The main issue confronting the cabinet was how to proceed in Beirut. By then the P.L.0 had proclaimed that west Beirut would become a "second Stalingrad". The I.D.F was tightening the noose. The Christian Lebanese forces refused to fight in west Beirut and preferred to allow the I.D.F. to do so instead. The I.D.F. was aware that breaking into west Beirut would entail enormous civilian and military casualties; since by then the I.D.F. had lost 170 men, this was becoming a highly sensitive issue. Therefore the Cabinet resolved to intensify the demands on Bashir Gemayel to undertake a leading role in the seizure of west Beirut. The Cabinet authorized artillery support for such a Lebanese operation. The Prime Minister, however, did not rule out I.D.F. ground support as well.
Later that day the Prime Minister was interviewed on Israel television. Mr. Begin explained the need for his trip to the U.S.: important meetings with Reagan and Haig, the goals of the war, the reasons for going beyond the 40 km line (flanking operation against the Syrians), and the decision not to enter Beirut. Here, Mr. Begin, like Mr. Sharon, made a fine distinction between the center of the city and its suburbs. He also claimed that the entire cabinet took decisions on major military matters. He chastised the media, and emphasised that the cabinet was not dragged into any decisions by the Defense Minister. Among the achievements of the war, Mr. Begin felt that "it healed the nation from the Yom Kippur trauma, completely, in my opinion. " He also felt that the past week put an end to the question mark over the existence of Israel, due to the skill, motivation and technological prowess of the I.D.F. He also emphasized the fact that the peace treaty with Egypt stood the first major test, and concluded by inviting King Hussein of Jordan to negotiate peace. Text:
Q: Mr. Prime Minister, when this interview is broadcast, you will be on your way to the United States. In view of the unstable situation in Lebanon, and there is criticism of I.D.F. actions in the world media, shouldn't have this visit now to the U.S. been postponed?
A: No, it didn't even occur to me to postpone this visit. I received an invitation to address the U.N. General Assembly on the disarmament issue and international peace, and I think this is an excellent time for the Prime Minister of the State of Israel to appear with such an address before the members of the United Nations Organization. Moreover, the President of the United States, who at first expected to see me in New York, since he is also speaking, the day before, before the U.N. General Assembly, changed his mind, and he invited me to see him next Monday, that is 21 June, in Washington. He has allotted me a great deal of time, some four hours, for talks. We have many topics to discuss. This is a good, important opportunity for both the President and myself, with regard to bilateral relations between the U.S. and Israel, from the point of view of international diplomacy between the free world and the totalitarian world, with regard to the Middle East, to hold a very serious clarifying discussion. I will also meet with the Secretary of State, who told me that he will visit me on Friday, and we will eat breakfast together, and, of course, we will use that opportunity to discuss the issues I mentioned before I go to the U.N. So, this is a visit which has national important, and there was no reason, I see no reason why it should be postponed. With regard to the situation in Israel, there is a cease-fire now; the diplomatic campaign. has begun; my colleagues in the cabinet, headed by Acting Prime Minister, Mr. Ehrlich, the Foreign Minister and the Defense Minister, and all the cabinet members are well acquainted with the issues, since we held cabinet meetings almost daily during the operation. Every cabinet member knows the issue, and I have no doubt that they will run things properly, to the benefit of the Jewish people.
Q: Mr. Prime Minister, in expectation of your talks in Washington, could you indicate the points of agreement and disagreement between us and the U.S. with regard to a settlement in Lebanon?
A: III try. As for the basic agreement, it is expressed by the insistence of both the U.S. and Israel on the demand that the situation not return to its previous state in Lebanon. That is, there won't be foreign armies in Lebanon; the reference is to the Syrian army, and I certainly don't deny that the intention is also the Israeli army. As you remember, we said that we don't want even one square millimeter of Lebanese soil. And we will be prepared to withdraw our army, we want to withdraw it from Lebanon. But we demand such security arrangements which will prevent the bloody affairs which occurred in Lebanon and from Lebanon. The same is true for the Syrian army; it has to get out of Lebanon. The Syrian army has no business in another country called Lebanon. The same is true for the terrorist organizations, which armed themselves with Soviet, Libyan and Syrian weapons, a great part of which we seized. And I want to tell you, dear friends, it is unbelieveable; if you would have seen the quantities of arms. For example, hundreds of tons of explosives. What this means with regard to terror capability, I can only explain by giving an example: during the underground period, we destroyed, of course after giving warning to leave the hotel, seven floors of Jerusalem stone in the King David Hotel with 400 kilograms of explosives, T.N.T. And now you can imagine what destruction can be achieved with hundreds of tons of explosives. The terrorists had more than 100 tanks. We destroyed them. We destroyed 250, close to 300 Syrian tanks; but the terrorists also had heavy cannons, for example the 130 mm cannon, range 27 km; they had heavy Katyushas with a range of 35 kms, not only the regular ones with a range of 21.6 km. [and] unlimited ammunition.
