Addressing a special meeting of the Knesset, President Mitterrand expressed his well known view that "in the final analysis" the Palestinian people must have their own state. Mr. Begin took exception to this view and argued that the main obstacle in the French-Israeli relationship is the support of France "for the concept of a Palestinian state. " He then elaborated on the dangers inherent in such a state. Text:
Mr. Speaker, Your Excellency, the President of the State of Israel, Your Excellency, the President of the Republic of France, Members of the Cabinet of the Republic of France, Members of the Cabinet of the State of Israel, Honored Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, Members of the Knesset:
This is the first time since the renewal of our independence in Eretz Israel that a President of France visits Eretz Israel, comes to our eternal capital Jerusalem and to its democratic Parliament.
On such a historic day I cannot escape the memory of my youth when my late father and teacher taught me - when I was still a child - to love and admire France. He would recite to us whole paragraphs of that famous appeal of Emile Zola, "J'accuse".
The tragic and horrifying Dreyfus Affair became engraved on the mind of many both in and out of France as an explosive outburst of anti-Semitism - that contagious disease which persists even when dormant and which communicates itself from generation to generation, and particularly so, perhaps, in those countries where even little children were taught that shocking prayer which began with the words: "Let us pray for the perfidious Jews" - that prayer which poisoned wells and which the great Pope John the Twenty-third finally exorcised from the liturgy.
Thus, did Theodor Herzl, the visionary of our state, the man whose like is born but once in centuries, perceive the Dreyfus Affair. And in its wake, he reached the conclusion that a Jewish state had to be established in the historic homeland of our people. When Herzl heard the cry of the incited mob: "Death to the Jews," - when he heard that cry in the capital of the civilized world, the city of lights, Paris, he was shaken to the core of his soul. And in his small hotel room, he sat and authored "The Jewish State", the book which changed history, and even as he wrote he could hear the flutter of destiny, and was seized by the fever of his fateful creation.
Perhaps because of the healing touch of time which mollifies every wound, and perhaps because of the natural disposition of the Jew to forget the evil and remember the good, it is a fact that with the passage of the decades, the Dreyfus Affair came to be seen in the old homestead - which is no more - in a totally different light. We saw in it the momentous effort of the French people to do justice. Verily it was a fierce struggle between truth and lie; between light and darkness; between love and hate; between right and wrong. And since I have no doubt that had our esteemed friend, Monsieur Mitterrand, lived in those days, he, with his characteristic civic courage, would have marched at the side of Emile Zola, Clemenceau, Jaures, Laborie and Colonel Picart. I shall today bring before the House the salient facts relating to that triumph of justice manifested within the great French people.
On December 23, 1894, Alfred Dreyfus was sentenced to life imprisonment for treason and spying. In March 1896, Colonel Picart discovered what is known as the "Petit bleu" letter to Esterhazy. In 1898, Emile Zola published his "J'accuse" against his government and army, and in the cause of his people, the honor of his country and in the name of justice. On September 9, 1899, a conviction was handed down at the second Dreyfus trial and he was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment. Ten days later he was pardoned by the President of France, but the advocates of justice would not rest - for truth does not warrant pardon; truth conquers. In 1903 demands for a re-trial were again heard and in 1906 truth won the day and the conviction was totally quashed. A full twelve years passed since Alfred Dreyfus was condemned on false and forged testimony and the French people did not rest until the innocence of that unfortunate Jew had been unveiled before the light of day. And so it be, for justice is absolute and operates outside, beyond and above time.
In due course we learned about the history of the French Revolution. That Revolution is unique in the annals of mankind for having brought liberty and progress not only to the people of France but also to many other nations. There are those who say that since the revolutionary war of the thirteen American colonies began in 1776 - that is, thirteen years before the outbreak of the French Revolution heralded by the storming of the Bastille - the American freedom fighters actually preceded the French revolutionaries. But one must remember the difference. In North America, a revolutionary war of liberation was waged against British rule which ended, thank God, with the victory of the insurgents against the oppressive colonial regime. There have been many wars of this kind. The French Revolution erupted against tyranny from within. It called for liberty, for equality, for fraternity. And it advanced the whole of mankind a giant leap forward.
