ISRAELI DELEGATION PRESS CONFERENCE
OPENING STATEMENT BY
MR. YOSSI GAL
SPOKESMAN OF THE ISRAELI DELEGATIONS TO THE PEACE TALKS
NOVEMBER 9, 1992
Good afternoon and welcome to our opening press briefing for the second
half of this, the seventh round of Middle East bilateral talks. This
present round of talks, as you all know, is scheduled, by mutual
agreement, to last until November 20th. We hope to continue soon
afterwards, and make as much headway as soon as possible.
It is our opinion that, just as there was no need to put things on hold
until November 3rd, there is now no need to wait until January 20 to
continue our peace-making efforts in a serious fashion. A lot is at
stake and we believe that it is in the interest of all parties to keep
moving forward.
In the meantime, the key to progress is continuity: continuity with
regard to the framework of the Madrid process; continuity with regard to
the ground-rules of this process, to the role and the commitment of the
co-sponsors. We believe that now that the sides are engaged, continuity
is the secret to success for this process.
Last night, we were reminded once again of the fragile nature of our
region when violence erupted on our northern border, and Hizbullah
rockets were launched against Israel's cities in the north. Today we
were again reminded of another act of violence, when six kids were
slightly injured in an attack on a kindergarten in Hebron. Those
individuals and organizations who carry out terrorism in the midst of
the talks, do so with the intention of ending the peace-making process.
However, our policy in this respect is clear Israel will continue to
pursue peace with whose committed ot it as if there were no terrorism,
and we will continue to pursue terrorists as if there were no peace
talks.
With your permission, a few comments about each and every one of the
sets of negotiations. We'll start with Jordan.
Significant progress took place last week in our negotiations with the
Jordanians. In this track, agreement on a joint agenda, acceptable to
both sides, is at hand. Minor clarifications were sought by the
Jordanians in our session today, and we will continue working on it
tomorrow. I wish to remind ourselves that we're speaking about a
document that is, in fact, more important than just a procedural agenda,
because it does outline all the substantial agreements reached by the
two delegations on the structure of the talks, on the principles
governing the negotiations, and on the issues which are to be
negotiated. These issues include questions such as borders, water,
security, refugees and of course the essence of the future relations
between our two countries, such as cooperation in the areas of economy,
health, transportation, communication, energy, education and the like.
We, Jordanians and Israelis, have decided to start tackling the issue of
water, and substantial negotiations will soon begin on that agenda item.
In order to facilitate these discussions, we have added another expert
on water to our negotiating team.
Today in our meeting with the Jordanians, we also discussed what issue
will come up first and the order of negotiations and the exact format of
the negotiations in the coming two weeks. We expect to continue to make
progress, and I'm glad to say that we are not alone in this assessment.
In discussing the talks, His Majesty the King of Jordan has recently
stated that "things are certainly moving, hopefully in the right
direction." And we share that estimation.
We hope that the progress we've made with the Jordanians will promote
progress in other tracks as well. For the Palestinian half of the joint
Jordanian-Palestinian delegation, it could and should demonstrate
Israel's seriousness in trying to negotiate a solution. And for the
other Arab delegations, this accomplishment should serve to inspire them
to do the same.
Later today, at 4:00 P.M., we will renew our talks with our friends, the
Palestinians. The talks with the Palestinians are being held in small
groups, dealing with substantial issues, as we have been striving to do
since the very beginning of this process. In one of theses groups,
discussions last week were being held on the composition of the body
that will run the self-government, the interim arrangements. A second
group dealing with specific aspects related to the interim arrangements,
such as the questions of land and water. We hope that additional topics
will be discussed and/or additional groups will be formed to work out
the many other specifics of the self-government arrangements. We are of
the opinion that it is time now to press forward with the issues, and
deal with the heart of the matter: the concept of self-government for
the Palestinians.
Let me now move to the negotiations with Lebanon. The first week of the
negotiations with Lebanon were unfortunately dominated by the events
taking place on our common border. And now, in light of last night's
renewed Hizbullah attacks, we had no choice but to address the issues of
terrorism, violence and security once again with our Lebanese
counterparts.
Today's meeting was very short. In our discussions we stressed the
seriousness of the rocket attacks emanating from Lebanese territory
directed against Israeli civilians and against our northern cities and
communities. Our delegation reiterated to the Lebanese our determination
to do all that is necessary in order to address the grave security
situation that has developed, and to restore calm to the area, stressing
that terrorists cannot be allowed to operate with impunity. It must be
clear to the Lebanese that calm and quiet will not be confined to one
side of the border, while the lives of our citizens are made unbearable
on the other side, and that the latest attacks will not pass unnoticed.
