PM Olmert in an interview with "A-Sharq al-Awsat": Recent military exercises are part of preparations to meet the challenges facing us.
Nazir Majalli
Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert said that what was being negotiated with the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) was not a declaration of principles, an agreement in principle, or a temporary agreement, as stated by the media, but a detailed peace agreement in the full meaning of the word. . Olmert added, in an interview with a-Sharq al-Awsat yesterday, that he was truly optimistic about reaching this agreement by the end of this year .He further said that there has been practical progress in talks on basic matters such as refugees, borders, security arrangements and guarantees, etc. As for the question of Jerusalem, which will be left for the last stage because of its explosive nature, he expressed his confidence that those obstacles would also be overcome.
Olmert saw a meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Paris during the Mediterranean states conference as unlikely, stressing: "Such a meeting is not my aim in attending the conference." In this context Olmert noted: "It was Syria that urged us to announce the talks between us – not us. They have never done this before. It is positive and important." Olmert expects peace with Syria to be at the expense of relations between Damascus and Teheran, and said: "Let us be very clear: is it conceivable that we should sign a peace treaty with Syria, opening our embassy in Damascus and theirs in Tel Aviv, with trade, economic, aviation and tourism arrangements, and at the same time Syria would continue to maintain its ties with Teheran?"
On the question of Iranian nuclear weapons, Olmert said: "We cannot stand with our hands tied when faced with nuclear armaments held by someone who calls daily for our destruction." He did not see the Iranian question as an Israeli problem, but rather one that concerns America, Russia, Europe, Japan and the Arabs too, calling upon everyone to act to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
He refused to go into detail about the Israel Air Force exercises that reached Greece (1500 km away) – the same distance as Iran is from Israel – saying, "I have not measured the distance; please drop this matter. These were exercises as part of the IDF’s readiness to defend Israel against threats."
A-Sharq al-Awsat then asked Olmert if he had any regrets about the fate that led him to be premier, as he came to inherit these duties when the previous Premier Ariel Sharon was stricken with brain damage, from which he has not yet recovered. Since becoming premier, [Olmert] has had a stormy time, steadily losing popularity because of the setbacks in the Lebanese War. During the past two years he has also been the subject of several corruption inquiries leading to calls for his dismissal, and escape from these allegations seems to be receding even more as new charges are being raised about illicit funding from an American businessman. In recent weeks it has become clear that his government is in danger, and the Knesset may vote tomorrow about holding an early election, while opinion polls indicate that the extreme Likud party may win.
A: This question is not realistic now, simply because I am doing my job as usual as premier. Personal problems are not at the top of my agenda. You know no previous prime minister in Israel has had to face what I have faced, and I knew them all well. Not one of them said his job was easy. I know of nobody in any job who is always really satisfied with it. I know of no premier who had everyone’s support. This job is at the very heart of the democratic system. You have to face party and personal politics. We are in a democracy where the press is not interested in what a premier does or does not do, but how it can sell itself to the public; and the best marketing method is by attacking the government. Politicians also attack each other but do not see their own problems.
Politicians sometimes do not know how to deal with the country’s pressing problems.
There are families whose sons are in danger (the POWs), security, peace, and economic questions, and all of them are dealt with by one single man.
Q: But your problem is different; there are suspicions that might become charge sheets in criminal cases.
A: The problems are the same. Look at the premiers who preceded me; they were investigated for bribery and corruption. Ariel Sharon and his two sons were investigated. This lasted for five years. Binyamin Netanyahu, the Likud leader, was also investigated in the Bar-On case when he was premier. This has been the fate of all Israeli prime ministers in recent times.
Q: Why do you think you are under attack?
A: What do you think?
Q: I heard it was because you opened serious talks on four fronts: with the Palestinian Authority, with Syria, with Hezbollah about the POWs, and with Hamas about a ceasefire and an exchange of POWs. A third of all Israelis think so, according to public opinion polls.