Now I want to show you what was that terrorist organization which acted against us. We captured this certificate in Lebanon. This is a Soviet certificate, written in Russian and English, given to a man who finished an eleven month course, to become a commander, an officer. And he would proudly and honorably carry this special certificate. But this is not all. It show you a much more serious certificate. Here I have an order of the day. It is written in the original, in Arabic - I do not know Arabic, to my regret I have not learned this rich language - but we have already photocopied it, and here you have an order, from the Nabatiyeh region, and now, the targets which the commander was instructed to hit. I will read them: A public place, Kiryat Shemona, She'ar Yashuv, Dan, Kfar Yuval, Hagoshrim, Maayan Baruch, Kfar Giladi. All of them settlements with a civilian population. And the order is expressly given to fire on them with artillery. Now you can understand who confronted us before we began Operation "Peace for the Galilee". The Americans also understand now, not only do we, that such a situation cannot be reconstituted by any means. All terrorist organization personnel in Lebanon must be disarmed. If they stay in Lebanon, with the agreement of the Lebanese government, then they have to be residents, not citizens, but without weapons. In other words, all must change in Lebanon. And we will be there until all the security arrangements are made to prevent attacks on such settlements as I read on the list.
Q: Mr. Begin, our forces, I.D.F. forces, are now in Beirut.
A: No. Next to Beirut.
Q: Next to Beirut, excuse me.
A: You should make a distinction my friend. There's a difference between "in Ramat Gan" and "next to Ramat Gan". No comparison, of course.
Q: Near Beirut, no comparison. And this is far beyond the 40 km security belt which you spoke of, or 45 km which the Defense Minister spoke of. What is our intention in this deep penetration near Beirut?
A: One of the strangest misunderstandings that I have ever encountered. We set, due to the range of the terrorist cannons and Katyushas, 40 - actually it should be between 43-48 kms, since the terrorists also have a Soviet cannon, albeit outdated, of World War 11 vintage, 180 mm, but its range is 43 km. There is a small insignificant difference. But this line must be achieved as a peace line, not a war line. So first of all we had to push them northward. Here there was a situation in the eastern and central sectors; we confronted them from the south, they were 18 kms from Kiryat Shemona. If they had remained in place we would not have solved a thing. Indeed, we liberated Nahariya from the Katyushas after we captured Tyre, since from there they fired all those Katyushas on our Nahariya. But we did not liberate the Galilee panhandle. 18 kms that's within the range of even the smallest Katyushas, whose range is 21.6 kin. So we had to push them northward. But this was a frontal attack, and in a frontal attack, the attacker loses very many men, and for us every person is a whole world. You should know that we lost 170 dead; for us this is an open wound for the rest of our lives. I call this in the famous Greek language "Hecatomb". This is a terrible blood sacrifice for the Jewish people. But we had no choice. Since they did not let us live, breathe. They did not let our children in the Galilee go to school - they sat day and night in shelters. It was difficult to even breathe there. We had no choice. We've seen from time to time, that the nation of Israel will exist in the Land of Israel only by preparedness for sacrifices; otherwise it cannot exist, since it is surrounded by enemies. But we have to save our own lives. And if we would have made a frontal attack, we would have had to sustain many casualties. What did we do? We decided to outflank the enemy. And I would like to say with great pride, it was the idea of our Defense Minister, a proficient craftsman. So we moved onto another road, onto the highway, and we moved north, in order to take the enemy from both sides, from the north as well. We reached a point of, say, 60 kms from our northern border, and from this point we descended southward, thus taking the enemy from both sides. This is a strategic maneuvre known to anyone who has ever dealt with military matters. This is not precisely... Hannibal's famous maneuvre, which weakened his center, strengthened his flanks, withdrew with the army to the center; meanwhile the flanks attacked the enemy, and surrounded them, broke them, and held the enemy from both sides. But the idea itself, that the enemy should be outflanked and attacked, not only frontally but from behind, is an ancient idea. Ever since there were wars in the world this idea guides military commanders. Therefore, we reached a point of about 55 or 60 km north of our northern border. The intention was to descend to move south, and take the enemy from both sides. And this is precisely what we did. When the U.S. President requested that a cease-fire take effect at 6.00 Thursday morning, I could not acceed to his request, since at the time the enemy was still 18 kms from Kiryat Shemona. Therefore, I explained to him that we are ready for a cease-fire, but not at this time. After about six hours we were prepared to announce that at 12.00 the next day we will agree to a cease-fire, since we knew that we had already pushed the enemy from both sides. And it retreated, because it was surrounded, it knew it was surrounded. It could only retreat. and it reached the 40 km point.
