In Luxembourg for talks with the heads of the European Economic Community, Mr. Shamir had to deal with protecting Israeli agricultural exports to Europe against objections presented by Greece and Italy. Interviewed there on the UN address by the prime minister, he said that he was not aware of secret meetings between Mr. Peres and King Hussein. He also thought that the peace plan presented by Mr. Peres was already rejected by the Arab side. The foreign minister also stated that he would have not stressed the aspect of international conference and would have stuck to the formula of direct talks. Text:
Q: You are now in Luxembourg for talks on Israel's future relations with the EEC. Do you have any news for us on that front?
A: There is a certain flexibility. The decisions began to be taken yesterday; they are tending in our favor. But they did not manage to sum up or conclude, and the EEC Council decided to convene the day after tomorrow and on Saturday, at which time the matter relating to us will be concluded. According to everything I have heard, the summation will be positive from our point of view - meaning that we will receive guarantees that will ensure the continuation of our agricultural exports to Europe. This was not an easy mission, because Italy and Greece objected to what they maintained were the advantages that would be accruing to us. But because the other eight EEC members stood firmly on our side, and following several lobbying efforts on our part, I would think that we will more or less get what we want.
Q: If you were prime minister, would you have delivered a speech like that of Shimon Peres to the U.N.?
A: I assume that in that event there would have been a not inconsiderable difference in the style and the formulation of the speech. Basically - and I already said this in my own speech before the U.N. - we favor direct negotiations with Jordan without preconditions. I would not have stressed the various possibilities of an international conference or an international forum, because Israel's position is in fact resolute: We oppose an international conference on the Middle East such as the Arabs demand and desire. The various hints and remarks of the prime minister regarding some sort of international forum are not in fact operative proposals and, as far as I understand, do not aim at the holding of an international conference which is liable to endanger Israel's interests. But we must examine the content carefully, we must speak with the prime minister regarding the intention. At all events, if the intention is actually that from the operative standpoint all that is involved is direct negotiations with Jordan - and all the rest, the forum, and so on - were more to create an impression, or to create an atmosphere to the effect that we are also considering other requests, but does not refer in the least to acceptance of the idea of an international conference that will discuss and decide on our affairs: Then the differences [between myself and the prime minister] could refer to formulation, -style and so forth.
Q: Before leaving for Europe, you said you were being kept informed about the prime minister's secret meeting and their content. Given this, could you assess whether Jordan might respond to Mr. Peres's U.N. proposals?
A: I want to correct you. I said I have to know about the actual holding of unpublicized meetings. I do not know their content in advance or in full. Today, too, I cannot know any better than do newspaper readers as of this moment -since I am abroad - how the Jordanians, and the Arab side in general, will respond. Because this is now the main question, at least on this topic. As far as I have heard, via the European media, the Arabs reject these proposals totally - and if this is so, I don't think there is place or justification at this time for any kind of quarrels or disputes amongst ourselves.
Q: There are some senior Likud figures - Levy, Sharon, Modai - who unlike you are concerned about the Peres speech, and as a result the Alignment is again demanding Sharon's dismissal from the cabinet. What will you reply to this renewed Alignment demand?
A: I have no exact knowledge of the content or the style of the remarks made in Israel in reaction to the prime minister's speech. But I repeat that I see no justification for a government crisis. A government crisis can be accounted for only on the basis of deep differences which block a concrete, operative government decision regarding a step of importance to the state. Only such a development can justify a crisis, and not this or that comment.