Briefing by
Cabinet Secretary Mr. Gideon Saar
National Media Center, Jerusalem,
April 9, 2002
Mr. Gideon Saar: As you know, our forces withdrew from two
Palestinian cities, Tulkarm and Kalkiliya. We announced publicly and
also through diplomatic channels that we will withdraw in every place
where our operations have been completed. Our aim is to do everything
we can to conclude this operation as quickly as possible. We do not
have any intention to remain in Palestinian areas. Our aim is to
uproot terrorism, and to return to a path of dialogue, if there is a
willingness on the other side to end this conflict through peaceful
means.
The reason for the operation is that during the last seven years our
security, as a result of the agreements, was in a way connected to
the Palestinian actions. The situation became impossible after
terrible terror attacks.
This strategy of terror was led by the Palestinian Authority. As you
know, some members of their security forces were involved directly in
these terrorist attacks. The [PA members have also been involved in]
the financing of terrorist organizations, such as the [Fatah] Tanzim.
There has also been incitement, and perhaps the incitement with the
greatest impact was carried out by the Palestinian Authority Chairman
himself.
So we reached the point where we had to take the issue of security
into our own hands, and this can be seen during the last ten days of
the operation - we have not seen any terrorist attacks in Israel. Of
course, we have taken a risk with the withdrawal from Tulkarm and
Kalkilya, since the Palestinian Authority has not shown any
willingness to impose its control and to prevent terrorist attacks,
so in that sense it is a complicated situation. I believe that the
international community should be aware of these aspects.
Q: You said that the IDF is conducting the operation now as fast as
it can. By speeding up the operation, is the IDF not running the risk
of having more Israeli casualties by speeding it up.
Secondly, in the Knesset yesterday, Prime Minister Sharon spoke about
withdrawing to security zones; buffer zones. Can you explain or give
somehow a little more details about these buffer zones or security
zones, what they entail there?
Saar: First of all, there are places where we must act slower - we
have here two important things. First, we must avoid civilian
casualties, for example like in Jenin. But the terrorist took over
places with citizens there, and not only there. The operations take
time when we want to conduct them carefully, and this time is also
necessary in order to minimize the risk to our forces.
When we say we want to finish it, or to conclude it as quickly as
we
can, this is our aim. We can't do it everywhere and under any
conditions.
We are aware of the US interest and the American desire as presented
by President Bush himself and other senior officials from this US
Administration, and of course we take it into account. At the same
time, we have vital national interests: we do what we have to do, and
no one else can do it, in order to uproot the terror
infrastructure.
We have had achievements during this operation, including the
location of arms and ammunition caches, and we will also bring
terrorists to justice - terrorists who have been involved in the most
severe attacks in Israel.
About the security areas, I cannot give you an exact map, of course,
but what we will try to do is to redeploy our forces in such a way
that it will minimize the risk of renewed terror attacks of the
terror organizations inside Israel. In places from which we have
already withdrawn, we can redeploy our forces in such a way that
risks are minimized. This is the basic principle.
Q: Can you apply the general thing now to Bethlehem? Can you explain
what is going on there?
Saar: I think it is a very serious issue there. Islamic terrorists
invaded the Church of Nativity and took hostages. I think this is the
serious aspect of this issue, because they are cynically taking
advantage of the holiness of the place, and then because of the
sensitivity of a religious place, they think they can escape justice.
I can tell you that we do not intend to let those terrorists escape
from justice.
Q: There is information of Israeli casualties in Jenin, can you tell
us what happened there?
A: No, I cannot. Right now that is the reply to this question.
Q: There are Israeli soldiers being kidnapped in Jenin?
A: As I already said, I can't comment on this issue right now.
Q. Shimon Peres said that it is like a massacre in Jenin, and
what is happening in Jenin?
A: First of all, I didn't see Mr. Peres and I sit with him every day.
We have had numerous discussions; I don't believe he said that. I
believe it is incorrect.
And I can tell you, if you could only hear the Palestinian media and
the way they are talking about how they fight in Jenin refugee camp,
then you can be sure there is no massacre [in Jenin]. There is a
fight with terrorists to cover some of the sites there in the refugee
camp. Our forces called on them to surrender; some of them did
surrender, and the fighting is going on between the terrorists and
our forces.
Progress was slower during the last few days in order to avoid
casualties and to avoid casualties among the civilian population
there. Because you should know that in certain places they took over
places where there is a civilian population.
Aryeh Mekel (reading from a statement from Foreign Minister Shimon
Peres read): Foreign Minister Shimon Peres expressed his concern that
Palestinian propaganda is liable to accuse Israel of carrying out a
massacre in Jenin rather then a pitched battle with heavily armed
terrorists. This is what the Foreign Minister said today.
Translated from Hebrew:
-----------------------
Q: Have there been discussions between the US President or other
senior officials from the Bush Administration and senior officials
from the Israeli Government?
Saar: There are always contacts between American and Israeli
officials, including today. I don't think it is necessary to answer
the question in detail. Unless there is a decision to publicize these
discussions, we are discrete about the identity of those holding the
discussions. However, in the last twenty-four hours, there have been
talks between Israeli and American officials.
Q: There have been a considerable number of casualties in Jenin. Does
this change the cabinet decisions with regard to the length of the
operation, and other objectives, such as the Gaza Strip?
Saar: The operation will continue in accordance with the cabinet
decisions. Any place where the military operation has been completed,
then the operation is over in that area. Any place where the military
objectives have not been accomplished, they will continue. No
operation will be concluded before the IDF has decisively
accomplished its objectives in every place.
Q: The number of wounded and the intense fighting, on the one hand,
and the American pressure to withdraw, on the other. Does this not
change the decisions regarding the length of the operation and the
timetable?