But there are still thousands of terrorists. Do we want them to return? The 40-43 km line must be a peace line, that is, there should be no terrorist at all beyond it. So we had to move north in order to ensure that they would not return, beyond the 40 km line. But this is an interim period; until we solve the problem completely, we will certainly stand on the 40 km line, 43, the difference is small. We did not deceive anyone. But this is a war, it must be understood that its aim must be achieved, and not create a situation, and then what was before will recur. No, this was not the intent.
Q: Was this penetration to Beirut planned in advance, or was it the result of the moves and developments of the war in the field?
A: I wanted to tell you. Ask my colleagues, in one of the cabinet meetings, and we have very frequent meetings, I said this: in contradiction to previous war nothing will roll on its own. For example, it is known that in the Six-Day War, the Defense Minister then, the late Moshe Dayan, didn't want to reach the Suez Canal. But the tanks rolled, they reached the Suez Canal. Today I said no, the government will keep its hand on the pulse, nothing will be done without an expressed decision of the government. So I would like to assure that everything that was done, was done by government decision. We did not enter Beirut because the government decided that we do not want to capture that city. And we did not capture it. We also did not capture the airport. We can capture both these objects, of course with bloody losses, but we control the approach to the airport, but we did not take it over. And the same is true for the city. Nothing rolled, the government took an explicit decision on everything.
Q: You explained the cabinet meetings and said it was not confronted with accomplished facts. You might be aware that among segments of the population, whose extent I cannot measure, there is concern or suspicion that Defense Minister Ariel Sharon allegedly dragged the Cabinet to moves which went beyond the original plan of the operation.
A: I don't say this to you, but to the article writers: stuff and nonsense. Nothing of the sort. Not even in allegory, as was Job. Just idle gossip of journalists who invent things. I read all the papers every day, I simply pay them no attention. They don't know what to write. Once, one paper that calls itself fair was really fair. But it has already forgotten how to be fair. What kind of dragging? This is a functioning government. It met sometimes twice a day. All the facts were reported to it. The discussion covered every detail. A decision was taken on everything. No one dragged it, no one could have dragged. And why does the Defense Minister, a veteran of combat, real combat, devoted heart and soul to the nation, need to drag the cabinet behind its back, and so forth. Nothing of the sort. And I would really like this opportunity to appeal to the journalists: would you finally start writing facts. Maybe stop inventing. There are sources; why invent? By all means, contact us, well give you information - of course, that which can be given when the enemy is listening. There was no deception, no dragging, things were carried out in accordance with cabinet decisions.
Q: Mr. Prime Minister, what does Israel intend to do with the terrorist nests and terrorist headquarters left in Beirut?
A: I cannot answer the question at this time. I would have liked to answer, since I don't like evasions. But there is the problem of the field, and in a few days you will find out; but I can't answer the question now. Excuse me, I must take precautions for our soldiers, our citizens, the whole campaign. Meanwhile, I am also travelling to the United States, so you won't have the opportunity to ask me again.
Q: They might ask you there.
A: By the time I ask you may already have the answer, or you'll be able to ask my substitute, Mr. Simcha Ehrlich.
Q: Was one of the operation's aims the capture of P.L.O. leader Yasser Arafat?
A: No. We would like that he perhaps not be able to command his armies anymore. How he bragged before we entered Lebanon, "I'm waiting for them, by all means, 'ahlan wa-sahlan. "' (did I pronounce it correctly in Arabic? I'm not sure.) "Let them come, well teach them a lesson." Now we know that he has requested asylum in an embassy in Beirut.
Q: The Soviet Embassy.