All the other revolutions brought to humanity nothing but harsher servitude. I refer, particularly, to the November 1917 revolution in Russia. For three hundred years and more the Russian people lived under the yoke of Czarist rule. It then enjoyed but nine months of true liberty. In February 1917, the Czarist regime was overthrown and the Russian republic was founded - and then came genuine freedom throughout the land, even to the point of anarchy, with people prostrating themselves on railway lines.
But the dream of Russian freedom quickly vanished and the coup d'etat instigated by Lenin and his friends, with the help of a sealed train of the High Command of the German Kaiser's arm y, brought nothing but renewed oppression, even greater than before, including the murder of millions by that infamous monster, the Man of Steel, losif Vissarionovich Dzhugashivili Stalin. And in the wake of World War II, this revolt of oppression spread over half of Europe, assisted by the Soviet tanks.
How totally different was the great Revolution of France, which Thomas Carlyle immortalized in the second rendition of his famous book, "The French Revolution". His original manuscript had been completely destroyed by fire and he, Carlyle, the historian and philosopher, was later to testify that his second manuscript surpassed even his first.
Thomas Carlyle wrote the truth. He did not conceal the atrocities that accompanied the Revolution. And excesses there were. But he explained for future generations the terrible maltreatment that had been inflicted on the French people by the aristocratic and degenerate few who had subjugated and exploited the masses with indescribable cruelty through a system of heinous and insufferable decrees.
The people, therefore, rose up against the tyranny and in honor of the marching Marseillaise revolutionaries, the mighty call was sounded: "Aux armes citoyens; Formez vos Bataillons." Then, the revolutionary arm was formed and it vanquished the aggressive invading forces of the anti-revolutionary coalition. And the French used to say, according to Carlyle: With a crust of bread, a grain of salt and with the Marseillaise - onwards to China.
True, they did not get as far as China, and even Napoleon had to retreat from Moscow, but the song of Rouget de Lisle has to this day remained the anthem of France, with its well-known theme. The anthem still stands, just as Imber's song, "Hatikva" remains to this day our national anthem, even though we have long been a free people in our land and no one can talk again about the "last of the Jews." So, too, the Marseillaise, the song of liberty, the song of revolt against tyranny, the song of self-liberation of a suffering people, lives on.
For all this and more we have always loved and admired France, its history, its magnificent language, its culture, its quest for justice, its willingness to fight for it.
I cannot conceal, Mr. Speaker, that in the relations between our people and France there have also been dark days -of the Vichy regime and the deportation of our brothers into the hands of their German exterminators.
But after the darkness came the light. The French people supported our war of liberation against foreign rule. They also helped us by actual deeds to overcome the repeated attempts to destroy us from the day of the renewal of our independence. There were also other days of light. We were not only friends, but also allies. Our common value systems made us true partners. We helped each other and acted together. We withstood tests confronting France and Israel both.
Those times also passed, to be followed by difficult days indeed - of estrangement, of support for our enemies, of withdrawal from us. "Faithful are the wounds of a friend," said the wisest of men, King Solomon. We did not cease loving France, but, to our regret, it was a one-sided love.
There are grounds to hope that with the election of Francois Mitterrand as President of the French Republic the situation will fundamentally change. I have been acquainted with Monsieur Mitterrand since 1955, as I related in detail yesterday evening. Ever since we have met often and always in friendship and cordiality. Monsieur Mitterrand has studied history and he knows the annals of the Jewish people. He knows of its sufferings throughout the generations of exile and particularly, what it underwent during the period of the Holocaust. Therefore, I can declare on the basis of my own personal contacts with him that Monsieur Mitterrand is a friend of Israel and he will certainly work for the renewal of the friendship, and perhaps even of the alliance, between our peoples and countries.
