Q: Should Prime Minister Begin's remarks to Ambassador Lewis be considered a Government statement?
A: The Prime Minister expressed the views of the cabinet.
Q: Was there a discussion of the remarks the Prime Minister made to Mr. Lewis?
A: The Prime Minister briefed the Cabinet on the contents of his talk with Ambassador Lewis and this was discussed.
Q: And the Cabinet approved these remarks as well as the conclusions the Prime Minister reached with regard to the strategic memorandum of understanding?
A: No negative comments were voiced during the discussion against the Prime Minister's remarks.
Q: What do you think of this mode of governing, when the- Prime Minister in effect brings faits accomplis to the Cabinet?
A: This was not a fait accompli. Actually, the Prime Minister can, and does, know the Cabinet's viewpoint, its attitude - and he had every right, and the full authority, to say what he did. I think that, in his remarks, the Prime Minister gave voice to not only the Cabinet's position, but (also) that of the great majority of the people of Israel.
Q: As Foreign Minister, do you not feel that we have gone too far in this reaction?
A: I do not think that we went too far - someone else went too far. This method of punishing Israel like this is insulting, demeaning and should be stopped.
Q: Were U.S. reactions, actions, even sanctions following such a stinging announcement taken into account?
A: Do you mean taken into account today? I do not think that today we have to think about reactions to a reaction. At the time, when the Golan Heights Law was passed, U.S. reactions - even severe ones - were taken into account. But when these reactions did come, I must say that we did not anticipate that they would come precisely in this form. We knew there would be reactions, and perhaps harsh ones, but we did not know that they would come precisely in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding, which is in no way connected to this issue. And therefore, today we must remain vigorously and steadfastly adamant about our position, our rights, and our honor.
Q: Who actually cancelled the Memorandum of Understanding, Israel or the U.S.?
A: I think that the U.S. in effect annulled it, by virtue of its suspending its existence, the realization of the Memorandum of Understanding, even before it was begun to be implemented.
Q: The Government considered the Memorandum of Understanding a diplomatic achievement of the highest degree...
A: Certainly it was a diplomatic achievement, insofar as it contributed to the strengthening of ties between Israel and the U.S., as well as to Israel's security.
Q: What happened to this achievement now?
A: But no one could have imagined that this memorandum would be used by someone as a means of applying pressure on Israel in negotiations on conditions for peace, or on ways of defending its security. No one could have imagined that. That kind of Memorandum of Understanding we do not need.