The events in Lebanon were also raised in our meeting this morning with
Syria, where we stressed that it must be clear to all those interested
in peace that such action cannot be tolerated. We continued in today's
session the discussion with the Syrians on a joint declaration of
principles. Agreement between Israel and Syria hinges upon three key
elements, which which we view as being interrelated peace, territory,
and security. In this context, the Israeli delegation presented a
reformulated position paper at the beginning of the round, stating that
an element of withdrawal to secure and recognized borders may be a
component of the future peace between our two countries.
At the same time, we have also reiterated that we will not discuss the
location of borders as long as Syria does not clearly address itself to
the nature, the content and the depth of the proposed peaceful relations
between us, and also clarify the nature of the Syrian-Israeli peace
treaty as being independent of developments in negotiations with other
Arab delegations.
The ball is now in Syria's court. They cannot expect us to commit to a
price before we have even been allowed to see the merchandise.
In conclusion, I would like to state that the agenda negotiations we
have had with the Jordanians do represent a step forward. We hope that
this step forward will serve as an impetus for progress in other
negotiations as well.
These negotiations in Washington cannot be completely detached from the
violence on the ground. But we will make every effort to carry out our
functions as peace-makers nonetheless although, as I said,
unfortunately, there will probably always be violent extremists in the
region. But we believe that a viable peace process, in the long run, is
the best and maybe the only solution to the problems of the Middle
East.
The progress made in the first half of the round, despite the wave of
terrorism, demonstrates that our ship is not really 'dead in the water',
but is hopefully 'moving under its own steam', and indeed, we hope that
in the very near future we will be all able to be pick up speed and
announce progress in other tracks as well.
Q: You just said that Israel will pursue peace as if there was no
terrorism and pursue terrorists as if there were no peace talks, and
yet, the meeting today with the Lebanese sort of exploded because of
Israel's insistence that the latest violent actions in Lebanon across
the Lebanese border would be discussed. Why can't you leave the
reactions to the mutual exchanges of violence across the border to the
military and concentrate here on the mandate that you have to make
peace?
A: We do try to concentrate on the mandate we have here for peace. And I
did say that we will continue to pursue peace with those committed to it
as if there were no terrorism. But at the same time, one cannot ignore
the responsibility of Lebanon, from whose territory all of these actions
are taking place. I mean, if all of a sudden from Lebanese territory
there are all of these Katyusha attacks, one cannot really say that the
Lebanese government is not responsible. If we are discussing peaceful
relations between Israel and Lebanon, we cannot ignore what is taking
place in the north.
Q: Why did you bring up the attacks, which took place from Lebanese
territory, with the Syrians? Do you think that the Syrian government is
in some way implicated in these acts of terrorism?
A: We just wanted to make sure that the Israeli message is loud clear.
And the Israeli message is that we hope that all of those interested in
peace understand that such actions, from whatever territory, will not be
tolerated.
Q: You talk about not letting the opponents of peace interfere with the
peace process, and yet it was Israel that decided to interrupt to use
a simple word the peace process today in the talks with Lebanon.
Aren't you, in effect, playing into the aren't you rewarding those
who conducted these attacks by saying "All you've got to do is do this
sort of thing and we'll interrupt the talks?"
A: I do not share your definition. Negotiations with Lebanon will
continue. There is no interruption. It was quite clear that the
negotiations could not really go on without making reference to the
events that took place there yesterday. Negotiations with Lebanon on
peace will continue.
Q: The Lebanese response to Mr. Lubrani's response was to say that the
four Hizbollah who were killed were Lebanese citizens in good standing.
And he also said that their blood was very, very dear to the government
of Lebanon. Was that an encouraging response, from your point of view?
A: The only encouraging response is for this vicious violence to once
and for all stop. If indeed we are interested in peace, if indeed the
Lebanese are interested in peace, I believe that they should make
everything possible in order to stop acts of terror from their territory
against Israel.
Q: What minor modifications are sought by the Jordanians on the paper?
A: "Minor clarifications" is the language that they use. We believe that
we have a very good document. They have not gone up on any agreement
with us. We'll be looking into their questions today in order to answer
this specific questions, and negotiations on that will continue with
them tomorrow.
