Mr. Sharon called the war a success "unparalleled in the history of warfare" and listed in detail the many achievements of the campaign in Lebanon. He included among them the destruction of the P.L.O. presence in Lebanon and its expulsion from Beirut, the destruction of the Syrian missiles, tanks and planes, the unity of the people of Israel and the performance of the Government. In order to set the record straight, the Defense Minister again recounted in detail the events that led to the expulsion of the P.L.O. from Beirut, the role of Ambassador Habib, and the role played by the U.S., France, Italy and their marines. He also criticized the Reagan Plan and felt that Israel could better resist it now that the P.L.O. was no longer firing on Jewish settlements in Galilee. Text:
Mr. Speaker, distinguished Knesset, already at the beginning of my remarks I would like to assert here, from the Knesset rostrum, that the operation to expel the terror organizations of the P.L.O. from west Beirut has been successfully completed. They, their headquarters, commanders and personnel have been expelled and dispersed in eight different countries, some directly into special detention compounds prepared in advance in those states.
A further great and vital outcome of the "Peace for the Galilee" war is unparalleled in the history of warfare: The rising of a nation against a terrorist organization, which out of its own kingdom controlled the cruellest terror actions in Israel and the world for many years, and expelling it from the capital of its kingdom. Such a sight is rare in the history of nations and wars of liberation and freedom, and will not be soon forgotten. On the one hand, it will serve as a lesson for those who spread terror and death, and on the other, will serve as a symbol, a sign and an example for other nations who value their security, peace and the lives of their citizens.
In this area as well, renewed Israel has shown the free world many signs and wonders. I will list some of them: The catching of the criminal Adolf Eichmann as a supreme symbol of punishment for the enterprise of destruction against the Jewish people; the freeing of the Entebbe hostages as an example of non-surrender to terror; the destruction of the Iraqi reactor as a sterling example of non-acquiescence in a dangerous threat to destroy Israel; and now, the total expulsion of the Palestinian terror organizations as proof of our determination to fight it to the end, not to accept it and not compromise with it.
I will not exaggerate if I say that there is no other state in the world which can pride itself on such ability to confront (adversity) and such successes of supreme moral-universal value, as little Israel. Perhaps it is precisely because it is small and because it rose out of the ashes of pogroms and destruction, and its instinct to survive in peace and security is therefore sharper than any other nation. Perhaps because the majority of Israel's citizens well understand that the P.L.O. and its supporters made the destruction of Israel its slogan.
It would not have been possible to reach this astonishing achievement - which caused an earthquake in the region -of delivering a heavy military and political blow to the P.L.O. and its expulsion from west Beirut, without the determination of our people, without the pressure of the I.D.F., its soldiers and commanders in west Beirut to the last minute and their presence there now, without the unusual resourcefulness and sacrifice which they exhibited.
From this rostrum we salute the I.D.F. dead who gave their lives in this battle against regional and international terror, organized terror and its supporters who operated against us mercilessly for years. The sorrow of the bereaved families is our sorrow. I hope, with all of us here, that the wounded will quickly recover and return to their homes and families. Yes, there is a heavy price for the achievement of our security and peace. In every generation, as today, we ask ourselves, mothers and fathers: will our sons also go to war, will there be an end to the killing. I say: We are not condemned to live by the sword alone and forevermore, but this on one condition only: If we succeed in understanding the bases and principles of the establishment of a nation in its land. This condition includes its readiness to realize at any time the natural right to self-defense, which is a moral right. This condition includes the belief in the justice of our cause, and in our right to fight for this country with patience, with the ability to withstand a prolonged struggle. If we don't do this today, there will be no one to do it tomorrow. If we don't bear this heavy burden on our shoulders - the fight will be seven times heavier for our sons.
In every generation we must reduce the burden of dangers to our peace and security, and increase the chances and hope for those following us.
It would be impossible to describe the expulsion of the terrorists from west Beirut, like the rest of the achievements of the "Peace for Galilee" War - from the destruction of the Syrian missiles, tanks and planes - without the leadership ability and courageous decision-making of the government headed by Menachem Begin; a government which in these months successfully passed tests which few Israel governments have experienced, a government which was involved in the making of every important operational decision throughout the length of the entire war. At the same time, in contrast to our previous wars, it saw to it, as did the General Staff itself, that there would not be any friction, that there would not be tension between the political and military echelons. That is, both echelons worked and acted during the long and difficult months in full harmony, while consistently working to achieve the war aims which were defined clearly and executed completely.
