you really believe that the celebration at the
Erez crossing point opens the way for a final resolution of
the issue?
[Peres] This celebration opens the way for the possibility
of reaching a solution. The practical proposals will come
later. It is a good start. Let me remind you here that the
first start to the final status negotiations was in May 1996.
[Majli] Under your government?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] But that was a formal session. It was obvious that
the imminent elections would impede the negotiations.
[Peres] This is true. But the peace process was not a nominal
one. We withdrew from around 400 Palestinian towns in a few
weeks and handed them over to the Palestinians.
[Majli] Do you have a clear concept of the final resolution
of the Palestinian issue?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] Is it a thorough proposal? A peace plan?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] Acceptable to both sides?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] What is it?
[Peres] I will not talk about it. Publication kills the
plan.
[Majli] Is your plan the same as that of (Justice Minister)
Yosi Beilin and Micha'el Eytan (a minister in Netanyahu's
Government) with some slight changes?
[Peres] No, no. It is something else. Do not tire yourself
because I will reveal nothing about it. I will publish it
when the time comes.
[Majli] We can guess. It includes a clause that allows the
establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Your
stand on this issue is known. But will it be a real state?
[Peres] It will of course be a real state.
[Majli] Independent?
[Peres] Yes, 100 percent independent.
[Majli] Disarmed?
[Peres] Most certainly.
[Majli] Let us imagine it: It will be an independent state
but when Israel decides to blockade it, for any reason whatsoever,
it can do so and therefore it will restrict the Palestinians'
freedom.
[Peres] No. Israel will not be able to blockade it. It will
be an independent state. We will intervene only in the security
areas.
[Majli] A security strip similar to the one in occupied
south Lebanon?
[Peres] No. A security strip similar to a truce zone.
[Majli] Will this independent Palestinian state be allowed
to decide for itself too who can enter and leave it and who
are its citizens without Israel's interference as is the case
today?
[Peres] It will be an independent state that decides everything
that concerns its population and other policies. It is not
our right to interfere in its affairs.
[Majli] An independent state with a capital?
[Peres, after a one moment silence] Yes.
[Majli] East Jerusalem as its capital?
[Peres] There is no need to partition Jerusalem as it is
today or make it one city and two capitals. We can enlarge
Jerusalem instead of partitioning it, increase its area.
[Majli] And part of the enlarged Jerusalem will be the capital
of Palestine?
[Peres] I only gave an example and did not mean to specify
the matter. Detailed proposals will be discussed at the proper
time and I keep them to myself.
[Majli] Yet we want to be assured. What is your position
on the Palestinian refugees' issue? You know that it is impossible
to talk about a fair and comprehensive peace without their
return.
[Peres] Regarding the refugees' issue, first a scientific
and accurate survey must be undertaken so as to know who are
these refugees, their number, who wants to return, and who
wants compensation. This is a principal issue. Do you for
example guarantee that all the refugees living in Lebanon
will return? How many among them have bought houses and land?
Therefore I say that we must first know its magnitude in order
to take serious action to solve it. We will find the solution
in this way.
[Majli] What about this report that the Israeli Government
has started to open the file of Jews who emigrated to Israel
from Arab countries so as to raise it in the negotiations
as the problem of "Jewish refugees" (demanding compensation
or return)? These files were originally opened when you were
the Prime Minister. Is there a serious intention to negotiate
it?
[Peres] Yes, why not? Negotiations in general are a matter
of give and take. All issues will be discussed and each side
will try to mobilize all its tools and interpretations. Do
not let this surprise you.
[Majli] Do you back the notion of settling the Palestinian
refugees in the Arab world? Jordan, Lebanon, and probably
Egypt?
[Peres] Yes, anywhere except Israel and behind the Green
Line.
[Majli] Not even a limited number?
[Peres] Look, the Jewish character is the major issue for
Israel that it must protect at any price. Anything that threatens
this character will be unacceptable to any Israeli.
[Majli] But the peace that you personally want to see achieve
and to be a fair one, do you not believe that this fairness
will be distorted and incomplete if the refugees' problem
is not solved in a radical and convincing way? What do you
tell this sector that constitutes around half the Palestinian
people? Remain dispersed?
[Peres] I understand the refugees' problem. It is primarily
a humanitarian issue and not just a political one. We must
all take their conditions into account. How will this be done?
There is a special committee for the refugees' issue that
stemmed from the multilateral negotiation track. Canada chairs
it and its task is to find reasonable solutions to their problem.
This committee will resume its discussions when the final
negotiations really start.
[Majli] Is it true that you are totally excluded from the
negotiations?
[Peres] Let us say that I am not directly involved in them.
But I am a member of the mini-cabinet council that follows
up the negotiations and I express my views there.
[Majli] Is that so?
[Peres] I have a specific task in the peace issue, namely
to build the infrastructure for peace. This is not an easy
task.
[Majli] Do you agree with King 'Abdallah that negotiations
with Syria will be resumed within one month?
[Peres] I agree that this is possible.
[Majli] Do you have information indicating this?
[Peres] The Syrians want to resume the negotiations from
the point they had reached and we agree to this. Discussions
revolve around the specific point they had reached. If the
Syrians accept the formula that was once proposed by (former
US Secretary of State) Henry Kissinger, which he called "constructive
fogginess," then the negotiations can be resumed immediately.
Al-Asad has to realize that it is unreasonable to act contrary
to what you see in a movie. The happy ending comes at the
end of the movie and not at its beginning. If you start the
film with its final scene, why do you need to watch it?