A: I cannot answer that question. So, we simply wanted that he not be able to be this commander any more. Excuse me for the native Israeli expression, this Arafat is a great "shvitzer" (braggart - ed.). He has yet to prove anything. He only travels back and forth across the globe, lives in fancy hotels. To make absolutely no comparison, we also once fought in the underground; none of us ever left this country, under the rule of 100,000 soldiers and 30,000 policemen, even for one day, and we fought. Of course, there is no comparison, no comparison. I only explain as an illustration. And he travels back and forth. I saw Mrs. Indira Gandhi welcoming him as if he were a king. He's no king. He's a man of atrocity, a professional murderer, a murderer of women and children, these are his orders, to hit such settlements. But there are those who today have an interest - I once told an important head of state that Arafat, according to our information, received 400 million dollars from Saudi Arabia. He interrupted me and said, billions, billions, not 400 million. They had unlimited money. And another head of state told me, they waste the money on nightclubs. These are their fighters. That's why they look the way they do. That's why we didn't especially want to capture. But we wanted to end his command, and that of the two 'Abu's, Abu Iyad and Abu Ziyad. They are not real opponents in battle. But they had great amounts of arms, the depots defy description. When there are arms there are hits, of course.
Q: I'd like to move to a different aspect of this war, Mr. Prime Minister. The destruction in the cities in Lebanon, the suffering of the civilian population in Lebanon; where these unavoidable in this operation?
A: Yes, people try to preach morality to us. III tell you about a night I spent in the advance headquarters. There sat all our generals, the high command, the generals, and argued about what to do in Sidon. We had not yet captured it. According to our information there were 7,000 terrorists there, armed with the best individual weapons, and perhaps also with heavy weapons. So it was said that if we go into a built-up area, there can be shooting from every window, from every rooftop, well sustain many casualties. So it was said that we have to bomb them from the air like the Allies did before they landed at Normandy - this is known - and thus prevent casualties. Most of the commanders, they spoke one after the other. I saw their work. I would like to tell the nation what an army we have. Not only a humane army, it is also democratic. We don't have automatic orders. Everyone expresses his opinion. Of course, ultimately the commander makes the decision, and it is executed. But it is wonderful to see them working. The overwhelming majority said, by no means should the city be bombed from the air, since it will be severely damaged, and many civilians will be killed. And therefore, we took measures to try and get the city to surrender. So the Red Cross volunteered, and even in Beirut people said they were ready to help, and UNIFIL also said it was ready to help. Let them raise a white flag, and most of the civilian population will leave the city, stay on the beach, and we will go in and make order with the terrorists, etc... And that's how it was. 50,000 of Sidon's residents were on the beach, not one of them was hurt. Where have you seen an army which behaves like that in a city held by the enemy? Of course there were also damages to the cities. Can this be prevented in a war?
Now III tell you a story. If someone tries to accuse us, then I will always remind him what I myself heard from the late Dr. Sneh. You know, he was one of the most talented men in Israel. Later he went where he went, he returned to us, repented. He once told me the following story: A person descends directly from Mars to Dresden, and he sees the city destroyed in 1945: not one house was left standing. So he cries, "These barbarians, what did they do to the historical, beautiful city of Dresden?" A man from Earth comes to him and says to him: "You speak of barbarians? Have you heard of what happened in Czechoslovakia?" He says, "No." "In Austria?" "No." "In Poland?" "No." "In Coventry?" "NO." "In Rotterdam?" "No." "Did you hear what happened in Auschwitz?" He says, "Also no". He told him. Then the man from Mars says, "Now I understand what happened to Dresden." This is a clear hint. What happened till [we entered] Tyre, till Sidon? What did they do to our people? What did they do to our children? Why couldn't they go to school like the children of London, or the children of Paris, or the children of Rome, or the children of Moscow? Why did they have to be in small shelters day and night? Why were men, women and children killed? Why was a man who had been in Auschwitz killed, a man who came to Eretz Israel to live and not be killed? All this was before. Then we had to put an end to it, and we entered Sidon, and Sidon was also damaged, that's true. Now we will of course assist in its reconstruction. Well also help the population. Delegations of the Ministry of Health have already left. Today we established a committee headed by Minister Meridor to coordinate humanitarian activities. But what could have been done otherwise? It was really a cancer on our body. We couldn't breath any more in the Galilee. Today, by all means, go to Kiryat Shemona, our children are walking. There is no fear, no Katyusha. I once said, the day will come when there will not be one Katyusha landing on Kiryat Shemona. There were people who scoffed a bit at this declaration. And today has come and there is no Katyusha. Not in Nahariya, and not in Kiryat Shemona, and not in Kfar Giladi, and not in Metulla, and not in Misgav Am, in no place in the Galilee. And I tell you, there won't be either.
