The day before this interview was broadcast, Defense Minister Sharon agreed with Bashir Gemayel that the I.D.F. and the Phalangist forces will link up at a point near Baabda, a suburb in Eastern Beirut, where the office of the Lebanese President is located. The agreement was even signed by the two and the I.D.F. was ordered to move to the Beirut-Damascus road near Aley. Gemayel refused, however, to commit his forces to fighting the P.L.0. in west Beirut. It became obvious that the Phalangists had no intention of entering the war. On Saturday, 12 June, quiet reigned along the eastern sector, but there was heavy fighting south and east of Beirut, where the I.D.F. was advancing in the direction of the Beirut-Damascus road
The Foreign Minister did not enter into any details regarding the fighting, neither did he elaborate on Israel's specific demands regarding the future settlement, basically because Israel did not have time to formulate these demands. He revealed that "the U.S. government was not surprised by Operation 'Peace for Galilee' only by its timing. They knew from talks with us that an operation like this was quite possible if terrorist action didn't stop. " He also denied vehemently Christian involvement in the war, saying it was not necessary, and therefore he was not disappointed. Text:
Q: The firing has not ceased in Lebanon. According to various reports the I.D.F. is returning fire against terrorist posts in southern Beirut and other areas. When, in your estimation, will a way be found so that the cannons will be silenced and make way for finding a political settlement?
A: According to the information I have as of this moment, or today, a cease-fire does, in effect, exist in all the areas in which the I.D.F. is stationed, except for a few places, or, actually, one place. It is natural that after such intensive fighting the firing does not cease all at once everywhere. I assume we are heading for a total cease-fire.
Q: You have the cease-fire only with Syria, that is what government spokesmen are proclaiming. Who, in your opinion, can impose a cease-fire on the terrorist organizations, or, on the other hand, how is it at all possible to achieve a settlement without the terrorists in Lebanon being a partner to it?
A: Actually, there is no cease-fire agreement yet. The Government of Israel decided that it is stopping all fighting by its army since the objectives of Operation "Peace for Galilee" had been achieved. If there will be an arrangement -and we want to reach an agreement - naturally, the agreement would be reached with the government of Syria, because this is a government and a state and an army. With the terrorist organizations there never was any agreement and there can never be an agreement.
Q: Then what will happen if the terrorist organizations continue to shoot?
A: This morning I heard Arafat's announcement in which he informed the U.N. Secretary-General that he is ready to accept the call for a cease-fire. It reminds (one) of his similar announcement of last year - around July 1981 - after the organizations headed by him had reached the desperate conditions of exhaustion. The implication of the announcement he is making now proves that he has reached the same condition. And, therefore, we feel, I feel, that in any case they will stop their activities, without a formal arrangement.
Q: Going on to the next stage, after the cease-fire agreement - on the assumption that there will be one - U.S. Secretary of State Haig has said that now is the time for a separation of forces. Is this the Israeli stand as well?
A: We have declared a cease-fire. Now we must protect it via agreements, settlements, which will safeguard the interests of Israel's security. One may give it all sorts of names, one can find different types of formulations for this arrangement, but that is a subject for talks and negotiations which will begin in the next few days.
Q: What is your scenario for today, tomorrow?
A: As you know, Philip Habib is here, the special envoy of the U.S. President. He has come to us after talks with the President of Syria. We will talk with him tomorrow, with him and his aides. Perhaps the U.S. Secretary of State will have the chance to come to the region. We therefore will begin talks with our friends from the U.S., and together will look for a coordinated arrangement which will stop the terrorist actions from Lebanese territory.
Q: Do you perceive in this week's events in Lebanon any path towards talking with Syria on broader subjects?
A: The cease-fire, which we declared and which is being observed today by the Syrians too, proves our oft-repeated thesis that a peace settlement is possible between Israel and any Arab country in the region. There is only one element with which a peace agreement isn't possible: That is the terrorist organizations. There can be no peace agreement with them because their declared, their real objective is to destroy Israel, and because in order to achieve this objective they do everything possible to prevent peace agreements between us and Arab countries. As for your question, a peace agreement with Syria is entirely possible one of these days if (Syria) should be willing.
Q: To what degree are the U.S. and Israel coordinating their moves toward a solution to the problem in Lebanon?
A: There are constant contacts, talks, correspondence conducted candidly, in all friendship and sincerity, between Israel and the U.S. The U.S. Government was not surprised by Operation "Peace for Galilee", only by its timing. They knew from talks with us that an operation like this was quite possible if terrorist action didn't stop. We continue to talk with the U.S. so as to cooperate with our friends - who are also the greatest power in the world - so as to come to a peaceful and stable settlement in the Middle East, the region in which we live and the region essential to the U.S.'s interests.
Q: What shape do you think a future arrangement in Lebanon will take?
A: In the cabinet's statements, both on Operation "Peace for Galilee" and on the conclusion of the operation, on the cease-fire, the government reiterated our hope and aspiration to reach a peaceful settlement with the government of a free, independent and sovereign Lebanon. This is our policy. This is Israel's basic, unchanging interest. It is our wish to make peace with a Lebanese government that wants to make peace with us, and that would be capable of doing so; and this will happen as soon as it no longer faces pressures and threats from foreign elements which endanger Lebanese interests. That is our policy. The ways and means to achieve this will be determined in consideration of prevailing conditions.
Q: Did the Christians help Israel this time in the war in Lebanon?
A: Negative. The answer is unconditionally negative. No one helped us in this war, no one participated with us in this campaign, no one besides Israel, besides sources in Israel, knew of the campaign. Therefore I can say without hesitation, as we have already stated in relation to the U.S. and to other friends, that no one in Lebanon knew about or participated in the "Peace for Galilee" campaign.
Q: And are you disappointed by this, or is this simply a fact?
A: I am not disappointed. We had no need for this, nor are we interested in all sorts of internal wars within Lebanon. On the contrary, we think that some sort of unified opinion is crystallizing in Lebanon; a sort of consensus is forming around the need to establish an independent and sovereign Lebanon which will not be a toy in the hands of foreign interests. And this is precisely our interest, for Lebanon to reach this state. We are certain that if it does, we will be able to conclude a peace agreement with it.