We were able to reach this achievement and all of us could see the expulsion armada operating with exemplary order from the port of Beirut because the nation showed unusual maturity, as befits an ancient nation which has established its life and state anew in the Land of Israel. A nation called up, a reserve army - all bear the heavy burden of a war of defense.
There are nations which know how to take pride in achievement and be proud of it with head held high - and I don't mean to insult and criticize - even if their part in it was small. Here, Philip Habib, as I read and heard, yesterday received from our friend the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, the Freedom Medal - as the "Rescuer of Beirut and its residents." As one who negotiated for two months and more with Ambassador Philip Habib on the agreement. to expel the Palestinians from Beirut, I can send him congratulations on the receipt of the medal. You, the citizens of Israel, do not deserve the liberty medal, but the liberty monument, a special monument to your decisive role in the expulsion of the terrorists, and as a result of the saving of Beirut, its residents and Lebanon in general from the center of terrorism which ruled them without limits.
Before the attempt is made to rewrite history, it had better be asserted here and clearly, that with all our gratitude to the marines, to the French and Italian soldiers, for the direction of traffic during the expulsion operation, it would not have occurred at all without the people of Israel.
Not one diplomat or foreign statesman - and I am not talking of Israelis - had imagined a day before the "Peace for the Galilee" war and for many days after it broke out, that the terrorist P.L.O. would be expelled from Beirut. On the contrary, in the salons of the Foreign Ministries of Western Europe and even in the United States the so-called experts have raised their voices, those who will seek every way to appease and compensate the master terrorist Yasser Arafat and his henchmen. But the people of Israel decided otherwise and performed what was conceived of by many as an impossible mission - to expel the P.L.O. from Beirut, not to Tripoli or the Beka'a, but to eight different states, and thus to destroy the terrorist state which threatened us from cannon and Katyusha range.
Therefore the nation deserves a special liberty monument and every fighter a special decoration, the Cedar of Lebanon medal.
But we are not a people who has free time for monuments, medals and declarations, since the burden on our shoulders is still great in our struggle for existence in peace and security.
I will try to describe the last stages which subdued the terrorists and led them to the decision to uproot themselves from West Beirut without further battle.
Between I and 5 August the I.D.F. increased its pressures on the terrorist alignment in southwest Beirut. The airport was captured, the neighbouring Hay As-Saloum was occupied, which was a Shiite neighborhood at first and became a terrorist center. We took control of the terrorist center in Uzai, which was the focus of the naval terrorist action against Israel for years. I.D.F. forces neared the heart of the terrorist area near the municipal stadium. The I.D.F. carried out a small and predetermined movement and took the Museum in the direction of the hippodrome. The terror base in Burj al-Barajna was surrounded from three sides.
These movements created the correct impression among the terrorists that the I.D.F. was determined to isolate the terrorist neighbourhoods south of West Beirut, neighborhoods which were the sanctuary not only of the regional but also an international terrorist center.
At that time the air force was also used intensively, and the navy also operated effectively.
On I August 1982, the air force conducted 127 sorties against the terrorist areas and terrorist alignments, mainly in the area south of the city of Beirut, and also attacked their headquarters.
And indeed, following this overall action of the I.D.F., the terrorists reached the conclusion for the first time on 6 August that they will really have to leave west Beirut. But the conditions presented by them were still not acceptable.
As during most of the days of negotiation, through the good services of the United States and Ambassador Philip Habib, the terrorists continued at the same time to violate the cease-fire. Despite their desire for further discussions as a condition for their withdrawal from Beirut, and perhaps to insure the acceptance of their conditions, the terrorists continued their activity against our forces.
It was clear to us that they cannot be allowed to fire under cover of the negotiations and hit our soldiers, as it was clear to us that we must apply counter-pressure.
There was astute and exemplary use here, on our part, of integrated military and political means.
Already on I August the Cabinet took decision no. 796 which states: "A. The Prime Minister will tell Ambassador Arens to inform the United States Government that Israel is prepared for a cease-fire in Lebanon, on the explicit condition that it be an absolute and mutual cease-fire. B. If the terrorists violate the cease-fire, the I.D.F. will respond on land, sea and air."
During the days between 6 and 12 August, the cease-fire violations by the terrorists continued. The I.D.F. continued its pressures in Beirut, this times mainly by bombings and shellings of the terrorist headquarters, the Syrians and their weapons systems - until 12 August.
On 9 August the air force conducted 36 sorties; on 10 August 16 sorties were carried out; on 11 August - the air force conducted 16 additional sorties. Almost all the sorties were concentrated on the area of the terrorist camps, in which there were almost no civilians, south of Boulevard Mazra'a.
