In this candid exchange, the President explained the reasons for his demands of Israel the day before, and expressed optimism that now the only problems that remained were logistic and technical (finding ships, securing the port, time table, etc.). The briefing was seen by Israel as conciliatory and was circulated by the Israel Government Press Office. Text:
Q: Mr. President, why didn't you take the kind of highly-publicized public action to stop the bombing in Beirut before you did yesterday? Perhaps hundreds of thousands could - or thousands anyway - could have been saved. Why not be - why not go public, no matter what you may have said in private, sir?
The President: Well, much of what we said - and we weren't silent or idle in all this time that Habib has been working - but the sensitivity of the negotiations were such that I avoided, as you know, anything that might interfere with those negotiations or in some way injure what Ambassador Habib was trying to accomplish. However, yesterday the situation was that the negotiations were down. We had general agreement by all parties finally to the arrangement, and the negotiations were down to the logistics, the technicalities of getting the people - getting the P.L.O. moving and so forth and those negotiations, literally, were broken off by the extent of the bombing and shelling. The delegates couldn't even get to the negotiation meetings and I have to be fair and say that, in my first call I was informed then by Prime Minister Begin that he had ordered a cessation of the aerial bombing and so, we discussed the artillery shelling from then on.
Q: Mr. President, why don't you tell us a little bit of how you felt in these nine weeks with people being bombarded and your continuing to send weapons to inflict this horror on them? I mean, what has been your personal feeling?
The President: As I say, this was a matter of great concern and we were trying to get an end to it. On the other hand, I think that perhaps the image has been rather one-sided because of the Israeli capability at replying, but in many instances - in fact most of them - the cease-fire was broken by P.L.O. attacking those Israeli forces.
Q: Well, they were the invaders, were they not?
The President: Are they the invaders or are the P.L.O. the invaders? Lebanon is the country Q: As of June 6th.
The President: - But on the other hand, if we look now at the stories that are beginning to come out and that some have been public, the P.L.O. was literally a government and an armed force in another nation and beholden in no way to that other nation, which was one of the reasons why you didn't hear more protest from the Lebanese government about the Israeli presence.
Q: Mr. President, you said that yesterday you did have a general agreement and then, there was this firing. Where -are we back on track today? Do we still have a general agreement? And would you go along with some forecasts that say the P.L.O. evacuation will begin sometime next week?
The President: I'm reasonably optimistic. Now, see, I didn't say "cautiously". I'm reasonably optimistic about this because I believe that this time the cease-fire is going to hold and, as I say, the negotiations now are not the case of trying to persuade agreement on the part of the various parties. The negotiations are on the technicalities, the logistical move that must be made in getting them out. And so, I think there's reason for, great reason for hope.
Q: The P.L.O. - would the evacuation start next week? As early as that?
The President: I can't - again I don't want to speculate on that because I'm not there at the negotiating table.
Here and then, I've got to get back there into those back lines there.
Q: Mr. President, yesterday your spokesman said that you were outraged by what had happened. Can you tell us a little bit about what happened in your phone call with the Prime Minister, specifically, did you raise your voice and what was the tenor of the conversation?
The President: This is something I don't do. I won't comment on my communications, whether written or spoken, with other heads of state. I don't think that's proper, so I won't do that.
Q: Mr. President, has the Israeli action in Lebanon, often against U.S. wishes - the massive retaliation for violations of the cease-fire by the P.L.O., has that changed in any way the special relationship between Israel and the United States? And has it changed your own personal views toward Israel?
The President: No, I think and I was concerned also that - the reason for the call, that it could endanger that - the manner in which it's being portrayed, there's been less emphasis on the provocation and more emphasis on the response. And, yes, I did and have voiced the opinion that the response many times was out of proportion to the provocation that - but we can't deny that the Israelis have been taking casualties from those cease-fire violations themselves. I think the figure now is 326 dead of their own military from being attacked in the breaking of the cease-fire.
Q: Has it changed your own attitude?
The President: What?
Q: Has it changed your own attitude toward Israel?
The President: I still believe that this country has an obligation to pursue the peace process that was started in Camp David and that this country has an obligation to ensure Israel's survival as a nation.