Q: Mr. Begin, do you have more or less accurate figures on the number of civilian casualties as a result of this operation, or the number of refugees?
A: I can't say that we have confirmed figures. I heard an imaginary figure of 600,000 homeless. I believe that it is nothing of the sort. In the area in which we are operating there are not 600,000 residents, so how can there be 600,000 homeless. Today I heard from the Defense Minister, he visited Beirut, he travelled along the whole line, he saw villages and towns, all undamaged with houses intact, no one was even hurt. What 600,000? The same is true for the loss of life. In a few more days we will know exactly. I'm sure the numbers are exaggerated.
Q: Is there an assessment of the number of those killed?
A: Regarding casualties assessments must not be made. 1, for example, I wanted to tell you, during the Yom Kippur War I didn't permit the release of the number of those killed, as long as we didn't know the number, to the very last one.
Q: Our casualties?
A: Regarding casualties, it is not permitted to say "some", "some 800." Every person is a whole world. If there are 800, then it should be said, "800." And therefore we cannot say, even with regard to foreigners, or even enemies "There are some 1,000 casualties." When we know there are 1,000 well say 1,000.
Q: Is Israel's effort to rebuild Lebanon to be solely an Israeli effort, or will the U.S. perhaps propose an international effort?
A: The U.S. already proposed to us, we agreed. And I appointed the Director-General of the Foreign Ministry and his deputy to be the representatives of the Israeli Government, and they will work with two American representatives. And well do the work together. And if other countries come to help, we welcome them all. But the U.S. already wants to help, [and] we are already helping, especially the Ministry of Health, [which] has established convoys. By the way, we are already healing a great number of Lebanese sick. Yesterday I visited our wounded in the Hadassah Hospital in Ein Karem, and I found Lebanese patients there. They are being treated well. This is natural. This is nothing to brag about. After all, we are the Jewish people. We have an open heart for everyone. If he is wounded, even an enemy has to be treated.
Q: On another subject, does Israel intend to dictate to Lebanon the composition of its government or the kind of government it will have?
A: This is not our business, it is the business of Lebanon. And I understand that there is vigorous treatment of the matter. Yesterday, President Sarkis - with whom I am willing to sign a peace treaty tomorrow, between Israel and Lebanon, on the basis of Lebanese territorial integrity, if he wants negotiations either in Jerusalem or in Beirut, I'm ready to go to Beirut and hold negotiations - but I understand that he now established a National Rescue Council, something like the institution founded during the French Revolution, "Salut Publique" National Rescue. So well see. All the elements belong there, and it is good that such a coalition be established and all those interested will participate; but we do not intervene in this, this is Sarkis's decision, not ours.
Q: The Minister of Defense did meet, though with Christian leaders in Beirut, or near Beirut. What was the aim of these meetings?
A: So what, I also met with the Christian leaders...
Q: With whom did you meet?
A: Very likeable people. And we assisted them. They were in danger of annihilation at least three times in the last five years. We saved their lives. Now they are happy, because the Syrian army has almost fallen apart in Lebanon. The Syrians no longer pose any danger to them. The terrorist organization is shattered. It no longer endangers them. You should know that the town of Damour was a beautiful Christian village, and it was captured by the terrorist organizations, who murdered the whole Christian population, except those whom they drove out, and took it over. Now we are there, and we are returning Damour to the Christians, and they will rebuild homes there. The Defense Minister was there, he was received with fanfare, they almost called him "King of Lebanon" as he was once called "King of Israel."
Q: Maybe that is the case.
A: No, no it's not like that. No, no. We are running the affairs of the State of Israel. Lebanon is not the Land of Israel. We do not want even one inch of Lebanese territory. We only want that the peaceful border between us and Lebanon be restored. You know, that for 19 years it was the only peaceful border. Flocks of sheep would cross the border, and they would be returned. Good neighbors return flocks of sheep. Not one bullet was shot. Afterwards it became a bloody border, really due to the despicable activity of that Palestinian terror organization. We want this pastorality to again dominate the Lebanese-Israeli border.
Q: What is the connection, as far as is known, between the Christian Phalange and the I.D.F.? Is there some tie?
A: Our army helped the Christians with equipment and ammunition; this is no secret.
Q: Today?
A: In the light of this operation, sir.