A: Maybe, I don’t know. But I do know that about a month ago TV’s Channel Two carried a news item about a Haifa lawyer who said, " If you can find anything that can convict Olmert, I'll give you a million dollars."
Q: Do you know who the lawyer was? What were his motives? Was he a Likud man?
A: [I have] no idea, ask your colleagues at Channel Two…
Q: There may be another angle: it has been said that Sharon disengaged unilaterally from Gaza to cover up the corruption charges against him. Does the same apply to you? Some say you are not serious about peace talks, but are just using them to stall investigations from a position of strength.
A: Those who oppose me say many things, but may I remind you that since November or December I have taken new positions concerning the peace process, and I said the same things I am repeating today. It is unfair to accuse me of having chosen this policy as a cover-up; clearly I have changed my previous policies. I used to be closer to the right-wing approach in Israel but came to the conclusion that it was unrealistic and could not be implemented. Concessions will have to be made through compromise. I have been saying this for years; it is not a ploy to deflect investigations.
Q: How do you view current developments? Will elections be brought forward tomorrow?
A: I do not support bringing the election day forward, but if a Knesset majority so decides I shall go to elections.
Q: You do not seem worried about it even though it could be the end of your political career.
A: My political fate is unimportant; the important thing is what is best for the country.
Q: But you threatened to dismiss Labor ministers, and that will cause them to vote for early elections. Was this well planned, or a moment of anger and a showdown with Barak?
A: Look, there is a moral issue. I wrote to them that voting to bring down the cabinet of which they are a part means that they cannot remain in it.
Q: Do I take it that you will dismiss the Labor ministers after the Knesset session tomorrow?
A: Yes.
Q: All of them?
A: No, only those who vote against the government.
Q: Including your supporters, Majadla and Tamir?
A: Anyone who votes against the cabinet.
Q: Could the Labor party back out?
A: I won't make a big issue of it. I sent them a short, secret, friendly letter. I do not want to humiliate them or fight them. But they leaked it. They should understand – you can't have your cake and eat it too. If I feel this administration has outlived its purpose I shall leave it.
Q: But you are not defending your own Kadima party leadership, and elections do not bode good. The only hope for your party lies in your own resignation.
A: Look, it does not depend on me. If they want to bring election day forward, it cannot be stopped. All later developments, including my leaving office, will flow from that.
Q: I see you are in a dilemma; it is not easy to decide. But will you resign to save your party?
A: I am not in a dilemma, but you journalists are. I know what I want. I do not want early elections. But if it is so decided, the debate will shift to the candidates. If I stand again it will not be the end of my political career. Nor will it if I do not stand again. Nobody knows where I will be or in what position.
Q: Will you stand again as a candidate?
A: I haven't decided yet.
Q: Can we talk about Iran?
A: (Laughing) Let’s talk about Russia – Russia beat Holland at football.
Q: OK, does Russia know that the Israel Air Force carried out maneuvers near the Greek coast as a rehearsal for a raid on Iranian nuclear reactors?
A: The Russians do not inform us of their exercises nor do we tell them about ours. But everyone knows we carry them out; it was not intended to attack anybody.
Q: Really? Was it just a coincidence that they flew 1500 km, the same distance as a flight to Iran?
A: I have not measured the distance; please drop this matter. These were exercises as part of the IDF’s readiness to defend Israel against threats.
Q: It is no secret that Israel put on a show of strength to impress Iran. Former Chief of Staff Dan Halutz, when asked if the IDF was planning to hit Iran, took off his glasses and said, "We can get anywhere."
A: I don't have such glasses. Look, we cannot stand with our hands tied when faced with nuclear armaments held by someone who calls daily for our destruction. I tell you clearly – Iran is not just an Israeli question but one that concerns the Americans, the Russians, the Europeans, the Japanese, and the Arabs too. All must work to stop Iran from getting nuclear arms. Israel is not in the vanguard to face Iran but a participant like the others. We are trying to convince the West to use all manner of force to persuade Iran to drop the nuclear program.
Q: What if Israel decides to use the "Syrian precedent"?