Saar: When the Government decided to carry out the operation, no
decision was taken regarding timetables. This has never been the
case. A decision was taken on aims and objectives of the operation.
These aims and objectives have not changed.
Nevertheless, we are aware of the US interest, and taking American
needs into consideration, we informed US Administration officials,
and Prime Minister Sharon certainly told President Bush that we will
make every effort to accelerate the operation and complete it. We
also said that in those areas where we have completed operations, we
will also withdraw, and this is what happened in two places, in
Tulkarm and Kalkilya, as you know. On the other hand, there is
activity that is particularly essential for the security of Israeli
citizens. This delicate balance will dictate our actions in the next
few days.
Q: Which town will the IDF be withdrawing from next?
Saar: We certainly do not make announcements of this kind for a
number of reasons, and, first and foremost, for operational
reasons.
Q: You said earlier that the IDF would not withdraw from any place,
until military victory is accomplished. In one place, at least, there
is a particularly acute problem, and I am referring to the Church of
the Nativity. Many agree that it would be impossible to achieve a
decisive outcome, and they say that this place is particularly
explosive. How can we achieve a decisive outcome there?
Saar: I will not go into the methods and approaches by which the IDF
achieves its objectives in every area of activity. The principles are
very clear. We have no intention of damaging holy places. We do not
fire into churches. At the same time, we surrounded the place. We
prevented terrorists from entering the compound. There is certainly
no reason why those terrorists should be able to take refuge in a
holy place. Regarding the type of activity, there are various
dilemmas regarding different places. You could have asked a question
about other wanted terrorists found in other places. In any event, we
have no intention of granting immunity to anyone in any place where
we operate.
Q: I understand that today a meeting was held among the Prime
Minister, Defense Minister and Foreign Minister ahead of the arrival
of Secretary Powell. Was a joint position arrived at? And next
question, you said that it is Israel's strategic interest to
eradicate the terrorism. Isn't it also Israel's strategic interest to
maintain good relations with the US, and continue the gradual
withdrawal?
Mr. Saar: I think we are already speaking in past tense. You
see, the request was a request to begin a withdrawal or a pullout,
and in two Palestinian cities, we have already pulled out. As I
stated before, the political/security reality is a lot more
complicated and it requires giving weight both to the security
interests and to the political interests, and we give weight to both
of these at the same time. We will work within these principles.
I would just like to stress something that, sometimes the world media
ignores. President Bush also made demands, requests from the
Palestinian side. Which of these requests were already fulfilled?
Have you heard the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority declare a
ceasefire, an end of terrorism? Has the incitement in the Palestinian
media been stopped? What happened on this account? Surely, if we
don't take the responsibility, in keeping with the view of some and
even our own view that it is desirable to withdraw from the cities,
then certainly they would want to see another party take the
responsibility. So what I suggest is that one look at the entirety of
the situation, the whole range of the conditions, and see what each
side has fulfilled. The American approach, unlike the approach of
some other countries, is generally balanced in its demands of the
sides, and in its attitude towards the parties.
And one need not go back to the days - and again I am not referring
to the United States but rather to those whose worldview sees the
demands as being made on only one side - this phenomenon has brought
about a situation in which cities of refuge were established for
terrorists under the auspices of diplomatic agreements whose purpose
is supposed to be the establishment of peace - terrorist cities of
refuge that have no parallel anywhere. The depth of the terrorist
infrastructure found there which we have been uncovering daily, from
foundation to roof, the amount of explosives, the amount of illegal
weapons, these are things that don't exist anywhere else in the
world.
So we ask those - and again stress that I am not referring to the US,
but to other nations, for example on the European continent, which,
it appears to me, speaking in generalities, bear a moral and
historical responsibility when it comes to the security of Jews, and
the security of the Jewish state - do they expect from us that we
take upon ourselves unilateral risks, even if the other side
continues in is path of terrorism.
What would be the consequence for the free world, if one can make
gains, or achieve a level of international legitimacy as a result of
suicide attacks. Are there any guarantees for the free world that it
will remain contained in a single region, in just one part of the
world?
It seems to me that the situation is too complicated to make demands
of only one side, and one must always ask 'What about the other
side?"
Regarding your first question, we welcome the Secretary of State. I
would like to reiterate that not only have we accepted the Tenet
document. We also officially notified General Zinni of our acceptance
of the American bridging document, which, up to this very minute, the
PA has yet to accept. Also, we have assisted General Zinni in every
way possible on each of the three occasions that he came to the
region. The side that consistently torpedoed each of the three visits
was the Palestinian Authority.
Q: How will Israel act if Arafat does agree to the American bridging
proposal?
Saar: The best thing is to ask that question again, after Arafat
accepts it, and implements it. After he does all this, I will be in a
position to answer your question.
Q: What must he implement? And have any of the requirements for
implementation changed as a result of the situation on the ground.
Saar: Arafat is a terrorist, everyone knows he is a terrorist. His
connection with terrorist was uncovered in a way that it no longer is
just theoretical, but is now a fact of life, surely one of the sadder
facts of life. So, if your asking me if I think he will change his
ways, will begin to fulfill agreements, and begin to fight terrorism,
I don't believe it, and I believe that anyone who does believe it is
making a grave mistake - since he will soon have to face the truth.
But since you asked 'what will happen if?' since there are some who
still believe it, then let's see if it will happen, and then we can
give you an official reaction. Yet, I have already clarified the way
I assess Arafat.
Q: Will you allow Secretary Powell to meet Arafat?
Saar: Whether the Secretary of State will meet Arafat or not, is an
American decision, not an Israeli one.