[Majli] Do you have a personal criticism of President Hafiz
al-Asad?
[Peres] Yes. We could have made peace together. He missed
the opportunity.
[Majli] This allegation was heard several times but the
Syrians denied it categorically.
[Peres] Al-Asad and all Syrian officials are telling the
world that the late Rabin and I pledged to him to withdraw
completely from the Golan. If what they are saying is true,
why then did they not agree? They want total withdrawal in
return for total peace. If we had pledged this to them, what
then prevented them from accepting it?
[Majli] Tell us the story of the messages exchanged between
you and al-Asad. We want to really understand who was responsible
for the lack of progress then?
[Peres] He proposed to me through the Americans (after Peres
became Prime Minister in the wake of Rabin's assassination)
to finalize a peace agreement before the Israeli election
(that was in early 1996 and the election was held at the end
of that year). I agreed and said that the election would be
held in less than a year and therefore we must use the time,
do away with the negotiations held by junior employees, and
negotiate at the highest levels. He replied that he agreed
to meet me but could not set a meeting soon. I answered: Meeting
a woman without specifying a date is like specifying a date
without a woman. It was not a theoretical matter.
[Majli] Was this the reason that made you bring the Israeli
election date forward?
[Peres] Yes. I was ready to fight the election on the basis
of achieving peace with Syria and Lebanon. That was a risk
but I was prepared to take it. But things moved in a different
direction.
[Majli] Was it not possible to find another solution with
the Syrians, like for example a US or Arab intervention, to
save the situation?
[Peres] All these efforts were made with US and Arab intervention.
Everyone later said that al-Asad lost and missed an opportunity.
This failure to meet was a grave mistake. In Syria, they regard
a direct meeting a bickering card. But this is not the case.
Al-Sadat, King Husayn, and 'Arafat wisely understood this
point. A failure to meet has a deeply negative effect on Israeli
public opinion. Our citizens are not convinced of a peace
between two countries whose presidents do not meet.
[Majli] So, in your view, the ball is now in Syria's court?
[Peres] Yes.
[Majli] Has Albright failed to make any progress?
[Peres] It is not a question of failure or success. As you
notice, the negotiations are still suspended.
[Majli] Does Prime Minister Ehud Baraq support the stands
that your and Rabin conveyed to Syria in 1995 and 1996?
[Peres] Yes, I believe so.
[Majli] What is the problem then? Do the Syrians know this
and ignore it or do they not trust Baraq?
[Peres] It is their problem. I do not understand them. The
territory they want is in our hands. They will not be risking
anything while we will be taking a risk by withdrawing from
the territory. What is worrying them? Their support at the
time for the operations of Hamas [Islamic Resistance Movement]
(inside Israel) and Hizballah (in south Lebanon) made us lose
the election.
[Majli] Were the Syrians reproached for this matter?
[Peres] There was self-appraisal. They believed that there
were no differences between Likud and Labor or that Likud
was better.
[Majli] Do you believe that they realize today that Labor
is better?
[Peres] Yes. I believe that they realize this now...
[Majli] Does Baraq support your new Middle East plan or
does he lean more toward the view of Netanyahu who rejected
it?
[Peres] This is not a personal plan and no individual, no
matter who he is, can oppose it. It is a plan that stems from
the nature of the stage and the creative vision of the future.
There is nothing called "domestic economy" or an "independent
national economy" today. It is not a question of a "new Middle
East" but of the "Middle East in our new world." What will
this region be like? I give you an example. Official US statistics
say that the Internet increased production ten times. How
can any country live today without the Iinternet? The calculation
is this: What do you lose if you do not use the Internet?
There are no limits in the economy. Economic control is just
an illusion. We want to get rid of poverty. There is poverty
in Israel where the per capita income is $17,000 and we must
get rid of it. It is the same in the Arab world where per
capita is less. For example, it is $1,700 in Palestine. We
can buy water from Turkey but the Palestinians cannot. The
issue is therefore one of cooperation and cooperation means
mutual benefits. Our region has a unique problem. The world
is moving forward and the Middle East needs to integrate itself
in it. This cannot be done without a partnership between the
countries of the region, I mean Israel, the Arab world, Turkey,
and other countries.
[Majli] What are you proposing to achieve this?
[Peres] We have started this in practice at the Israel-Palestine-Jordan
level. We will set up joint industrial zones on the borders;
Palestinian workers will come to a joint Palestinian-Israeli
factory on the borders instead of coming to Israel. It is
the same with Jordan. The three sides now have joint projects.
There are high tech training and professional courses and
joint tourism projects. We are carrying out research on the
means for solving common problems in the water, energy, and
technology fields. Every one can join in.
[Majli] You do not like to talk about the past. But this
past is full of negative experiences between Israel and the
Arab world. They are an obstacle to many Arabs that prevents
them from accepting or trusting your ideas. Do you not think
it is appropriate for you to say sorry to these people and
apologize for this past to show that there is a radical change
in Israeli policy?
[Peres] Look, everyone made mistakes. It can be said that
everyone must say sorry. But what is the use? The problem
is that we and the Palestinians are the products of two tragedies.
They [the Palestinians] did not understand in depth the Jews'
tragedy under the Nazis. We did not understand in depth the
tragedy of the Palestinians' dispersal. Every side can present
a long list of the tragedies caused by the other side. I remember
now the death of a Jew and his wife in Nahariyya and other
incidents. The past cannot be changed. The future is the important
thing..."
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in the content and articles of this website,
do not necessarily express the opinions of the Zionist Organization
of America, nor the editor and creator of this website.