Parliamentary Assembly

Mr President, distinguished members, may I express to you my profound thanks for the honour accorded me and my country by inviting me to address this session of the Council of Europe. I do so not only conscious of the intrinsic importance of this body, but also because of its significance. Indeed, it has a profound import for those of us who come from the Middle East, because here in Strasbourg, despite all the problems, great nations which were divided for centuries by war, attrition, conflict and hatred are joined together in what must represent a new and noble adventure in the history of mankind. Above all it represents a landmark and a lesson for the nations of the world in general and for the strife-tom area from where I come, in particular.

You here represent much for someone from Israel. You represent what is perhaps the most important of all between nations – dialogue. You represent an attempt to stress the unifying and to resolve the divisive. With all the growing pains which the European Community must endure, what is happening here in Strasbourg represents a brave and noble example to the world.

And as I stand here as a representative of what is, alas, the only parliamentary democracy, as you understand it, in our area, I cannot but offer a silent prayer that one day we will be privileged to have such an institution in which the representatives of the countries and parliaments in the Middle East will meet to discuss their problems in free and open debate and not, as in so many instances now, in hostile and menacing diatribe.

In the past two years the world has seen dramatic and far-reaching changes. The communist ideology has collapsed together with the Soviet empire and a new alignment of countries in central and eastern Europe has developed.

We can point with gratification to the revoking of that infamous Resolution 3379 of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which equated Zionism with racism. The impressive majority of the United Nations which sponsored this resolution and which voted for it was a reflection of the major changes which have taken place in the world.

In this connection I would urge the distinguished members of the Council of Europe and, indeed, of the freedom-loving countries, to be aware of the spread of the curse of anti-Semitism and racism in Europe and to fight this frightening phenomenon before it develops and broadens in scope.

We see as our major challenge the achievement of peace between us and our Arab neighbours, including the Palestinians.

In 1922 the world community, in the form of the League of Nations, gave political recognition to the historic and religious rights of the Jewish people to a state of their own in their ancient homeland, hallowed and sanctified by history recorded in the Bible, which is holy to all of us. That political acknowledgement of the rights of the Jewish people was further endorsed by the United Nations on 29 November 1947.

In our Declaration of Independence we held out our hand to our Arab neighbours in a quest for peace. It was rejected, and, instead, the armies of seven Arab states combined with the Palestinian Arabs in an effort to destroy the embryonic Jewish state before its birth and to drive us into the sea. We fought back desperately without adequate arms, outnumbered, outgunned, and embargoed by most of the countries of the free world. Thanks to our sacrifice of 1 % of our population and the leadership of Ben Gurion, we managed to survive.

Israel stretched out its hand in an offer of peace, but it was rejected. The Palestinians continued along the road of tragedy and, in the words of one of our outstanding statesmen, never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

For nineteen years, from 1948 to 1967, the West Bank was occupied by Jordan and the Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt. But the Palestinians were not granted independence, nor was a state established, because then, as today, the last thing the Arab countries wanted, their protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, was a Palestinian state.

Ten days after the conclusion of the Six Day War in 1967, the Israeli Cabinet offered to return to Egypt the Sinai desert and to Syria the Golan Heights in return for demilitarisation and peace. The government prepared for negotiations with King Hussein. The Arab reply to this approach was the Khartoum Summit Conference with its three “nos” – no to negotiations with Israel, no to recognition of Israel and no to peace with Israel.

In 1977, the programme for full autonomy for the Palestinians proposed by the then Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, was rejected out of hand. Had this proposal been accepted, we might by now have been well on the road to a permanent settlement.

We are irrevocably committed to the inexorable process moving towards peace in the Middle East. I am convinced that we will achieve it. For I only have to look back to fourteen years ago, at the time of President Sadat’s historic visit to Jerusalem, when most of Israel’s borders were hermetically sealed and there was no passage of people or trade across them. Who would have dreamt then that today the Israeli flag would fly over an Israeli embassy in Egypt and an Egyptian flag over an Egyptian embassy in Israel? Who would have dreamt that ten years after the signing of the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, Egypt would be accepted back into the Arab League while remaining loyal to its commitments to Israel and would, indeed, reassume its rightful position as leader of the Arab world?

Who would have dreamt that tens of thousands of Israeli tourists would be thronging Egyptian resorts and tourist sites annually, and that joint Israel-Egypt agricultural projects would be taking place in the Nile delta and in the Negev desert in Israel?

Who would have dreamt that over a million people would be crossing annually over the bridges of the River Jordan in both directions, and that hundreds of trucks would be carrying produce and exports in both directions? And who would have dreamt that thousands of Israeli Muslims would be making their way to and fro in performance of the holy pilgrimage to Mecca? Who would have believed that thousands of Lebanese would be crossing daily into Israel to work?

