In a major elaboration of the direction of Israels foreign policy following the Hebron Protocol, Mr. Bentsur spoke of a new "political super highway" where there are a number of tracks. He mentioned the Israel-Palestinian track, an Israel-Syrian one, an Israel-neighboring Arab states track and a new track, that of projecting Israel as it is to world leaders and public opinion. He felt the Hebron Accord was a new foundation for the continuing dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians. He also stressed the importance of people-to-people diplomacy and contacts in addition to political and diplomatic moves. Text:
Dear Friends,
We stand here this evening less than two weeks after the signing of the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians on the Israeli redeployment in Hebron. The seven months of intensive and exhaustive negotiations which it took to complete these agreements also produced something more an agreed outline as to the continuation of the peace process.
These agreements should therefore not be seen as just another stage in the implementation of the Interim Agreement signed between the sides in Washington in September 1995. Nor does their importance derive from the fact that they were signed by the newly-elected government in Israel or from the broad political and public support they received.
The true importance of these agreements lies in the foundations they lay for the continuing dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians. The long negotiations leading to the agreements have produced a dynamic of dialogue and a negotiating format. A clear outline was also established regarding the implementation of the various remaining provisions of the agreements (further redeployment, safe passage, prisoner releases, activation of the air and sea ports in Gaza, and amendment of the Palestinian Covenant) as well as agreement regarding the resumption of the permanent status talks (begun officially in May 1996).
In these negotiations, the parties learned that if progress is to be possible, no side must feel the loser. As Minister of Foreign Affairs Levy has often stated, in peace there are only victors. We are dealing with in attempt to create a reality in which each side can realize enough of its objectives to be able to live with the agreements.
If I may turn to the Israeli perspective, the agreements just signed give expression to a number of the fundamental guiding principles of Israels foreign policy since the establishment of the state:
direct negotiations between the sides to the conflict;
renunciation of outside pressures, ultimatums and threats;
renunciation of violence and terror;
granting emphasis to security (Peace is a goal designed to safeguard life and well-being. Peace can not exist without security.);
the principle of reciprocity and commitment to fulfilling agreements.
Friends,
We have reached agreement regarding the redeployment in Hebron, but we still have a long way ahead of us. Many real and difficult challenges await us. We will need much patience, tolerance, negotiating skills and creativity to overcome the obstacles between us and the Palestinians. It is our sincere hope that the mutual goodwill established in the long negotiations over the redeployment in Hebron, and the willingness to seek to understand each others goals and limitations, together provide a basis for optimism for the future.
The search for peace has always been the essence of Israels diplomacy, not only since the establishment of the state, but even in the days of the yishuv. The signing of a peace accord, important as it may be, is, however, not the end of the search, but a preliminary step in our effort to shape a Middle East of peace.
If until now we have been seeking contractual peace agreements with our neighbors and in this regard we still have negotiations to conduct with the Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians in the case of Egypt, Jordan and the states of the Maghreb and the Gulf our objective is to instill in our contractual agreements substance and vitality.
The significance of peace within Israels strategic view is not limited solely to the existence of the contract, rather it lies in the nature and character of the relations established. We often refer mistakenly to normalization as a separate concept or distinct goal. In fact, normalization is simply the embodiment of peace. As such it must be nurtured step by step, with full awareness of the obstacles presented by the circumstances that exist in our region.
Until recently there had been a tendency recently to believe that we had already achieved the final goals of the peace process, that we were approaching a new reality different to the one we had known before, that we were at the beginning of a new era of idyllic regional cooperation and new forms of inter-state relations.
I dare not use the word illusion or mirage, but some of the events of recent months, and the immediate reaction to the democratic choice of the Israeli people, testify to the fragility of change in our region and the need to proceed gradually and with care, while remaining focused upon the achievement of objectives. Herein lies in essence the work of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Our work today, if I may borrow a popular phrase of the day, is carried out on a "political super-highway" which contains different lanes or tracks of activity one track dedicated to negotiations aimed at achieving peace agreements with our neighbors; a second track dedicated to injecting substance into the relations between the countries of the region, with the aim of nurturing true peace; a third lane, which addresses our bilateral and economic relations with the international community; and a fourth track, one which, in light of the lessons of recent months, is of ever greater importance intensified efforts to communicate with world leaders, policy makers and opinion leaders to create that very atmosphere which will preserve our diplomatic breathing space and allow Israel to conduct negotiations free from external pressures, threats and ultimatums.