Q: I'd like to explain that there be no misunderstanding. We never made it a secret. The State of Israel, through its army, assisted the Christians, you say Phalange, the Christians, who were helpless, and faced the danger of annihilation, helped avoid annihilation at the hands of the terror organizations and the Syrians. Both of them attacked them and shed their blood, and killed thousands upon thousands, men, women and children. They perpetrated atrocities among them. We gave them arms, they have what to fight with and defend themselves. It is one of the most wonderful services given by the Jewish people to another nation. By the way, I did not begin this; my predecessor, Mr. Rabin began it. We continued, on a larger scale, and we did well.
Q: Is there coordination today on the battlefield, near Beirut, between the I.D.F....
A: On the battlefield there was no coordination because we fought the whole battle.
Q: I'd like to move to a wider context of this operation. To what degree does Operation "Peace for Galilee" perhaps bring peace closer with other Arab states, Jordan or Syria for example. I heard that Jordan is not so unhappy with this operation.
A: Others are also not so unhappy. I would like to tell you what I think the "Peace for Galilee" operation did for us, first of all. First of all, it healed the nation of the Yom Kippur War trauma, completely, in my opinion. In the Yom Kippur War we won at the end of the war, but we were badly hit at its beginning. First of all, we were surprised. We were in the dark, we read the map exactly the way the enemy wanted us to read it, that is, that it is preparing autumn maneuvres; it prepared a war. And in the first days it was an ungodly horror, how 18 and 19-year olds fell in the battlefield by the hundreds, they actually defended the nation with their own bodies. So there was a trauma. Why.? People asked, abroad too, will this small nation be able to hold out? Look, the lines were broken through in the north, in the south; true, later the enemy was checked, but there was a thrust. What will happen if there will be another 10,000 tanks. The Arabs have much money, unlimited. Saudi Arabia itself received this year 122 billion dollars for its oil. Can you imagine this fantastic sum? So they have unlimited funds. They can absorb more arms. Will we hold out? It was a question mark regarding our existence in the future. In Israel as well, I don't deny it, even among the young, and especially abroad. This question mark disappeared this week. Why? The nation saw, the world too, that these days numbers don't count, neither are numbers of tanks decisive. If you have an army, even smaller, trained, skilled with high motivation, if it knows that it is faced with a noble mission, no less than to fight for the well-beings of the citizens, your brothers, sons, parents, your grandmother, you fight for your people's well-being, and this is immeasurable motivation. It is ready for self-sacrifice. And it also has advanced technology developed by the Jewish mind, so it overcomes. We lost one Skyhawk, and we downed 85 MIGs, modern Soviet planes. We destroyed all of the ground-to-air missiles, 19 batteries. And when we fought the Egyptians in the War of Attrition, you remember, we lost scores of planes as a result of the operation of those ground-to-air missiles. Today not even one of ours fell. The Skyhawk fell because of other reasons, but during the attack on the missiles not even one of our planes fell. Why? We developed technology. Perhaps we are the only ones who have it. So we had the upper hand. We destroyed 300 Syrian Soviet tanks. You know, they included the T-72. We destroyed nine such tanks with our "Merkava." While NATO claimed that the T-72 is undefeated in one respect - it cannot be hit from the front - NATO now knows this is not so. This is also a myth. It can be hit from any side. And we destroyed nine T-72 tanks. I wish we could take one out and examine what goes on there in its belly, but we have not succeeded till now due to battlefield reasons. But the fact is that our "Merkava" destroyed nine such tanks. So, the nation was cured of that trauma. I am absolutely certain. With God's help, we will stand up to all our enemies and overcome them. We hate wars; we want peace. If we are attacked, we will stand firm.
A second most important thing was proven. The peace treaty between us and Egypt held up. This was an important test. It is true that we are being cursed in the Egyptian press; it is not the only one in which nonsense against Israel is heard. I also know of European press which uses not so elegant words. So what, so they write. But the peace treaty itself withstood the test. They did not go to war, concentrate an army, everything written in the peace treaty exists. These are the two most important achievements, with regard to the lessons of Operation "Peace for Galilee".
Regarding movement toward further peace, from this studio I extend a hand to King Hussein, come to Jerusalem; I'm also ready to come to Amman. Come talk peace; why should we have war. I also appeal to President Assad. If you want to come to Jerusalem, a beautiful city, we'll talk peace. Do you want to invite me to Damascus? A bit dangerous; no matter. I'll come, who cares about dangers. Well talk peace. Why do you hold the Jews there with you, President Assad, a mere 4,000 Jews. Let them go - well welcome them in our warm home with love. Why do you hold them as hostages? Here I appeal to all of them, I want peace with all the neighboring Arab states. Maybe their leaders really learned a lesson, and this development may bring peace closer with them as well.