We have reached a new crossroads. We are experiencing a period of unrest in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. We deeply regret the bloodshed on both sides as we strive to maintain law and order.

Irrational and self-destroying persistence has tragically marked previous Arab attacks on Israel. Hatred and violence have led only to bereavement and disaster without solving any problem. Understanding has come too late in every case. There is no desire in Israel to rule over another people and to direct its life. Let us not forget, however, that this issue is the subject of a major policital debate in Israel which may be resolved in the general elections in June 1992. Israel has to face fateful decisions, and I am only too aware of the agonising reappraisals taking place today, both in our free society and among the Palestinians who live with us in Israel and in the territories.

It is easy to discuss our problems at a distance, to pass judgment, to make speeches, write articles and offer solutions. It is, to say the least, less easy for those who, together with their children, will have to bear the consequences should they err. Remember, what for others is a matter of foreign policy is for us a matter of existence. We are only too aware of the fact that, in the cruel realities of our region, if we make the wrong decision, we shall not have a second chance.

Nobody in Israel can forget for one moment the unprovoked, indiscriminate, brutal onslaught of Scud missiles from Iraq against an innocent civilian population in Israel. Nobody can forget that this reflects a form of behaviour which threatens not only Israel but the whole of the Middle East.

In the current outbreak of civil unrest in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, the choice facing us is unfortunately not between law and order on the one hand and negotiations on the other hand. The choice is between maintaining law and order as a basis for bilateral negotiations, or allowing the situation to deteriorate into a new edition of Lebanon or Yugoslavia. That is the cruel choice which faces us today.

A society’s strength is tested by its ability to face crises. I believe that, given all the difficulties and with all our shortcomings, our society has shown as much maturity and humanity as any other society in similar circumstances. As Golda Meir once said, she cannot forgive the Arabs, not so much because they kill our children as because they force our children to kill theirs.

It is our earnest hope that the current peace process, in which, as in the past, the United States is playing a major role, will succeed.

Unfortunately, it is not generally realised that the Palestinian population with whom we live and have daily contact lives under a reign of terror created by their own extremists. In the so-called intifada, which has lasted over four years, some 1 300 Palestinians have been killed. Of them some 650, or approximately 50%, have been killed by Palestinians. In 1991, the percentage of Palestinians killed by Palestinians reached 75%. In the month of June, it was 93 %. In July and November, it reached 84%. In the past two weeks the eight Palestinians who were killed were killed by Palestinians. In addition to the reign of terror, there is a violent struggle between the supporters of the Islamic fundamentalists and extreme PLO groupings, on the one hand, and the I other elements of the PLO, on the other.

As a background to this situation, we cannot forget for a moment that the PLO policy still continues to adhere to the Palestinian Covenant, which calls for the destruction of Israel.

What validity can one give to statements made by a leadership which obviously does not control the constituent elements of the organisation which it purports to lead and represent, and which is becoming more and more irrelevant as support for it in its own ranks wanes? Gradually the new leadership emerging in the West Bank and Gaza is replacing in Palestinian consciousness those who are rightly perceived to represent the failures of the past.

True, there is a debate within Israeli society on the issue of the current peace talks between Israel and its Arab interlocuters. That debate will be resolved, as in all civilised countries, at the ballot box. Unfortunately as I pointed out, the Palestinians live under a reign of terror and the so-called Hammas, or Islamic fundamentalists, as well as the extreme constituents in the PLO, are violently opposed to the peace process and to the participation of the Palestinians in it. They have, therefore, stepped up their terror attacks not only against Israelis in the territories administered by us, but also against those many Arabs who support Palestinian participation in the peace process. All their activities, including the murder of both Jews and Palestinians, are directed towards creating the atmosphere which will prejudice the talks which have been taking place within the framework of the peace process.

Thanks to the initiative and efforts of the United States of America and to the Russian co-sponsors, the peace process got under way in Madrid, where for the first time in history an Israeli delegation, led by the Prime Minister of Israel, sat around the same table with representatives of a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation, a Lebanese delegation and a Syrian delegation.

I have already mentioned the slow but inexorable move towards peace. A scene such as the one we saw in Madrid, or but a few days ago in Moscow, would have been considered some years ago to be an unrealistic Utopian dream. Now, Israeli teams have been meeting with the Jordanian-Palestinian team, in addition to the Lebanese and Syrian teams, and each meeting has marked some slight advance and, above all, some change in atmosphere.