On 12 August the air force conducted 72 sorties. Which goes to show that the day of heaviest bombing was not on 12 August but on I August, in which 127 sorties were carried out.
Along with this intensive activity of the I.D.F., from I August and until 12 August, we formed and concentrated our forces around Beirut.
It is permissible to repeat here what we have declared and emphasized more than once - that we did not want to burst into west Beirut. We wanted to bring about the removal of the terrorists without needing to burst into the "city" of Beirut.
But we knew that the terrorists would come to the final conclusion to leave Beirut only if they were to believe that we were ready to go to the end, if it should become necessary - that is, to capture west Beirut.
Here I will quote the words of the pilot Ahiaz on this issue, as they were broadcast on television on 27 August 1982, a few days after he was released from captivity by the terrorists. We knew beforehand from authorized and reliable sources what Ahiaz revealed in that broadcast, at a time when the expulsion was already in progress. But the words of one who spent many days in the hands of the terrorists, and revealed extraordinary fortitude, are true and important. In answer to the question whether the terrorists believed that the I.D.F. would enter Beirut, Ahiaz, responded: "I felt at the beginning, and so I was also told, that this was a deceit. They built greatly on what was going on here in the country, especially the massive opposition in the country against entry into Beirut. They put great hopes on that."
Consequently, in view of this attitude on the part of the terrorists, it was clear that the only way to obviate the need to enter west Beirut was to make all preparations for entering Beirut, including mobilization and concentration of forces, including preparations of detailed plans and an operative timetable for the entire period.
Mobilization of the reserves proceeded according to all rules and laws, and in accordance with cabinet decisions. The I.D.F. had to be prepared for all eventualities, at all possible dates that were planned. Should a situation have been created forcing us to take this final step and to go into west Beirut, you may rest assured that we would have discussed this in a plenary Cabinet meeting. However, that complex and difficult struggle, the combined military, diplomatic and, I'd say, psychological struggle bore fruit without any need to decide on taking the step we so much wanted to avoid, i.e.: going into west Beirut.
Already during the second week of August, the terrorists - to the best of our knowledge - came to conclusions resulting from these activities. The evacuation of west Beirut did, for the terrorists, turn into a strategic question -here I am using phrases taken from the terrorists' terminology, not exactly the kind of language we are using. The exodus from west Beirut did, for the P.L.O. turn into a strategic problem: how to preserve the lives of the cadres as well as those of the leadership - especially after most of their heavy and anti-aircraft ammunition had been exhausted. No military or civilian supplies had been reaching them, as a result of the tightened Israeli siege. The terrorists defined their position as suicidal, especially since the U.S., in their opinion, cannot or is not interested (here, I am quoting terrorist sources) in exerting pressure on Israel to observe the cease-fire.
However, the terrorists are not committing suicide. All those comparisons with Stalingrad and the Warsaw Ghetto are an insult to those hallowed and heroic names when the attempt is made to apply them to the behavior of the terrorists in Beirut.
During 12-13 August, after another day's bombardment of terrorist strongholds, they accepted our conditions. The following is the picture as seen by the terrorists, after contacts with Habib in Beirut during 12 August, presented in our official report reflecting the terrorists' position on the morning of Friday, 13 August. "A. Habib handed the terrorists an ultimatum according to which they were to respond that same evening to his demand that the multi-national force was to arrive in Beirut only after at least half the terrorists had withdrawn under the supervision of the Lebanese army and without international guarantees to protect them and the refugee camps."
I should perhaps briefly explain the meaning of the phrase "protection of the refugee camps." What, in fact, had been the terrorists' condition? Their terms had been: Arrival of the multi-national force, withdrawal to their camps (a would-be "withdrawal" because that was where they already were), where the multi-national force would protect them - in other words, the creation of a buffer-zone between them and the I.D.F. - and (only) then, commencement of negotiations with the Lebanese government regarding evacuation arrangements.
On the night of 12/13 August, Philip Habib told them something quite different. That night he presented an ultimatum.
"B. Habib, in fact, went back on what he had agreed upon with the terrorists. The terrorists' position is that the multi-national force would arrive at the start of their withdrawal from Beirut." And continuing the quote: "C. Israel's aim is, in fact, to bring to naught any political solution, and to continue crushing and slaughtering the terrorists in Beirut. All the more so, since Habib had told them that the present cease-fire was (to be in force) for 48 hours only." End of quote.
We are not responsible for the terrorists' impressions as expressed in the third paragraph I have quoted. Habib apparently told them this on his own initiative, as an additional means of pressure, in view of the events of 12 August.
What is important is that, as midnight (12/13 August), the terrorists accepted the fact that they had to withdraw from Beirut unconditionally.
