In early June, two U.S. senators (Boschwitz and Lautenberg) gained the support of 95 senators who signed a letter to Secretary of State Baker calling on him to be 'fully supportive, both in fact and in appearance, " of the Israel Peace Initiative. Mr. Arens, back from the United States, felt that Israel had strong support for its peace policies in Congress and in public opinion. In the following interview the foreign minister did not conceal that there were still various differences of views between Jerusalem and Washington, one of them the continuing American dialogue with the PLO, then raised to the level of the U.S. ambassador in Tunisia. Text:
Q: The prime minister's office has called the senators' letter in support of Israel a reply to Secretary of State Baker's address. Is Israel involved in a confrontation with the Administration, and does it need the Senate's help in fighting for its status?
A: No, we are not in a state of confrontation. Anybody familiar with the U.S. Administration knows that it includes not only the Administration in the White House, but that the Congress, Senate and House of Representatives constitute an integral part of the U.S. regime. Therefore, anyone interested in cooperation with the U.S. and in U.S. support cannot neglect the House of Representatives and the Senate, and must see to it that they give their support. Indeed, the prime minister's initiative brought us very broad support in the Senate, and apparently in the House of Representatives too, and indicates that we succeeded in improving our status considerably.
Q: This seems similar to the letter written by senators during Henry Kissinger's time, when the Administration was talking about reconsidering relations with Israel. Do you agree with this analogy?
A: You know that history does not repeat itself, and it is very difficult to find cases that are completely analogous to what is happening nowadays, so I do not think that there is room for comparison. But as I said, it is very important for us to have broad support in the Congress. In the last few months we have not had such support; there was an erosion in Israel's status, both among the American public and in the U.S. Congress, and here we have proof that the prime minister's initiative brought about a considerable improvement. I suppose that this must eventually be reflected in the positions of the Administration itself, of the president and of the secretary of state, but we will see about that.
Q: It was said that the Israel embassy in Washington was involved, at least on the technical and administrative levels, in organizing this letter. Isn't there something wrong with that?
A: There is nothing wrong with that. The Americans understand, perhaps even better than we do, that the Congress is part of the U.S. Administration, and that therefore it is legitimate, and I would say, even imperative, for our embassy to maintain very close contacts with senators and members of Congress, and to conduct an information campaign and try to convince them of the rightness of our positions. The embassy did this, and did it very well.
Q: How would you describe the state of the talks between Jerusalem and the secretary of state regarding the advancement of the political process? Could you focus on the problematic points, if there are any.
A: First of all, we all know that even allies do not always agree, and the fact is that Israel-U.S. relations are very good. But this does not mean that we agree on all points. In Secretary of State Baker's last speech, it became clear to anyone who had not understood this, that we do not agree on all points, but this does not mean that we cannot achieve cooperation and coordination. We are doing all we can to convey our stance and to convince the Americans that our positions are the right ones. We have here a certain advantage: we are there, and our future and existence are at stake.
Q: Are there any signs that the U.S. will reconsider its policy on holding contacts with the PLO, as Israel has been asking it to do?
A: We are not asking, because I do not think it appropriate that we ask. We are presenting the U.S. with the facts. And the facts are that Ambassador Pelletreau is conducting a dialogue in Tunis with a terrorist - with Yasser Abd Rabo - who is one of the leaders of the PLO faction that just a few days ago sent terrorists to try to infiltrate into northern Israel and take over one of our settlements and kill people there. This is contrary to the declared policy of the U.S. that no contacts are to be held with terrorists. I hope that they will be convinced by themselves that this is not helpful. Of course, in our opinion this cannot help advance our peace initiative because the PLO is the major element standing in the way of the advancement of peace. They are conducting a campaign of murder and terror against the Palestinian population in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. This can be seen every day in the newspapers. Therefore, anything that improves their status and gives them a feeling of recognition and legitimacy cannot help peace.
Q: Still, the senators don't even mention the PLO in their letter. They don't see eye-to-eye with you.
A: It does not say in the letter that they don't see eye-to-eye with us. The letter simply does not refer to the Middle East issue. I assume that there are many in Congress who do not approve of the talks with the PLO, but as you know, the Congress does not easily engage in a confrontation with the Administration on any issue concerning foreign policy.
Q: Boutros Ghali will arrive today. Is there a political objective that you will try to attain in talks with him?
A: Firstly, we welcome his coming here. This is not an everyday event, in spite of the fact that we would like to reach a situation in relations between ourselves and Egypt in which a visit to Israel by an Egyptian minister, or to Egypt by art Israeli minister, is a completely routine matter. As far as we know, Boutros Ghali is coming here as President Mubarak's emissary, with a message for the prime minister, and we will wait until we see the contents of this message, but of course we will take advantage of his visit in order to discuss the prime minister's peace initiative with him, and to mobilize Egyptian support for our initiative.
Q: Did the Egyptians initiate this visit?
A: That is right. But I assume that this is in the context of the relatively close relations we have been maintaining with Egypt, with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ismat Abdel Maguid and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for a number of months, regarding bilateral relations and our peace initiative.