Regarding the first track, the permanent status talks are to resume within two months, as agreed between the sides. The government of Israel will pursue these talks with genuine determination to reach agreement. Indeed, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been working for many months already addressing the issues involved and developing strategies and options for the negotiations.
We also regard the resumption of negotiations with Syria as a central component of this track of the "super-highway." The government of Israel, from the day it took office, has sought tirelessly to resume these negotiations. The government has used two channels: one conveying messages to the Syrian leadership through the good offices of our friends with the goal of finding the formula which will make it possible to continue the talks begun at Madrid. The second channel involves reviewing the history of the negotiations thus far, with a view to identifying possible avenues for achieving the necessary understandings.
More than once since the accession of this government, and most recently last week before the diplomatic corps, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has stressed the centrality of Syria to the efforts to achieve peace in the region. We are ready to resume the negotiations with Syria at any time and at any place, and, if I may add, at any level. As the Minister has said, Israel has no desire to alienate or isolate Syria. Rather we wish her to be included that she would include herself in the circle of peace.
Israel is acting responsibly to advance the possibility of peace with Syria. We are trying to create an atmosphere of dialogue and negotiation, not one of threats and military escalation as we witnessed some months ago. Yet, if we are to believe the press reports, Syria is demanding as a precondition to the resumption of the talks that Israel commit itself to a complete withdrawal from the Golan Heights. It is clear that the venue for clarifying positions and reaching understandings is the negotiating table. It is at the negotiating table that Syria can assess at first hand Israels positions and intentions. Is there any better or more logical way than to meet and discuss the issues in dispute? We are confident that through sitting down together the two parties can find a way to proceed towards peace.
We believe that the talks with Syria should continue. The basis for their resumption could be the Madrid principles and the letters of invitation to the Madrid Conference. I was at Minister Levys side during the preparations for that conference, and I know how much time and effort was invested in bridging the gaps and finding formulas capable of launching the peace talks. He who seeks a way forward will find in these principles answers to the issues being raised today.
I would now like to refer to the second track mentioned earlier the efforts to inject substance and viability into our relations with our Arab neighbors. I have no illusions. This will not be a rapid process, but rather a gradual one of building cooperative frameworks, and creating understanding and coexistence. The first story of this edifice involves economic cooperation, the establishment of the regional bank and other regional economic institutions, the interconnection of the countries electricity grids, and the joint development of infrastructure and joint ventures. We have been witness to numerous encouraging initiatives in this regard with Egypt, Jordan and countries in the Persian Gulf. The private sector has a crucial role to play in enhancing this cooperation. The Cairo Conference held in November displayed for all the importance of the economic aspects of this process. Economic cooperation creates a joint interest and mutual will to advance peace in order to achieve prosperity and well-being for all.
The second story of normalization involves the development of frameworks for security cooperation and coordination in risk reduction and prevention of military conflict. The third and top floor of the edifice of normalization is the strengthening of understanding between the peoples, their cultures, and religions.
It is in this context that I would like to refer to the multilateral track of the Madrid process. Israel attaches great importance to the renewal of the work of the multilateral working groups. Their work has been delayed for too long. We are currently seeking, together with the co-sponsors and regional parties, to rejuvenate this track, through convening the multilateral steering committee, a step to be followed immediately thereafter by the resumption of the work of the five working groups. There have been important advances in these groups, progress which warrants that we continue to build.
At this juncture I would like to address a few words to an important project of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which has not received due recognition among either the Israeli or Palestinian public. I am referring to the People-to-People program. The goal of this program is to inspire understanding and to create forums for dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians from different echelons of life. Among the initiatives being undertaken within this framework in these very days are teenage workshops, a conference of religious figures, and an examination of the feasibility of establishing a hospital specifically built to serve Israelis and Palestinians. I would also mention in this context the bilingual childrens magazine entitled "Windows" and the mutual exchange of books between Israeli and Palestinian libraries. This is just a cursory list. There are in fact over one hundred and twenty more such initiatives being studied at this time. These may be humble beginnings, but ones which, I am convinced, will lead eventually to the coexistence and dialogue we all seek.