The expulsion of the terrorist P.L.O. from Beirut is now an accomplished fact. Israel, and the entire region, stand at the threshold of a new era. Even if the future should bring difficult struggles, it holds out greater prospects for peace and security than ever before.
As a result of our victory over terror, the capital of Lebanon and the Lebanese people, whom we hold in great esteem, have been liberated from the boot of the oppressor. For the first time in years there are prospects for a stable government to be formed in Lebanon, after it became possible to hold presidential elections, and a new, young president was elected without any disturbances. Our army is in Lebanon not as a conquering, but as a liberating army, and is being accepted as a friendly army. It is felt that the future of both nations will depend on a peace treaty and defense pacts agreed between them directly and without mediators. This does not mean that we may not be facing struggles, all of us, but the objectives are achievable, they are within reach, closer than ever before:
First of all, removal of all terrorists from Lebanon, together with the Syrian army, in the framework of the evacuation of all foreign forces from that country. If we shall insist on this, if we shall show resilience and patience as we did until now, up to the unique expulsion of the murder organizations from Beirut, we shall see also the expulsion of the terrorists and the Syrians from all of Lebanon, so as to ensure that this neighboring and friendly country will no longer serve as a launching-ground for terror against us. We are also striving for - and I believe we shall achieve - peace with Lebanon, and an open border between both countries. Peace is not a gesture from one country to another, but a defense requirement. And in any case, in order to ensure that inhabitants of northern Israel will not have to return to living in shelters, and that their children will grow up and go to school like any other child in Israel, we shall ensure a security belt and security measures of 40-50 km. in depth, which will be free from threatening artillery and other means of terror.
It must be clear even now - we have learned from our experience, and many details came to our attention in this respect precisely during the war and its aftermath - that neither UNIFIL nor a multi-national force can grant us that security. Security measures will include steps to prevent another transform of Lebanon into a center of terrorism.
So much for Lebanon - on condition that we continue to show determination, stubborness, patience, and above all, close our ranks, as befits a people fighting for its existence, security and future. Whenever we stood together, we succeeded. We achieved peace with Egypt, we changed the map of Judea and Samaria, liquidated the nuclear threat in Baghdad, and we drove the terrorist P.L.O. out of Beirut. Our people can be proud of all those achievements, but we had better not rest on our laurels. We have still a long way to go.
At present, there are those who would impose on us a plan contrary to our national interests, a plan that also contradicts agreements we signed with Egypt and the U.S. at Camp David, where we promised autonomy for the Arabs of Eretz-Israel. I have no intention of entering into subjects belonging to the realm of the Foreign Minister, who will address the house on that subject today, but one cannot refrain from drawing comparisons between what happened in Lebanon and what may happen in Judea and Samaria, should we accept even part of what is now being proposed to us. I shall devote a few words to this subject.
One might say we are now facing another mighty struggle for Eretz Israel, but under more favorable conditions. That plan did not take us by surprise. Already many months ago, we estimated that, following the withdrawal from Sinai, after the heavy price we paid for peace with Egypt, there would be those among our friends in the U.S. who would show impatience and try to introduce changes not mentioned in the Camp David Accords. The great friendship with the U.S. notwithstanding, there is sometimes there, too, a lack of patience and tolerance that anyone really living in this region, realizing its problems and carrying on his shoulders the burden and the consequences of each wrong decisions, must find hard to understand.
Ideas concerning changes in the Camp David Accords were mooted in the U.S. long ago. In my opinion, Operation "Peace for the Galilee" only served to postpone the presentation of the American plan for a few months. It was to be hoped, And would indeed have been preferable, had the plan not be launched at all, because now a new situation has been created. The terrorist P.L.O. was defeated politically and in the field, and we now could and indeed will devote ourselves with greater optimism to the search for partners for a plan leading to peaceful coexistence with the Arabs of Eretz-Israel. We were told more than once, and I was told this myself: Actually, what can be the danger to Israel from that demilitarized "small thing" to be established in Judea and Samaria? After the war in Lebanon, I think that every thinking person will understand exactly the nature of that danger. Some people like to throw around figures regarding the number of Palestinians living in Lebanon. I want to refer to one such figure, that given by U.N.R.W.A. That agency gives the number of Palestinians in Lebanon as 275,000. That is the U.N.R.W.A. figure. Usually, they don't minimize but rather enlarge figures. But let us accept it. This means that less than 300,000 Palestinians are living in Lebanon. And behold: Some 300,000 Palestinians living in Lebanon succeed in establishing an armed force, organized in units, of 25,000 men, in addition to armed militias which played some part or other in the fighting, to the extent of over 40,000 men. And we are speaking of a population of 300,000 - or less than 300,000 - Palestinians.
