In order to help the negotiating process get started again, the Prime Minister, in a pool interview to the Foreign Press Association in Israel, explained the Israeli position on Sinai and went into details regarding certain locations. Text:
Q: Is Sharm-EI-Sheikh negotiable?
A: Well, Israel's position is that even in a context of peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, Israel needs control of Sharm-EI-Sheikh. Too many times in the past, the fact that we were not there, brought about war, in 56... in 67. The only guarantee against another blockade is Israel's presence in Sharm-El-Sheikh.
Q: Does presence means sovereignty?
A: I have stressed one point... presence. Presence and control. I didn't say anything about sovereignty.
Q: How about Santa Katarina, Sir. It is very important to religious Jews because of the associations with Mt. Sinai. Is that negotiable?
A: Well, it is negotiable.
Q: And Abu Rodeis?
A: As you know, in the last effort of Dr. Kissinger to bring about an interim agreement between Egypt and Israel, Israel was ready to give up the oil fields at Abu Rodeis.
Q: Does the fact that you are now putting in a large effort in exploration and search for new sources of oil at Abu Rodeis indicate you are not very optimistic about an agreement with Egypt?
A: No, this is not the case. We have decided to work on two parallel lines. On one, to try everything to bring about peace, either an overall settlement, or to move towards peace by steps, in significant moves towards peace. I'm talking about an interim agreement between Egypt and Israel that will give a significant move towards peace. Israel is ready to give up Abu Rodeis. But the second line is, as long as we are there to do everything to bring about exploration and exploitation of the oil that exists there...
Q: Would it be difficult for Israel to make more concessions to Egypt at a time when you are under pressure from the United States to do just that?
A: Well, I do not believe that Israel can agree to anything different than what we were ready to agree to in the process of the talks that were conducted under the auspices of the United States. I feel we showed great flexibility. But there was a line beyond which we could not go.
Q: Will the opening of the Suez Canal be a factor for stability in the Middle East?
A: Well, I hope the reopening of the Canal will bring more stability to the area. But I would like to stress that it will depend on the general attitude of Egypt, because in the past the fact that the Canal was open did not prevent Egypt from taking steps that led to war. I would say more than that. In 1969, when President Nasser decided on the War of Attrition, the cities of the Canal were populated, factories were working there. Regardless of that he decided to go into the War of Attrition which brought about the destruction of these cities. Therefore, I think the real issue will be what will be the Egyptian attitude, what will be the Egyptian policy and to what extent Egypt will show its readiness to move towards peace... either by one act, negotiations for an overall settlement, or by steps... that each step will be a significant step towards peace.
Q: Is Israel likely to make some gesture in return after Egypt opens up the Canal?
A: Well, first let's see if there will be a reopening of the Canal. Then we'll be able to decide.
Q: And what if the Egyptians move their troops over the Canal once they've opened it?
A: I do not want to make or pass any judgement on hypothetical questions. Any attempt to violate the Disengagement Agreement will be considered very seriously by Israel.