Make no mistake about it, the process will be a long one with ups and downs, but I believe it will be an inexorable one which will ultimately lead to peace. I certainly have no wish to paint a rosy picture of future possibilities. We are in the initial stages of the peace process, not at its conclusion or its height. The unrest in the territories, the violence practised by extremist factions do not lead to a peaceful approach. Activated by instructions from abroad, murder and systematic attacks are carried out by fanatical groups.

For fear of being labelled as collaborators, many Palestinian leaders are afraid to speak freely and to act in a spirit of moderation, and those participating in the Palestinian delegation to the peace talks have already been subjected to threats, veiled and direct, to their lives.

Whatever confidence we might have had in the intentions of Arab leaders was badly shaken by the Gulf war and the dastardly missile attacks on the peaceful citizens and towns of Israel. Who can guarantee that a new despot will not rise tomorrow and attempt to strengthen his hold on his own country and the entire Arab world by imitating the precedent set by Saddam Hussein, or indeed that Saddam Hussein will not recover so as to constitute a renewed threat to our region and to world peace?

Misperceptions continue to plague many concerned with the Middle East. There is a tendency to see the Arab-Israeli conflict as the central and most perilous in the Middle East, although this has been proved incorrect many times, and especially so after the Gulf war. The Arab-Israeli conflict is undoubtedly important, and every effort must be made to achieve a solution – as, indeed, is now being done. But I feel it necessary to stress time and again that, grave as the Israeli-Arab conflict is, it is not the main problem facing the world from the Middle East today. After all, the Israeli-Arab conflict had nothing to do with the war in Afghanistan. The Israeli-Arab conflict had nothing to do with the fall of the Shah and the rise of Khomeini, and bore no relation whatsoever to the Iran-Iraq war. The Israeli-Arab conflict certainly had no influence on the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, any more than it has on the Polisario struggle with Morocco. The Israeli-Arab conflict had nothing to do with the outbreak of internecine war in Lebanon in 1975, and the ultimate result, whereby it has become a vassal colony of Syria. In other words, if for one reason or another Israel were to disappear today, all the centres of conflict and danger for peace in the area and, conceivably, in the world, emerging from the Middle East, will continue to endanger the area and the world.

I have always been of the opinion that this obsession with the Israeli-Arab conflict, to the exclusion of all the other conflicts and dangers in our area, has created a situation whereby the western leadership has failed to appreciate the significance of major developments in our area and, indeed, to evaluate them in advance. With Israel hosting the second largest press corps in the world after Washington, every stone-throwing incident in the West Bank seems to have achieved a major headline throughout the world, while at the same time battles in which tens of thousands were being killed in the Iran-Iraq war, for instance, were ignored. While a terrifying arsenal of weapons of mass destruction was being built up in Iraq under the very eyes of the world, western powers were acquiescing or even participating in the sale of arms to Iraq.

I hope I will be excused if I express my reservations about the ability of the western leadership to understand and appreciate the major factors that influence developments in our area. After all, the facts speak for themselves. The western powers, as I have already noted, have literally fallen flat on their faces time after time, when it came to understanding and appreciating the world-shattering events in our area. They were taken by surprise by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They were taken by surprise by the fall of the Shah and made light of an evaluation by our ambassador at the time, six months before the event, that it might happen. They did not evaluate in advance the rise of Khomeini and Khomeinism. The Iran-Iraq war caught them unprepared. They were taken by surprise by the conclusion of the Iran-Iraq war when it came to an end. They did not evaluate correctly the move of Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait. Indeed, important United States congressional leaders, only a few months before that event, praised and lauded Saddam Hussein as a great leader who was seeking peace. When Israel attacked the Iraqi nuclear facilities in 1981 she was condemned, and that condemnation has been on the agenda of the United Nations every year since, including that of the current General Assembly, believe it or not! And now comes the astounding revelation of the terrifying preparations being made in Iraq for the creation of weapons of mass destruction – nuclear, chemical and biological, including possibly a hydrogen bomb – which would place in jeopardy not only all the states in the Middle East but, conceivably, much of the world.

All these errors, one after the other, have been made despite the existence of intelligence organisations with almost limitless resources, with the most modem facilities available, despite a network of diplomatic representations and university research departments, and despite a widespread network of press and news agency media.

After the vital, very important and courageous military moves instigated under President Bush’s leadership in Iraq, came the miscalculation of the timing of the cessation of hostilities, a miscalculation which enabled that monster Saddam Hussein to survive, to strengthen his hold on his unfortunate country and, presumably, to continue to attempt to hoodwink the United Nations investigation teams and thus advance the process of the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction.

One must be excused if one is at times critical of their track record and sceptical about the ability of the major western powers to evaluate correctly the developments in our area.