I will not deny, however, that there are obstacles to overcome along this desired path. In my estimation - and it is my duty to speak with candor - the main obstacle is France' support for the concept of a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. His Honor, the French Foreign Minister goes to one of the most advanced and democratic nations in the world, Abu Dhabi, and to one of the most peace-loving nations in the world, Iraq, and there, precisely there, His Honor declares that in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District a Palestinian state should be established and that the organization which calls itself PLO - or in French the OLP - is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian Arabs, the inhabitants of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District, and that it must be brought into the peace process.
President Mitterrand knows well what is written in the document called the Palestine Charter,, which can manifestly be termed the Arab edition of "Mein Kampf" vis a vis the Jewish people. But let me, today, quote an exchange which took place in London some two weeks ago, between the correspondent of "Davar" and Mr. el-Hassan, Arafat's aide. This is what was said in the full report of that conversation:
Question: Assuming Israel will withdraw from the territories, will you be satisfied with a Palestinian state on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip?
el-Hassan: The problem is not geographical; the problem is political.
Question: I ask you a political question: Will you be satisfied with the West Bank and Gaza?
el-Hassan: Are you referring to those few square kilometers?
Question: I mean the West Bank and the Strip.
el-Hassan: No. We will strive for a single Palestine to realize our entity.
Question: And what of the Zionist entity?
el-Hassan: Zionism is the satan. We don't negotiate with it. Just the same, it won't last for long.
Question: But there is also a state; its name is Israel and it has borders, an emblem, a flag and people?
el-Hassan: If it is based on the Zionist doctrine then it has no right of existence, and we have no intention of negotiating with it.
Question: Nevertheless, of late you speak of the occupied territories only, meaning the West bank and the Strip?
el-Hassan: Correct, we speak of the territories as part of the realization of the idea.
Question: In other words, you speak of a secular democratic state which is to be a Palestinian state?
el-Hassan: Correct. That is the state I'm talking about.
Question: If so, it is the same old story we heard long ago?
el-Hassan: Correct. It is precisely that same old story.
Given the meaning of the above such dialogue I wish to know why the full autonomy we propose, in accordance with the Camp David Accords, for the Arab inhabitants in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District, should be considered unacceptable?
In the document we presented a few weeks ago to the Governments of the United States and Egypt and yesterday also to the President of France, we proposed that the Self-Governing Authority (Administrative Council) be granted the following responsibilities:
1. Administration of Justice
2. Agriculture
3. Finance
4. Civil Service
5. Education and Culture
6. Health
7. Housing and Public Works
8. Transportation and Communications
9. Labor and Social Welfare
10. Municipal Affairs
11. Local Police
12. Religious Affairs
13. Industry, Commerce and Tourism
When this Administrative Council, to be democratically elected, will be inaugurated, we shall withdraw the Military Government. Two historic changes will then have been introduced into the lives of the Arab inhabitants of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. They will enjoy for the first time an elected representation which will deal freely, without any interference whatsoever, in their own daily affairs. And the Military Government will be withdrawn. No such situation prevailed during the period of the Turkish rule, the British, the Jordanian or the Egyptian. Why is this unacceptable? And there are advisers of yours today who support only a Palestinian state.
It is my duty to explain the meaning of a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza as far as the Jewish State is concerned.
Such a state would arise on the hills and mountains of Samaria and Judea. The PLO is armed mainly with Soviet weapons - tanks, artillery and katyusha missiles. The range of the Soviet 130 mm. gun is twenty-seven kilometers. The range of the katyusha missile is 21.6 kilometers. Along the coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea -live two-thirds of the Jewish population. With those weapons deployed at any point on the mountains of Judea and Samaria, one could reach Petah Tikva, Ramat Gan, Bnei Brak, Givatayim, Tel Aviv, Jaffa and more. With those sophisticated weapons in the hands of terrorists who seek our destruction, can France, advocate of justice, really lend support to that horrendous design of creating such a danger to the very existence of our people?
I have heard of the view which says it would be symmetric justice were, alongside the Jewish state, a Palestinian state to be established. There is neither symmetry to this view nor is there justice. Symmetry? The great Arab people possess today twenty-one sovereignties, encompassing an area of twelve million square kilometers, stretching from the Persian Gulf to the shores of the Atlantic Ocean. The Jewish people, which was not only persecuted but also exterminated, has one single tiny state in its ancient homeland. Has a twenty-second Arab state to be established, which will seek the destruction of the Jewish State and shed the blood of its citizens day and night?
That is anti-symmetry.
And where, indeed, is the justice? Can the people of France really allow themselves, after all that happened in the Second World War, to render support to the design of handing over the mountains of Judea and Samaria to an enemy bent on our destruction as it, itself, proclaims in its infamous Charter and at all its conferences, including that of the Fatah in Damascus.
I intentionally leave these questions rhetorical, Mr. Speaker, without reply. Let them echo not only throughout the halls of the Knesset but also in the Chamber of the National Assembly in Paris. Let them resound throughout the radio and television stations of France, in the editorial rooms of the press, and also in the Elysee Palace where our dear friend, Francois Mitterrand, President of the French Republic, resides.
I wish to express my belief on this matter, too, justice shall win the day. Truth shall conquer and the decisive obstacle will be removed from the path of friendship between France and Israel which is so dear to us.
Your Excellency, the President of the Republic of France, my dear friend,
On this day I wish to place in your hands a specific idea, the ramifications of which extend beyond the frontiers of our country. I propose that you take upon yourself to bring into being a Mediterranean Charter. By this proposal all peoples living along the Mediterranean seaboard, North and South, East and West, members of the three monotheistic faiths - Jewish, Christian and Moslem - will sign a joint charter the principles of which shall be:
1. None of these peoples shall initiate war against each other;
2. Any dispute between them shall be resolved through negotiation;
3. Warfare shall no longer serve as an instrument of their policies.
You will have no doubt taken note, Mr. President, that the aforementioned three principles carry an echo of the Treaty of Locarno, the Kellog-Briand Pact and the Atlantic Charter. I am honored to acknowledge this. I have not resorted to the exact language of the Treaty of Locarno, which stipulates the mutual pledge not to attack and not to invade, except in the use of legitimate national self-defense, or, in other words: the use of the right of self-defense permits also the mounting of counterattack and invasion into the territory of the aggressor state. We have learned from experience. There is no need to stipulate this last exceptional case. If we write that no state may initiate war against its neighbor, then it follows, axiomatically, that if a state is attacked, it has the full right to resort to national self-defense, as is also stated in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
The concept that warfare shall not serve as an instrument of policy is taken from the Kellog-Briand Pact. That Pact did not serve humanity when totalitarian National Socialism conquered the heart of Europe, and two treaties with the aggressor, born of Satan - that of September 1938 and that of August 1939 - opened for him the gates to his bloody way, one to the West and one to the East. Yet this does not mean that the idea itself failed. Men failed. Leaders were afflicted with blindness; people were misled. But the concept itself was right and great. Let us not hesitate to return to it now and seek to bring it to fruition in our own times.
Mr. President, please assume the initiative. Approach all the peoples who dwell in the region which is the cradle of human civilization and propose to them, with any amendments you deem fit, this Mediterranean Charter.
Our world is divided in many respects: democratic nations and totalitarian regimes; North and South; prosperous peoples and hungry peoples; industrial nations and developing nations; countries which grant tranquility to their citizens and countries where domestic bloody strife rages.
Let us endeavor to bring about a different sort of division into the world: to divide it into Regions of Peace. Let there be a Mediterranean Region of Peace; an Atlantic Region of Peace; a Baltic, a Pacific and more.
By establishing such Regions of Peace, there will arise and perhaps there will be guaranteed the peace of mankind in these days when the terrible threat of mutual destruction hovers over us.
I thank you, our honored guest, for having graciously addressed us from the rostrum of the Knesset. We greet you and welcome you to the historic homeland of the Jewish people, to Jerusalem, the City of David, our eternal capital. We extend our welcome also to your advisers accompanying you. Our hospitable people open their hearts to you. And upon your return to your country and home, please tell your great people: The people of Israel continue to love and admire France, which coined the slogan Libert, Egalit, Fraternit, whose true source is the ancient Bible. Tell them, your people, that the hour has come to renew the friendship and the alliance across both sides of the Mediterranean Sea, between France and Israel.