Q: That means that contrary to what was published in the Jordanian
newspapers, we still do not have an agreed-upon agenda with the
Jordanian delegation whatever you call it.
A: I believe that we can say that we are on the verge of finalizing, on
the verge of finalizing that document. We will be looking into the minor
definitional clarifications that they sought today. And as I said, we'll
go back to them tomorrow with that.
Q: If I could just follow that up for a second, does Israel think that
this document, whatever it is agenda or plan should in some way be
commemorated or solidified either by a signature or some public exchange
of any sort, or is this a working document that we do not expect you
do not expect the public to see, for example, or either side to commit
itself to in any formal way?
A: We do not expect any signature ceremony, and I don't think that paper
should be signed. I mean, as you've said, it is a working document. It
is a working agenda. It is much more than an agenda because you have
lots of statements of principle on both sides. But formally I don't
think that it should be signed by both parties. If we are in agreement,
we should move to take each and every one of the items on that agenda,
and, indeed, this is what we hope to do. And I did mention the issue of
water. We have here two water experts. Hopefully the Jordanians will
have the same so that we can start taking each and every one of the
issues the five, six issues of the agenda and start dealing with them
thoroughly and hopefully finalize agreements on each and every one of
these topics.
Q: In the Jordanian listing earlier of some of the categories, they
mention settlements and the impact that Israeli settlements in the
occupied territories had on Jordan's demographic situation. They also
mention territory in the sense that there's some land on the other side
of the Jordan River which is apparently occupied by Israel. You didn't
mention those two. Are they in there?
A: I think I did mention territory. Territory and territorial issues is
certainly one of the issues on this agenda. In the negotiations with
Jordan, we will, of course, have to agree on a boundary between the two
countries. We'll have to demarcate that line. First we'll have to agree.
So the issue of borders is certainly there. The issue of settlements, I
don't think that is relevant to the agenda we have with the Jordanians.
Q: Well, is it, perhaps, included in the category called "refugees"?
A: No.
Q: You said that you're no longer going to discuss territorial
concessions to Syria because Syria only wants to discuss that. How do
you where do you go from there?
A: I didn't say that. I said that we will not discuss the location of
boundaries as long as Syria does not clearly indicate to us the exact
nature and the contents of the peaceful relations, the essence of peace
they have in mind, and the independence of that peace. Before we see the
merchandise, one cannot expect us to define our price. That's what I
said.
Q: Yes, I heard you say that, but where do you go from here? Because
that's Syria wants to discuss where you're going to put the border,
you want to discuss the nature of peace, and that's it. Would
A: That's exactly what negotiations are all about, and that's exactly
role of the negotiators to try and find agreements on issues like these.
I mean, had this not been the case, we would not have been in this peace
process for a whole year. I mean, we are all aware of the complexities
of the situation in the Middle East, but I am still optimistic that a
way that we will find a way to formulate this joint statement of
principles with the Syrians as well.
Q: It's been suggested that perhaps in the final months of the Bush
administration, some officials may take a mission to the Middle East in
order to accelerate progress. Does the Israeli government feel that
progress is moving forward in a satisfactory manner, or would it welcome
such a mission from the State Department?
A: We believe that the talks have a vitality of their own. We believe
that there is a lot to be done inside the negotiating room. I personally
am not aware of any such a specific offer. Once and if it comes, we will
certainly give it serious consideration. But, for now, I believe that we
have enough in the of contents to discuss and there is certainly an
interest on our part, hopefully on the other side, to continue direct
bilateral negotiations.
Q: You made reference to the need for Syria to admit that these are
independent of other events with other delegations. Would you give us a
characterization of how far advanced each of them are on a scale of 10
or whatever? And would you indicate whether the agenda with Jordan also
has specified and if the Jordanians have agreed that their negotiations
will be independent of the Palestinians and so on?
A: I wouldn't really like to give marks to each and every one of these
sets of the negotiations, but we've been saying from the vithe fact that
these negotiations are all taking place in Washington at the same time
should not really act as a hindrance to progress in any set of
negotiations. And we've also said that if an opportunity presents itself
in one set of negotiations, that then we should try and make the most
out of it. We've made progress in the negotiations with the Jordanians.
I believe that we are on the right track with the Palestinians. It's a
modest beginning but we are on the right track. And I think that we can
do the same with the other negotiations.
END