The main danger which faces the world has been ignored to date. It is the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, which threatens the regimes of most of the Middle East today, which sponsors uprisings from time to time in many countries in our region and which is spreading rapidly throughout the world. We hear of the efforts being made, for instance, by the Iranians and their associates to advance the rise of this fundamentalism in the five Muslim republics in the former Soviet Union, with their sixty million inhabitants. This is despite the resistance of the political leadership in these countries. This danger is now compounded by the fact that some of the elements involved in the rise of Islamic fundamentalism are endeavouring to achieve control of weapons of mass destruction. If one links the extremism of Islamic fundamentalism to the terror of weapons of mass destruction, one cannot escape a formula for catastrophe. The world faces a sombre and sinister prospect.

This is the problem to which the experts on the Middle East throughout the world must address themselves. This is the problem which should be foremost today in the minds of the leaders of the western world and, particularly, of the United States of America and Europe. After all, Algeria is not so far from Europe today. This is the problem which is, unfortunately, being ignored, for whatever reasons I cannot understand. As I look at the record of the western powers in the Middle East, I cannot but endorse the famous statement by General Schwartzkopf to the effect that one thing he had learnt in the Middle East was that the Middle East experts are not experts at all.

We can only hope and pray that we will move slowly but inexorably towards peace. It will be a long, trying and slow process, of that I am sure, but in the final analysis it will advance the area towards peace and bring us hopefully to the goal that we and all the people of the Middle East pray for. Yes, we are moving inexorably towards peace and that is the major goal of our people, reflecting as it does the prayers of millions who cannot express themselves freely in our area, tom by fundamentalist religious fanaticism. That peace will be achieved because we want it and because the people of the Middle East want it and need it.

In the meantime, as we pursue our struggle in the ongoing search for peace, we continue to develop as a free, vibrant society, which stretches out its hand seeking co-operation with all.

In a period of forty-four years, we have created an open, democratic society in Israel in which the dignity of man is enshrined as a supreme value. We have a free and independent judiciary, a democratically elected parliament, a free press and a system of universal education. We have created a highly developed system of agriculture, and an industry which is capable of producing some of the more sophisticated high technology and biotechnological engineering, supersonic planes and some of the better medical scanning equipment existing today. Israeli-manufactured items are in spaceships and in some of the more advanced planes produced in the United States. We are one of the three most advanced countries in the world – the other two are the United States and Japan – in the development and use of solar energy. We have provided technical, agricultural and medical aid to many developing countries. Over half the eye operations performed in black Africa over the past thirty years were performed by Israeli teams. We are among the leaders in the world in the field of irrigation, desalination of sea water and cloud-seeding. We are one of eight countries of the world which has been represented in space by its own satellite.

In closing, I must refer to a major aspect of our national life today in Israel, namely, the absorption of a large proportion of the Jewish communities from the former Soviet Union. The task before us – a small country, beset by the economic crisis which is affecting much of the world today – is comparable to that which would face the United States of America if it were to absorb the whole of France today. We have already received – and are in the process of absorbing – since the gates of the Soviet Union were opened in 1989 until today, some 400 000 immigrants, or roughly 10% of our population. In other words, it is as if the Federal Republic of Germany were absorbing eight million immigrants.

We are being enriched by an inflow of human material which is highly qualified in many fields and of which over 60% have academic qualifications. The process is costly and painful. But we can already point to the full half of the cup, although the empty half exercises our consciences daily. Many of your countries have experienced this strain of absorbing large populations of refugees. None of your experiences can compare in scope to ours in these difficult and trying days. We are solving a major humanitarian problem; we are, indeed, giving a lead and are setting standards.

We trust that many of the countries represented here will help this great humanitarian endeavour, which must be an example to many peoples and countries in the world. We are proud of our commitment to our brothers and sisters, and of the national consensus as to the self-sacrifice necessary to bring them home and to absorb them. We are proud of the freedom enjoyed by our Arab and Dmze populations, which comprise 17% of our population and who are an integral part of our society and our political life. We are proud of the fact – and it is appropriate that I say it here in this body in which the issue of human rights is focal – that, despite our problems, and they are many, we can point to the fact that the supreme value in our society is that of the dignity and freedom of man.

If there are at times divergences due to the exigencies of security considerations, the situation is monitored by a free press, by an alert parliament, by an outspoken public and by an independent judiciary.

It is against this background that I thank you for honouring me and through me, my country. We in Israel – Jews and Arabs – dream of the day when peace will come. It is with the example of Europe in mind that from this rostrum I express a prayer that the current peace process will succeed and that, together with the representatives of the great Arab nations and the people of Islam, recalling our common heritage and the golden ages of co-operation between our peoples in the past, we shall renew our days, as in the past, for our mutual benefit and for the benefit of the peoples of our region.