A: What do you mean?
Q: I mean Israelis bombing inside Iran, and in Teheran, which will cause the Iranians to negotiate with you. Is this a likely scenario?
A: I’ve read about such things in the foreign press (smiling) – don't go so far in your thoughts… I am leading good negotiations with Syria and do not want to harm it. I recall how I was attacked about not having talks with Syria. I answered that when the time comes, I shall talk. Now we are indeed talking. Indirectly at present, through the Turks, and matters are progressing. I am pleased.
Q: Will you be meeting President Assad in Paris next July 13th?
A: I shall be there on that date to take part in an important conference, at the invitation of French President Sarkozy, to unite the Mediterranean countries. I support this event. President Assad will also be there. Maybe we shall meet, maybe not. Such a meeting is not my aim in attending the conference, and the important thing is not a meeting but the peace negotiations we are holding.
Q: As you see the political events developing in Israel and in these negotiations, could [a meeting] happen?
A: As we hold peace talks, a meeting is bound to occur at some stage, and peace cannot be achieved without such a meeting.
Q: The Syrians say there will be no such meeting.
A: Look, it was Syria that urged us to announce the talks between us – not us. They have never done this before. It is positive and important.
Q: At what stage are the talks? Is there agreement about withdrawal? What happens after peace? A break in [Syrian] ties with Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas?
A: Each side knows what the other side wants and we shall say nothing different today. About those ties with Iran, let us be very clear: is it conceivable that we should sign a peace treaty with Syria, opening our embassy in Damascus and theirs in Tel Aviv, with trade, economic, aviation and tourism arrangements, and at the same time Syria would continue to maintain its ties with Teheran?
Q: How can you dictate to Syria what relationships it will have? It is a sovereign state.
A: We do not harm Syrian sovereignty by saying that we expect Syria to stop its support of terrorism. How can we accept a continued [Syrian] alliance with an Iran that supports terrorism?
Q: The French president has offered also to mediate between Israel and Syria. Are there any other mediators?
A: President Kennedy used to say: "Success has many fathers, but failure has only one." As long as things are progressing there are many who will take credit.
Q: Is President Sarkozy still trying to get you and President Assad together?
A: I have been asked: “Why not invite Assad to visit Israel? What do you think? Could there be anything nicer? Do you know how important that could be?” But I have not invited him. Why? I am realistic; the conditions are not yet ripe. I do not want to embarrass him.
Q: How do you face those in Israel and the US who say Assad is not really interested in peace with Israel but only wants to break the Western boycott and improve his own ties with Washington?
A: You are making assumptions. But when asked such questions I say: What is the matter? Let peace develop with Israel, let the boycott end, and [Syrian] relations can develop with the West. Does this bother me? I want peace.
Q; But the Arab world dislikes and cannot accept the fact that Israel is not cooperating with the Arab peace initiative.
A: Why are you making this accusation? I have said over 20 times that we are treating the Arab initiative with respect.
Q: The question is not one of respect. This Initiative was made by all the Arab states, telling Israel as a government and as a people that the entire Arab world is interested in accepting you and having peace with you in exchange for an end of the occupation and giving the Palestinians 22% of Palestine, the rest going to Israel. Why not openly declare you accept it and hold talks on its basis?
A: What do you want me to do with it?
Q: Make it the basis for negotiations. Call Amru Musa [Secretary General of the Arab League] and give him your support.
A: [Raising his voice] I have no quarrel with Amu Musa. I am negotiating with the neighboring Arab states. What do you want of me? When Qatar wanted to have open relations with Israel why should have we objected?
Q: And the other states?
A: There are some that preferred to have undeclared relations with us.
Q: The traditional policy you repeat does not convince the Arab states. It is felt that acceptance of the Arab initiative would be proof that you have chosen peace and that evading it means you are evading peace. Why not calm these fears?
