Mr. Sharon explained the policies he pursued and argued that all his moves were sanctioned by the Cabinet. He rejected calls for his resignation saying "I do not engage in the wars of the Jews. " He felt that Israel must maintain its resolve not to panic at U.S. pressure because "the U.S. got a wonderful achievement against the Soviets on a silver platter and they won't want to give it up easily. Text:
Q: Do you intend to resign?
A: I do not deal in gossip, I deal with the main issue. The main issue, in my view, is the removal of the terrorists from Beirut. And I have been dealing with this issue for a long time; I deal with this issue day and night. Wars between Jews do not interest me. I do not aspire to be popular with one person or another, with one group or another. I consider most important the principles of our national security.
Q: But still, you were severely attacked in the Cabinet meeting, and accused of activating the air force without authority, and this must make you wonder whether you still enjoy the confidence of the Cabinet and the Prime Minister.
A: I do not intend to resign. I acted exactly in accordance with the Cabinet's resolution that stipulates that the I.D.F. would respond to terrorist violations of the cease-fire in the air, on land and by sea - and that is what we did.
Our soldiers - and this is the Cabinet's position - are entitled to all the necessary protection for the purpose of carrying out their missions. And the activation of the air force was first and foremost to guarantee the safety of our soldiers on the front lines - and I hope they will be there a short time, until the evaluation of the terrorists, which I estimate it getting close.
Q: The Prime Minister himself said at the last meeting that the most recent military activity caused damage and did not expedite the negotiations.
A: The activity of the last two weeks brought about the acceleration of the negotiations and a complete change in the conditions for the removal of the terrorists from Beirut. There is no similarity in the conditions the terrorists wanted to attain two weeks ago and those they are willing to accept now. I would like especially to concentrate on the last two days, during which there was very intense activity on our part, and about which it has been reported that they were delaying or postponing, as it were, the attainment of an agreement. What is interesting is that last night the terrorists were presented for the first time with plan that says that the multi-national. force will not enter, part of the multi-national force will not enter on the day of the terrorists' departure, but after most of them have left Beirut.
Q: And you say that this progress came in the wake of our bombings?
A: Definitely.
Q: Are you saying that other Ministers do not understand the benefit in these military actions? Some of them are saying that the escalation caused great damage; there was an angry phone call from the President of the U.S. A: I have never complained about any Ministers ... I have nothing to do with this whole business of gossip and meddling. I am occupied with only one thing, which seems to me to be the most important thing at this time, and that is the removal of the terrorists from Beirut.
And as for the angry reaction of the United States, we all have a great deal of appreciation for the United States - I personally have a great deal of esteem for the United States ... [and] for the President of the United States. I heard the various assessments, so to speak, this morning on a break in relations between the U.S. and Israel. I think that these are hasty evaluations. One has to take into account the entire network of relations.
Q: Still, there was an American threat to stop the Habib mission and the negotiations unless the bombings ceased immediately.
A: One mustn't get frightened, one needn't get scared. Philip Habib (unintelligible - ed.). The United States has an interest, as a result of our action, the United States received on a silver platter a tremendous achievement vis-a-vis the Soviets, who have been revealed in their impotence vis-a-vis the present developments in the Middle East. In my opinion, the United States is not anxious to sacrifice these achievement; and therefore, no one wants to halt the negotiations.
Q: I take it from what you're saying that the U.S. President's threat wasn't serious.
A: When we come to weigh Israel's national interests, we must be ready as well to stand up against friends, even if they get angry from time to time; and this does not take away one iota from our relationship with them or from the profound esteem we hold for them. We went out to war. One must remember what we're dealing with, what we're talking about. We went out to a war whose aim was the elimination of terror, the terror that has been hurting us for years, the elimination of terror in Lebanon, that has become the center for international terror. And this mission must now be completed; and if for the purpose of this mission - and I would say this above and beyond the giving of defense to our soldiers - if for the purpose of this mission, terrorist headquarters must be attacked, then terrorist headquarters should be attacked.
Q: Even if scores or hundreds of civilians are killed in such attacks?
A: We concentrated our attacks in areas where hardly any civilians are to be found.
Q: Does that mean that the reports coming in from abroad on hundreds of civilian casualties are lies?
A: The reports that have come in are deliberate lies. And we've known for some time, this matter has been reported in the Cabinet, reported in other fora in which I sit, that these reports are tendentious; and we must speak the truth. We have an interest in attacking the terrorists' headquarters and their leaders. Anyone who wants peace and security must know that one of the conditions for achieving such peace, real peace, and maintaining such peace, is that there be maximum casualties among the terrorists' leaders.
Q: What you say contradicts reports and pictures from television in the U.S. and throughout the world, stark pictures of civilian casualties.
A: There is no doubt that the numbers reported are very exaggerated. Still, it is certain that civilians have been hurt as well. But we did not deliberately hurt civilians, and I say that if civilians were hurt, and civilians were hurt, but these civilians were hurt actually because they were hostages in the hands of the terrorists.
Q: Your authority has been restricted, and now you can't activate the air force without the Prime Minister's permission. How do you feel as someone whose credibility as Defense Minister has been removed?
A: The Cabinet did not reduce my authority. I am a member of the Cabinet, acting in accordance with Cabinet resolutions. The Cabinet's resolutions determined exactly what are the modi operandi to be used. To this day, to this day as well, the Prime Minister has been kept au courant.
Q: Every time?
A: I can not come and say to you now that every sortie, that the Prime Minister was kept abreast of every sortie. Neither is there any need for this. But the Prime Minister has been kept informed, to this day, of any extraordinary activity.
All the actions were taken in accordance with Cabinet resolutions. The Cabinet did not change one iota the line it adopted which stipulates that I.D.F. soldiers will not be subject to fire without this causing a reaction.
Q: You told that Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee that it was a stormy Cabinet meeting...
A: I should not like to comment on gossip from the Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee. I consider it very grave that things get out of the Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee even before you finish deliberations there. Sometimes I leave the Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee after speaking there, and I hear on the radio already things I had said only a few moments previously.
Q: But there was a difficult Cabinet meeting from your point of view?
A: There was a Cabinet meeting in which I presented the way I thought should be adopted, the principles in which I believe; and I say that 1, too, as well, want to score a diplomatic achievement. What can be more important than scoring a diplomatic achievement, and it is a first class achievement, when you stand and watch the terrorists departing from Beirut, and in effect accomplish one of your primary goals that you have set for yourself and that are likely to affect Israel's and the region's well-being for many years. But I certainly think that it is my job and my responsibility not to stray from the principles we have established. And it is my job to bring this before the Cabinet.
Q: Was there straying from the principles you had established?
A: I didn't say that. I said it was my job to bring, and it is the Cabinet's job to examine and decide. And when I bring up issues to the Cabinet, as I have done ever since I have been a member of the Cabinet, for over five years, I have never been influenced by considerations of being liked by someone or another, or being seen as acceptable or unacceptable. My approach is businesslike. That is how I think one must act; that is how I acted ... I suggest that those who are concentrating their efforts on making war on me and on occupying themselves with "resign or not resign" [instead] come together for the last required effort for the uprooting of terror from Beirut. And I should like to set them at east. This historical accomplishment will be so great that everyone will be able to share in it.