51 Address by Foreign Minister Shamir to the Zionist Organization of America Conference- 5 September 1981

Early tomorrow morning, Prime Minister Begin and I will be leaving Israel for Washington D.C., together with Defense Minister Sharon and Interior Minister Burg, who is in charge of the autonomy negotiations. The purpose of this visit will be to confer with President Reagan and other American leaders on our bilateral relations, on the general situation in our region and on the peace process.

We are looking forward to this exchange with Israel's close ally and friend and the leader of the free world. The wind blowing from Washington is positive and the media has taken a turn for the better and there is a decline in criticism of Israel, excluding Time Magazine.

This is not to say that our problems with America are all settled to our entire satisfaction. In spite of our very close relationship, there are, at times, differences of opinion. We believe this to be normal in relations between allies and on our part, we will do our best to deepen the friendship and limit to the maximum any differences that remain.

In recent references to America's ties with Israel and with our region, we note that a considerable part of it is devoted to Saudi Arabia. There is an effort to present the Saudi kingdom in the image of a moderate responsible power that is trying to be useful and responsive to the interests of the United States and the West. We have reason to believe that there is a considerable gap between this image and the reality.

Saudi Arabia's power does not derive from its army, nor from the stability of its regime, nor from its social cohesiveness or its advanced culture. Its main weapon and source of power is its check-book which it frequently uses in the service of its policies.

If you take a close look at developments on the ground in the Middle East, the Saudi application of its financial power does not serve the cause of peace, and does not, in our estimation, serve Western interests in the region. Take, for example, the situation in our northern neighbor, Lebanon.

Between Israel -and Lebanon there were de-facto relations of peace for many years. It was a stable, thriving state whose regime was closer to democracy than any other in the entire region. It was destroyed by the invasion of Syria and the aggression of the Palestinian terrorists. Recently, the Saudi government has been involved in the affairs of Lebanon while seeking to adopt an image in world public opinion as a mediator and a peace-maker. What is the real role the Saudis are playing in this tragedy?

Thanks to its considerable financial capacity, Saudi Arabia is covering the expenses of Syria's occupation of Lebanon and is contributing toward the continued rape of Lebanon by the Syrian army. Because of its domestic problems and economic weakness, Syria would have faced great difficulty in sustaining such a burden. The Saudi grant of several hundred million dollars relieved Syria of this problem. Even more ominous is the fact that the Saudi government is heavily subsidizing the P.L.O. and its share in the destruction of Lebanon in addition to which it is supplying the terrorist with quantities of arms.

As for the Saudi role in the effort toward securing the cessation of hostilities in our northern border, the simple fact is that the Palestinians terrorists were themselves pressing for it, because they were very near to the breaking point. Hence, the Saudi mediation only served PLO needs in this particular crisis.

Contrary to the impression that some want to convey, the Saudis have contributed nothing to secure the removal of the Syrian missiles from Lebanon. They are still there and the threat posed by them has not been removed.

Saudi Arabia is still actively engaged in activities against Camp David. In Saudi media and statements to the Arab world, Camp David is a bad word that is very strongly attacked. This attitude adopted by the Saudis against peace is not well known to the American public. As for the so-called peace plan proposed by Prince Fahd, a close look at it will show that it was directed against Camp David and designed to prevent others from joining the peace process and to reject the impression that anyone in the Arab world may be considering the possibility of joining the Camp David process. No wonder that Prince Fahd's plan was acclaimed by the PLO.

In short, from the viewpoint of the interests of peace and the real interests of the West in the Middle East, the Saudi role is totally negative.

You are all aware, I am sure, that the PLO was established in 1964, three years before the Six Day War, before we held any territories which they are supposed to liberate. There were similar terrorist organizations that preceded the PLO for many years, even before the state was established.

It was much later, after 1967, that the Fedayeen, as they were then called, were advised to concentrate on a war of liberation and to demand a state on any territory that is liberated from Israel.

We must expose the truth and remind everybody of the plain facts. The purpose, then as now, was what those initials PLO stand for. What they call Palestine is what we have always called the Land of Israel. To liberate, in their terminology means to conquer. To liberate Palestine means to conquer the Land of Israel.

Some people in the West, every once in awhile, declare that the PLO would be Prepared -perhaps, to accept a mini-Palestine state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. But the PLO, repeatedly says that this would be a first step towards taking over the entire area at a later stage. It certainly would make it that much easier for the PLO, with some "'military help from the Arab states on Israel's eastern front - and, of course, from the Soviets, to threaten what will, -then be left of Israel. Yet every time a proposal for such. a, "Palestinian state" is made, it: is received in Western capitals as a new sign of moderation -that merits serious attention.

From Israel's point of view, there is no difference whatsoever between an all-out invasion and a stage-by-stage dismemberment. The latter is clearly more dangerous because it is done under the cover of moderation and by creating a deliberate false, impression that in the first stage the Palestinian Arab state will be willing to coexist with Israel. Some of the statements made recently by European leaders have surpassed even what we have- become accustomed to hearing from those quarters.

The Chancellor of Austria would have. you believe that if only Israel adopted a more flexible and a -more liberal, policy vis a vis the Palestinian Arabs, the PLO would not be committing its terrorist outrages. The absurdity of this logic is such that it does not merit serious attention. It is beyond my understanding how Jews who live in Austria can be the victims and how anyone can blame Israel for what these despicable terrorists did to them.

Nor, M. Cheysson, the Foreign Minister of France, is this a problem of territory - as I have already explained. The analogy that is made between the PLO and freedom fighters whenever and wherever they may be is an insult of so many who died for just causes, for freedom and national liberation.

It is important to repeat today, especially in the US and in Europe, where President Sadat recently referred to this matter, that the PLO has not changed its real face nor its ideology one bit. This organization continues to cooperate with destructive forces that seek to undermine law and order in many parts of the world - from the neo-Nazis in the far right to anarchists and Maoists in the extreme left.

Hence the PLO is not and will not be a partner to any dialogue with Israel. There are no grounds for theories in this direction on the basis of the cessation of hostilities that was recently arranged in the north. The terrorists were hard pressed for this after sustaining very heavy blows from Israel. They needed it to prepare for another wave of attacks. It should be remembered that we agreed to cease fire after the United States called on Israel to do so. I should add here that we refrained until now from action toward removing the Syrian missiles from Lebanon, that continue to be a threat, only because we were approached by the President of the United States whose representative Mr. Philip Habib, assured us that they will be removed by political means.

We are still dedicated to the peace process that was initiated at Camp David. It represents the first serious breakthrough, in two generations, in a conflict so bitter and so polarized that it had generally been given up as incapable of solution. Camp David is the product of a growing realization in the Arab world that a military solution to the conflict with Israel is unattainable. It is the only feasible option today. It is the only realistic chance to move this region towards a comprehensive peace. And it is the only sound basis upon which to build the strategic consensus in the Middle East that represents the hope of stemming the further spread of militant Soviet imperialism.

We are convinced that all this is worth preserving, not just for the sake of Israel, but for the sake of vital regional and even global interests.

It goes without saying, I think, that in a world where reliable friends and allies are hard to come by, for a country in Israel's position, every voice raised in support -of Israel in the crucial battles it is compelled to fight in the international area, is of great value. By the same token, every word of condemnation or criticism - on these crucial issues - does immeasurable harm to our cause.

Without doubt, the Jewish people have been Israel's greatest and most constant ally, and of course, it is only natural that this should be so. We may still be scattered over many countries; but, in essence and in spirit, we are truly one. We share a common history, a common cultural and spiritual heritage, and a common destiny. I think Jews all over the world, as individuals and as communities, feel this profound truth and, generally, act accordingly.

The Zionist Organization of America has been in the forefront of the Jewish people's struggle to help Israel secure its basic rights and its basic needs. You have been true partners with us in this struggle, and we confidently expect this partnership to continue and expand in the difficult months and years that lie ahead.

The truth is that we would like to see as many of you as can do it come to Israel and join ranks with us at this end of the Jewish spectrum. Those of you who, for one reason or another, must delay the move, also have a role to play, and, I am sure, will continue to play that role to the best of your abilities.