A: Listen: Israel has fought against five Arab states. We made peace with Egypt and Jordan. We are now talking with the Palestinians and the Syrians. Lebanon still waits. We are willing to talk with them too. I see the Arab initiative as a realistic part of the foundations of peace in addition to Security Council resolutions 224 and 338 and the Roadmap.
Q: Israeli-Arab ties have seen setbacks since the Oslo accords; doesn’t that upset you?
A: What setbacks?
Q: You had ties with Qatar, Morocco, Tunisia, Oman and Mauritania.
A: Our Foreign Minister was in Qatar last month and was given a great welcome.
Q: OK – Qatar. They have good ties with you as well as with Hamas and Hizballah.
A: So what are you implying?
Q: Let’s talk about the negotiations with Hamas and Hezbollah for a truce and POW exchanges. Why are things being held up? Are the intelligence services causing obstructions?
A: First, we are not negotiating with those two terrorist organizations. In the south we negotiate through Egypt and in the north through a German mediator. Talks about kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit are continuing intensively. Talks about Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev in Lebanon have not been finalized and need more time. Our key negotiating partner for peace is Abu Mazen.
Q: But we hear criticism and complaints about Israeli intentions even from Abu Mazen.
A: We have been holding very serious talks with the Palestinian Authority, with Abu Mazen and Abu Ala [Ahmad Quraye, head of the Palestinian negotiating team] for six months now. Some think this should be enough to end a sixty-year battle but that is mistaken. Yet there has been serious and real progress in the talks.
Q: In which areas has there been progress?
A: The refugee question, borders and security arrangements. As for the issue of Jerusalem we put it aside from the start – I told Abu Mazen that we should not start our talks with the most explosive issue. Had we started with Jerusalem the talks would have soon ended. This is very sensitive, so complicated, with many aspects, so it has been postponed. We began with the easier matters, and that will help us deal with Jerusalem and reach a happy conclusion to this clash.
Q: Do you think there will be a happy conclusion by the end of this year?
A: Yes.
Q: What then have you agreed upon? Some say you are talking about a plan to be shelved, or that you will declare some principles of a political solution, or a declaration of intent, and lately we heard about a temporary agreement, so what is the truth?
A: I do not know nor do I care what is said. I know we are working, and hope there will be a detailed agreement about the nature and borders of the State of Palestine next to the State of Israel.
Q: A fully detailed treaty?
A: A treaty with detailed understandings, clear to all sides what is expected from them, each side knowing what is his limit of maneuver.
Q: And you see Abu Mazen as the man with whom you will reach a treaty by the end of the year?
A: I can think of nobody better suited to it; we cooperate on a basis of trust.
Q: There has been doubt about his ability to implement such a treaty. What do you think?
A: It must be put to the test. First we agree. Then we implement the Roadmap. Afterwards we shall see.
Q: Will bringing elections closer change this assessment?
A: I don’t think so. Bringing election day forward will not be conducive to this effort but it is an internal Israeli matter.
Q: What is the purpose of your visit to Egypt tomorrow?
A: This is a routine visit I often make to Egypt to meet President Hosni Mubarak, whom I hold in great esteem. I benefit from his wisdom and rich experience as a leader. As you know he has ruled Egypt since the 1980s and is one of the oldest of world leaders. I enjoy hearing his excellent analyses of the situation and how he puts it in historical perspective.
Q: Do you expect progress in the matter of the POW exchange?
A: I hope so. We are trying. Egypt talks with us and helps, and we are appreciative and hope there will be more of an effort to stop arms smuggling [from Egypt to Gaza].
Q: And if smuggling does not stop?
A: If it does not stop that will be a violation of the agreement and we shall be compelled to use armed force.
Q: And the deal with Hezbollah? There have been attempts by Israeli intelligence, the Mossad, to stop it.
A: The UN envoy is continuing in his efforts; there is no deal yet. I hope it will be concluded soon. There is an internal debate here. No agreement yet. When it happens I shall ask the cabinet to meet and vote on it. I am doing my best to bring the boys home.
עד כאן.
מח' מידע ואינטרנט – אגף תקשורת
29 יוני 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment