Mr. Rabin elaborated on the three main threats to Israel's security. The first was a military threat from neighbouring Arab countries who were building their military might. The second acts of terror against Israelfrom outside its borders, mainly from Lebanon. The third - the Intifadah which began in December 1987. He said that the Government of Israel was on the "verge of formulating... an overall policy. " He called for gradual movement based on the Camp David Accords. Negotiate with Palestinian representatives elected by the Palestinians, move into a transition period and negotiate an ultimate solution. The process, a long and tortuous one, will be long and during that time the vigil of Israel will not be relaxed. Text:
I believe that your presence shows your deep involvement and care for Israel, your concern for its present and future development. Allow me, therefore, to share the way that I see the defense problems of Israel. Of course, I shall deal mainly with what now captures the headlines of the media, which might be even your preoccupation. Allow me first to say that even though formally our War of Independence ended in 1949, when we signed armistice agreements with our four neighboring Arab countries, for all practical purposes, the war of independence goes on. In the last almost 41 years, we have experienced many wars, terror activities and lately civil violence, an uprising by the Palestinians in the territories. But allow me to add that in a few days we will celebrate the tenth anniversary of the signing of the Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel, which shows that war and peace are interwoven in our situation, that experience of war should not mislead us about the possibility of achieving peace. The fact is that for ten years peace has been maintained between Egypt and Israel. Egypt was the Arab country that led the Arab world in all the wars between 1948 and 1973. Peace is not any more a dream. It can be a reality.
What are the threats that we have to face when formulating our defense policy. The first and the major threat to Israel's security and future is the military threat. The threat that is presented by the armed forces of the Arab countries that have not yet signed peace with Israel, that continue to stress that they are in a state of war, and continue to invest tremendous amounts of their own resources in building the means by which to wage war. That is to say, all the Arab countries, with the exception of Egypt. There is no extensive and intensive arms race in any region of the world like the one that exists in the Middle East. 30 to 60 billion dollars are spent by the Arab countries for maintaining their armed forces and purchasing the best of the products of conventional weapons from the Soviet Union, Europe, the United States. In the last few years, the Arab countries entered into a new dimension of military hardware. Ground-to-ground missiles can be fired at Tel Aviv from Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia without these countries moving them outside their own sovereign territory. Iraq, Syria and Libya have production plans for advanced chemical warfare means, nerve gases, and while we are sitting here large quantities are under production in all three countries, an arsenal of chemical warfare means and means of delivery are in their possession. This is the major threat and therefore 85% if not 90% of the defense budget of Israel is allotted, appropriated, in preparation to cope with this threat, hopefully, to deter the temptation to initiate a war against Israel, and if war be forced on us, to win it quickly and decisively.
The second level of threat are the acts of terror from outside Israel, mainly from Lebanon. We are six and a half years after the war in Lebanon and we have not succeeded in eliminating terrorism from Lebanon. The terror in Lebanon is growing. In addition to the Palestinian terror groups, we see there the growth of Shiite terror organizations, like Amal, like Hizballah, that did not exist before 1982. The intensity of terror activities from Lebanon today is not less, possibly even higher, than before 1982. The Government of Israel in 1985 formulated a policy that allows us to cope with the terror from Lebanon without the illusion that we can eliminate it by military means only. Since the IDF redeployed its forces, since we evacuated the 15,000 Israeli soldiers, who were deployed in Lebanon, we succeeded in preventing, regardless of the efforts of the terror groups, any Israeli civilian, Jew or non-Jew, from being assassinated or killed as a result of terror activities from Lebanon. Since June 1985, 48 Israeli soldiers have fallen in their mission to maintain peace in the Galilee, without trying to be the policemen of Lebanon. A painful price, but much less then the three years that preceded June 1985. Hundreds and thousands of Israeli soldiers, day and night, patrolling, ambushing, carrying out offensive activities to maintain peace for the Galilee. Thanks to their efforts, the settlements and the settlers along the Lebanese border can maintain the "normal" way of life of a frontier settlement.
And the third threat are the latest acts of violence against Israel which were initiated on the 9th of December 1987. It was something new, different from what we had experienced in the first 40 years or almost 40 years of Israel's sovereignty. I refer to the uprising of the Palestinians in the territories. We have to define what is the purpose, the nature, the mode of operation, of this kind of phenomenon. Only once we have understood it, will we be able to find the policy by which to cope with it, and how to continue to cope with it. Allow me to say at the very beginning, that of the one and a half million Palestinians in the territories, not one, to the best of my knowledge, would like to be an Israeli or would like to live under Israeli control. I did not find any lover of Zion among them. Allow me to add that whenever the Arab-Israeli conflict focuses, not on the relationship between the Arab countries and Israel, but on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and that has happened only in the last six years, we are in a more difficult situation. For thirty-four years, between, 1948 and 1982, Israel's strategy succeeded in maintaining the confrontation and its solution on the plane of the relationship between the Arab countries and Israel. In 1982, on our initiative, and in 1987 on their initiative, the whole focus of attention of the world was shifted from the Arab-Israeli, to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Without doubt, it has become more complicated for us to cope, and sometimes to explain.
The nature of the confrontation is entirely different from what we have experienced. In the past we had to face the armed forces of the Arab countries and the terrorist groups of the PLO. This time the Palestinians from the territories, out of despair and frustration at the Arab world, the international community, Israel, burst upon the scene with an entirely different kind of violence. The use of standard arms like pistols, Kalachnikovs, hand grenades, standard explosive charges is minimal. They use means that are in ample supply to whomever would like to use them: stones, gasoline bombs, knives, tires that can be set on fire. The essence is to find means by which violence can be perpetrated on a broad popular scale, in addition to passive means. No need for the typical organization of terror groups, the secrecy, the chain of command, the logistic problem of supplying the terrorist with arms. Here, we face a popular movement, motivated from within, even though it is guided generally by terror groups from the outside, as well as from within. There is no need for any clear-cut chain of command. Some people thought, if we put 5,000, 10,000 activists in jail, in military installations, it will end the problem. It is not so. 380 Palestinians have been killed, 22 by Palestinians themselves. About 8,000 have been wounded. 23,000 have been arrested or detained. Today, there are over 6,300 held in military installations, and 4,000 terrorists in the regular prison system. We face a popular movement using simple means, where there is no need for an elaborate system.
This is the problem. Basically, the goals of those who lead the Palestinian uprising are no different than the goals of the armed forces of the Arab countries in all the wars against us. They are no different from the goals of the PLO terrorist groups in the past. They want at least to get rid of Israel in Judea, Samaria, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, and have no Israeli presence there. This is the least of their goals. The goal is the same as always; the means by which to achieve it are entirely different. I have no doubt that the fact that they are using this method, carried out by civilians, including women and children, who are governed by us, who live, it is true, under a military government, because, as you know, the territories are not part of Israel and are therefore under military government, I have no doubt that it created new problems for us. The IDF and the other agencies have never experienced this kind of confrontation between uniformed personnel and civilians, including women and children.
The law determines the limits of what we can do and what is allowed. The Israeli Government and I, as Minister of Defense, and the armed forces are not above the law, but subject to our laws. We are faced with two alternatives as to how to cope with this new phenomenon. The first is very simple, and very unpleasant. When you see the television, when you read the papers, when you hear the radio, bear in mind just how unpleasant it is for the soldiers and the border policemen who have to carry out this job, and for those who give them the orders, since it is very unpleasant for uniformed personnel to confront kids throwing stones and women demonstrators.
"Let's give in, let's vacate the centers of population, part of the centers of population in the territories, part of the territories, all the territories." I believe and I am convinced that giving in to violence will serve as an invitation, as an incentive, for more violence, more terror, will increase the threat of war. Israel should by no means give in to violence. Here I am by no means speaking as someone aspiring to have the whole Land of Israel under Israeli sovereignty. I am more than ready to make territorial compromises for peace in political negotiations. But giving in to violence goes against all that I believe in. The second option, therefore, is to confront the violence, the uprising, with whatever legal means the Government empowers in the territories. Here too, there are two options: one is suppression, to assume that force alone will bring a quick end to the violence. I believe that within the limits of our laws, and I stress, within the limits of our laws, we must follow the moral norms that we would like to see us, as a people and as military force, adhering to. It is a complicated issue that might take longer than we want. But I believe that there must be another option, an overall comprehensive policy as to how to cope with the problem because, allow me to say, we have learned the hard way, that there was no war that ends all wars, that there was no war or military operation that ends or uproots terrorism.
There is a need for an overall policy that stands on two feet, a political one and a military one. Any policy that stands on one foot has been shown as not leading to a solution, but at best, to gaining time. There must be a correlation, an integration of the two main means: the political and the military. I believe that the backbone of the motivation of the people of Israel to fight their wars, their struggles, is based on the assumption that we offer our hand in peace. But not at any price, not without conditions ensuring not only peace, but security for Israel. And whenever our hand offered in peace is rejected, we are ready for everything. This was, this is my belief It is the strength of the people's army, because in Israel, the army is the people, and the people is the army.
Therefore, what we say to the Palestinians in the territories: "We offer our hand, you want a solution - only around the negotiation table. You want to continue violence? You delude yourself or you are being deluded by others. The true story: Throwing stones and gasoline bombs will make us run? Forget it. Well never run from throwing stones, gasoline bombs or whatever means of violence that you use against us. "
I believe that the Government of Israel is on the verge of formulating this kind of an overall policy. Allow me to add, I have always believed, and I continue to believe, that when it comes to war and peace, there are two sides of the coin of our life in Israel.' National consensus or a broad consensus is essential. Any war that a divided country fights will lead nowhere. And for peace we also need a wide national consensus. I believe that the meaning of national consensus today is based on the guidelines of the present Government of Israel. In these guidelines there are things that we oppose and that we are for. What we oppose are four main items: the creation of an independent Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan. Therefore, second, no negotiations with the PLO of Tunisia. Three, under no circumstances, to withdraw to the pre-Six-Day War lines. It was mentioned that I served as the Chief-of-Staff of the Armed Forces of Israel during that war. At the end of that war, I made a moral commitment: never, never to allow any future Chief-of-Staff of the Armed Forces of Israel to be put in a position of defending Israel from the pre-Six-Day War lines. And that remains my intention. And the fourth point: the redivision of Jerusalem is unthinkable. Jerusalem will remain united under Israels sovereignty, as its capital.
But there are positive elements for moving ahead towards peace. With whom? I wish, we could do it in accordance with the Camp David Accords with Egypt. This opportunity ended in the early 1980's. We hoped that we could do it with Jordan, but this hope faded in July 1988. Let's face reality: without a Palestinian partner, there will be no move towards peace. Within the guidelines of the present Government of Israel, there is a recognition of the need to encourage Palestinian representatives from the territories to participate in the peace process. I believe that today, more than in the past, they lead in the struggle for the Palestinian case more than anybody else. They are the largest sub-entity of the Palestinians. They are in confrontation with us. They should be our partners for peace. Second, there can be no drastic move from war to peace. Whoever tries that will bring a stalemate or an explosion.
Therefore, we have to move gradually, in line with the principles of the Camp David Accords. That is to say: to negotiate with the political representation of the Palestinians from the territories, preferably those elected by themselves from among themselves; to negotiate a transition period; to create a timetable in accordance with the Camp David Accords, for arriving at the ultimate solution. I believe this should be the policy of Israel. In offering this, we have to make sure that there will be no illusion on their part that through the continuation of the use of violence they will achieve their goals. At present, I believe that we have reached the point where what used to be the trademark of the uprising in the territories, the large violent demonstrations, are over. Two jeeps, sometimes one jeep, with three Israeli soldiers can disperse any demonstration. Second, I believe they have realized that they cannot bring about civil disobedience: tearing to pieces identity cards, not paying taxes, not being dependent on licensing, for whatever needs licensing. Our main problem today is stone-throwing. 85% of the violent activities is stone-throwing. 60% of the stone-throwing incidents are carried out by children up to the age of 12. We have returned, unfortunately, to the stone age. This is the problem, and I came just two hours ago from Gaza where I met soldiers, reservists, national servicemen who are mainly occupied in running about the streets of Gaza, in the alleys of the refugee camps, after stone-throwers. I am glad that the majority of the Israeli soldiers, even though sometimes frustrated by this kind of job, respond as one of them did today. "We are not soldiers here, at best, we are policemen". Now, very few of them would open fire with live ammunition on kids that throw stones. Many of the reservists said to me: "You know, when we catch a kid," and in accordance with the instructions they are supposed to transfer him to the Civil Administration, then the parents are called, and they have to pay a sum of money as a bond that the kid will not do it again. Many of them said to me: "Look, we slapped them once or twice on their faces and we sent them away. They remind us of our own kids." This is the problem, the problem as it is interpreted into the reality of most of the activities of our soldiers in the territories. Do you think that they like it? Ninety to one hundred percent, when they are asked where they want to serve, along the Lebanese border or in Hebron or Gaza, would say in Lebanon. And allow me to remind you that more Israeli soldiers were killed in military activities since the 9th of December 1987 along the Lebanese border than the total number of Israeli civilians and soldiers that were killed as a result of the uprising in the territories. Regardless of that, they prefer to go there. When you ask them why, they answer: "There we are soldiers, and here, we are not,"
But, you must bear in mind, that the limitations on our forces are not political; they are acting only within the law, the law as it was legislated by our legislative body, the Knesset. And I did not hear any voice, any reasonable voice, calling for a basic change that will make Israel's laws similar to those of an Arab country. I am not aware of any member of the Cabinet that has proposed any change of the laws. I am not aware of any party which is part of the coalition that has made such proposals in our legislative body. The criticism leveled against Israel is against what we are doing now, which is within the limitations of our laws. I believe that the people of Israel, at least in the way I see it in their military service, the youngsters, the reservists, regardless of their political opinions, are performing magnificently. I am not aware of any arm of the forces of the West or the democracies that would stand the provocation, the acts of violence in the way the majority of our soldiers do. I am proud of them. I am really proud of them. If there are here and there some exceptions, they represent a fraction of a percentage of the number of soldiers that have served in the territories, and the total number that have experienced the service is over 100,000 soldiers. They understand their job. Most of them do not like it. But they really do it with all their heart and capability, because they deeply understand the basic principle: not giving in to violence.