When one comes to deal with a problem like this, it turns out that one immediately encounters additional factors. It's not some small thing that it's always possible to deal with when something occurs. It turns out that the terrorists are operating in the midst of civilians, and when they operate in the midst of civilians, one must make an effort not to harm the civilians. In this matter, the I.D.F. made an effort in this war that no nation and no army ever made or ever will make in any war. Only the Jewish people was willing to pay the price it paid so as to avoid harming civilians or to keep that to a minimum, for which we are also sorry. But additional factors return, besides the element of living in the midst of civilian settlement. There are superpowers at work. We have seen now that Great Powers, too, intervene. There are the media. The world of today is different. Noises echo. Today, when we see west Beirut on our T.V., we see that it is whole, and we know that it's whole - west Beirut is whole, for we didn't touch the city of Beirut, except in unusual instances, for specific purposes. I think that I won't err if I say here that we did indeed hit areas, the terrorist areas, and there too without any resemblance to what was publicized - but according to checks conducted via aerial photography, we damaged or destroyed in west Beirut (that is in the city of Beirut, not in the terrorist areas) - 40 houses. 40 to 50 houses were destroyed.
And I would like to tell you: there are between 23,000 and 24,000 houses in all of west Beirut. Every house, every person is precious. But I say: Things have been presented in a way that is without foundation or meaning.
I don't want to reply to interruptions. I suggest that we stick to the serious area of the subject. This is a subject, MK Amir, which can be debated.
I simply want to emphasize that in the current situation, with the terrorists living in the midst of the civilian population; with our people being one that is fearful of harming civilians; with the war open to the media in whatever way the media with to present it - and I'm not talking about our media - and not in the way you wish to present (it), and at times not with strictly pure intentions; with the great powers in the region, when the Russians can be involved just as the Americans can be involved; when the Arab nations can give aid - and we had no intentions of getting involved with the Syrians, we told them and made it clear to them endless numbers of times that we had no intention of warring with the Syrians; we didn't even demand the Syrians' withdrawal (but we demanded the terrorists' removal to a range of 40 km from our northern border in the Bekaa region, and here Syria was involved in the war - fortunately, we were successful. And I would say: One of our greatest achievements was confining the war to Lebanon's borders, and not letting it develop into a full-scale war.
But everything we saw in Lebanon ought to set off a thousand red lights regarding the danger of what is called "the small demilitarized entity" that could arise. They say to us: How could this be, in comparison to the State of the Israel's military might? So I constantly say: Our victory over the P.L.O. is more a political victory than a military victory, because the I.D.F. is might, the I.D.F. is an army that has tremendous power. The problem is not with the I.D.F. having to face the terrorists. That's not the problem. There are so many factors that go together, and I again stress that the main achievement is a political one. It should be understood that the P.L.O., shorn of its ability to employ terror, isn't capable of attaining a single one of its aims. Its ability to attain its aims consists in its ability to employ terror and murder. Terror and murder could be used in Lebanon, but not when they are scattered in the countries where they are scattered. I'm not saying there won't be terror. We didn't give any commitment or surety to the P.L.O. that we wouldn't go on hitting it everywhere it is found, if indeed it doesn't learn its lesson.
Regrettably, the old-new plan has been submitted, and we have rejected it, and rightly so. But now we can handle it with less pressure, without the P.L.O.s pistol of terror aimed at our temple from south Lebanon. Imagine that we would have to deal with this mistaken plan with the terrorist P.L.O. firing on our settlements in the north from time to time and creating casualties throughout Israel from Beirut. Surely they then would have rushed us, saying: You see, you'll accept the American plan, and then, miracle of miracles! Terror will disappear.
So another positive by-product of the "Peace for the Galilee" War is that we can deal with the American plan without the terrorist pressure that we once knew, we will deal with it until we succeed in convincing (them) that our paths and our plans are the right ones,
We have no war with the Arabs of the Land of Israel. We must live with them in peace throughout the Land of Israel, on the coastal plain and in the Galilee, in Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley, with the aim of attaining peace on both sides of the Jordan.
We have started on the right road. Any outside interference that attempts to impose a solution could endanger the entire peace process, to which the signing of the Camp David Accords, the signing of the peace treaty with Egypt and the expulsion of the P.L.O. from Beirut contributed advancement and acceleration.
We shall do all we can to safeguard this process, and I am convinced that we shall succeed as we succeeded in our war to the finish against the terrorist P.L.O. in Lebanon.