Important developments are also taking place between Israel and other countries of the region, beyond the level of official relations, through the exchange of knowledge and experience. Such is the cooperation that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Center for International Cooperation (MASHAV) is conducting with the Palestinians. In the past year more than three hundred Palestinians have undergone training in courses in Israel, and we expect to double this number in 1997. Among these courses one can find workshops in agriculture, crop development, irrigation and soil management, sewage treatment, public health, community services and community development and management.
Similar cooperation programs exist with Egypt and Jordan. Some of these programs are bilateral, others are trilateral in nature, involving interested third parties from Europe and elsewhere. Modest as they may seem, I regard these activities not only as a manifestation of peace but as vehicles for establishing support for peace in different strata of society.
As we look towards the forthcoming negotiations, we must first establish understandings within the region, perhaps together with the co-sponsors and other countries, regarding the code according to which the negotiations will be conducted. We cannot function under conditions where pressure, threats or violence will be used to influence or to try to determine the results of the negotiations. The understandings on such a code of conduct would include, among other things, understandings regarding the nature of negotiations, the role of international actors, the internationalization of negotiations and the disavowal of using the existing and burgeoning relations between the parties as pawns in the negotiating process. Our bilateral ties with the Arab world, the future of the multilateral activity, and economic cooperation all of these should continue to develop and not be placed in constant doubt and uncertainty.
The events of September 1996, the violence, the intolerable loss of life and the threat to withhold normalization undermined the Israeli publics confidence in peace and its future. This support is vital if the leadership of all parties are to be able to negotiate in an atmosphere conducive to peace. To ensure this, leaders must understand not only the possible consequences of violence, but to act responsibly to prevent the recurrence of such violence. It is our hope that when the negotiations resume, and even if they encounter difficulties and seeming crises, that the atmosphere of dialogue, negating in advance threats of intifada or terror, will prevail. The meaning of peace, its very essence, is that it is irreversible. This is our expectation. He who threatens with terror or withholding peaceful relations is calling into question the very path of peace and undermining the achievements already made.
Many doubts, criticism and expressions of no-confidence have accompanied this government and its leadership from its very beginning. We have been forced to engage in a public relations battle in an attempt to share with the international community and with our neighbors our commitment to peace and the sincerity of the government in its actions.
I accompanied the Minister of Foreign Affairs on his various visits to Cairo and Amman. In his meetings with the Egyptian and Jordanian leadership the Minister reiterated Israels commitment to peace. I know that at the time many were skeptical and doubted our intentions. However, the agreement on Hebron belies these doubts. This agreement was not easy for the government, if we recall the positions expressed by its members before they took power. One must appreciate this governments commitment to the ongoing peace process in this light. In this spirit of confidence, the international community and our close neighbors should accompany our efforts to advance peace.
As part of my responsibilities as Director-General I see different reports from around the world regarding press coverage of the Middle East and Israel from Washington to Peoria, from Tashkent to Wellington and I can tell you that it has not been a pleasant experience to see the unbalanced, unfounded criticism to which we have been subjected. Some compensation or relief lies in the drastic change which took place a month ago even before the signing of agreements as the world came to recognize Israels unwavering support for peace. We will proceed in our efforts to promote peace while making every effort to bring our truth, our beliefs, to the attention of the entire world. The international media may only be doing what it sees as its job, but it is a source of regret for us to remember how different governments around the world preferred to pass judgment on Israel, not through bilateral channels, not through diplomatic dialogue, but in a one-sided manner. We of course are attuned to the international community, and we seek further cooperation, but it is time for fairness, responsibility and balance.
The Madrid Conference was opened in what was called at the time a window of opportunity, following the changes in the international balance of power and developments in the Middle East after the Gulf War. Now we find ourselves once again at an opportune moment which must be seized. In Israel there is a government which believes in peace and aims to enhance it while maintaining the countrys and its citizens security. We face many challenges, of which I spoke earlier the resumption of negotiations with Syria and Lebanon, the permanent status negotiations with the Palestinians. All these must be addressed in an atmosphere of peace-building, including through the resumption of the multilateral talks which are an integral part of the Madrid process.
We wait for the future with sober eyes, and with a prayer in our heart that we will have the ability to reach understandings with our neighbors in a spirit of dialogue, goodwill and genuine desire for peace. The road is full of mines and obstacles. Overcoming these is the real test of the desire for peace and the mission to which we all are dedicated.