I hear voices from the United States, calling on Israel to relax the measures. I can assure you as the Minister of Defense, in the name of the Government of Israel, that when there is a reduction of violence, there will be a reduction of forces, a reduction of measures that we are using. Do you believe that I am in love with the detention camps that the military forces had to establish. We would love to see the moment when we will have to dismantle them. But it will be done only when tranquility prevails.
The mission of the armed forces is a twofold one. To operate within the limits of the law to achieve tranquility by a reduction of violence. And second, to maintain the Civil Administration, the local government of the Palestinians, to serve them for their own welfare. We are the government that is responsible for them too. It's a complicated mission. It has to be done with the feeling that they are rejecting our hand for peace. Looking forward to the future, I believe that we - and I hope that this will be done after the visit of the Prime Minister in Washington - we will have a policy of offering, in the name of the Government as a whole, a reasonable political solution to the problem. Not only to suppress it, but to solve it. Second, to continue to use all the measures within the limits of the law to suppress the violence. And three, to achieve coordination with the United States, which I believe is possible, in order to deliver the message to the Palestinians in the territories, the Arab world, the international community, that Mr. Arafat will not achieve any practical political gains; that the road to the solution goes via the Palestinians in the territories and not via Tunisia... I have always believed, and I was born in this city over 67 years ago, all through my life, that we have to blend vision and reality. The way I understand the essence of Judaism "not waiting for the end," is not an excuse not to do what can be done, but to understand that there are no shortcuts. The Messiah will come, not when we decide, but when Somebody Else who is sitting above will decide. That the "open sesame" solution to any problem leads to false Messiahs. At the same time, not to listen to defeatists who that are ready to give in to any threat, to any violence against us. Going along the middle road towards the vision of the return to Zionism, to establish Israel as a viable Jewish state, living in peace and security, is not a mission that can be achieved just like that. It is a historic process that has to be measured proportionately to the length of Jewish history. Only those who have the faith, the deep belief, the endurance, that are ready to make sacrifices, to achieve it, will reach their goal.
It is not a mission for one generation. It is a prolonged process. And we have achieved a lot. We have achieved a lot. And when we look towards the future, we can look with strength, and a confidence that we have never had in the past. Therefore, don't listen to the defeatists, to those who try to spread fear and anarchy. We have had periods of much greater difficulties for the State of Israel.
Above all, allow me to end be asking you one thing. I remember quite vividly how after the Six-Day War, every member of the Jewish community that I met as the Chief-of-Staff, or later as Ambassador to Washington, said to me, that this war made us ten feet tall. I remember as Prime Minister of Israel, after the Entebbe rescue mission, how everybody identified themselves with Israel. For there are today, as there always have been, difficult periods for Israel. I remember the War of Attrition, I remember the war and our stay in Lebanon, and today is another such period. During my term as ambassador, I learned a saying in the United States: "a friend in need is a friend indeed." I hope that your presence here, coming over, regardless of whatever opinion you have on certain acts or certain positions, of the Israeli Government, will not loosen our partnership. From here, I am going to meet the family of Avi Sasportas, who on the 16tb of February disappeared while waiting for a hitch-hike to go home. Till now, we do not know anything of his whereabouts. I met the family, the mother, the father, who came from North Africa. They asked to see me. And allow me to say it was a unique, moving experience. The worry, the care, the nervousness that the family expressed to me, about their son. They said, "we came to thank you, and through you, the armed forces of Israel, and the volunteering spirit when thousands of Israelis came of their own free will to participate in the search." And the mother said, "whenever we are in trouble, we sense that we are united." Believe me, it is very difficult for me to meet them today, because, as the Minister of Defense, I am responsible for the soldiers, for all their whereabouts. He was not the first one - since 1980, nine Israeli soldiers either were assassinated or disappeared within Israel, waiting for some transportation to take them. And therefore, you must bear in mind what kind of responsibility the officers, the commanders of the IDF, the police, I as the Minister of Defense, the members of the Government of Israel, carry on their shoulders when it comes to explaining to the parents that lose their sons, to the brothers that lose their brothers, to the youngsters that lose their parents. We are still in a struggle and at war. Many people who live abroad do not realize that we face it daily. Bear it in mind when you try to think, to offer what Israel should do. Thank you.