Prime Minister's Speech at the Herzliya Conference
December 18, 2003
Good Evening,
I congratulate the organizers of this conference for the important and interesting gathering which you have held here. During the past three days, you have been discussing Israel's situation. I, as Prime Minister, am responsible for the planning and implementation of the measures which will shape Israel's character during the next few years.
We are all entrusted with the duty of shaping the face of the Jewish and democratic State of Israel - a state where there is an equal distribution of the burden, as well as the acceptance of rights and shouldering of duties by all sectors, through different forms of national service. A state where there is a good and efficient education system which educates a young generation imbued with values and national pride, which is capable of confronting the challenges of the modern world. A country whose economy is adapted to the advanced global market of the 21st century, where the product per capita crosses the $20,000 line and is equal to that of most developed European countries. An immigrant-absorbing state which constitutes a national and spiritual center for all Jews of the world and is a source of attraction for thousands of immigrants each year. Aliyah is the central goal of the State of Israel.
This is the country we wish to shape. This is the country where our children will want to live.
I know that there is sometimes a tendency to narrow all of Israel's problems down to the political sphere, believing that once a solution is found to Israel's problems with its neighbors, particularly the Palestinians, the other issues on the agenda will miraculously resolve themselves. I do not believe so. We are facing additional challenges which must be addressed - the economy, educating the young generation, immigrant absorption, enhancement of social cohesion and the improvement of relations between Arabs and Jews in Israel.
Like all Israeli citizens, I yearn for peace. I attach supreme importance to taking all steps which will enable progress toward resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians. However, in light of the other challenges we are faced with, if the Palestinians do not make a similar effort toward a solution of the conflict - I do not intend to wait for them indefinitely.
Seven months ago, my Government approved the "Roadmap" to peace, based on President George Bush's June 2002 speech. This is a balanced program for phased progress toward peace, to which both Israel and the Palestinians committed themselves. A full and genuine implementation of the program is the best way to achieve true peace. The Roadmap is the only political plan accepted by Israel, the Palestinians, the Americans and a majority of the international community. We are willing to proceed toward its implementation: two states - Israel and a Palestinian State - living side by side in tranquility, security and peace.
The Roadmap is a clear and reasonable plan, and it is therefore possible and imperative to implement it. The concept behind this plan is that only security will lead to peace. And in that sequence. Without the achievement of full security - within the framework of which terror organizations will be dismantled - it will not be possible to achieve genuine peace, a peace for generations. This is the essence of the Roadmap. The opposite perception, according to which the very signing of a peace agreement will produce security out of thin air, has already been tried in the past and failed miserably. And such will be the fate of any other plan which promotes this concept. These plans deceive the public and create false hope. There will be no peace before the eradication of terror.
The government under my leadership will not compromise on the realization of all phases of the Roadmap. It is incumbent upon the Palestinians to uproot the terrorist groups and to create a law-abiding society which fights against violence and incitement. Peace and terror cannot coexist. The world is currently united in its unequivocal demand from the Palestinians to act toward the cessation of terrorism and the implementation of reforms. Only a transformation of the Palestinian Authority into a different authority will enable progress in the political process. The Palestinians must fulfill their obligations. A full and complete implementation will - at the end of the process - lead to peace and tranquility.
We began the implementation of the Roadmap at Aqaba, but the terrorist organizations joined with Yasser Arafat and sabotaged the process with a series of the most brutal terror attacks we have ever known.
Concurrent with the demand from the Palestinians to eliminate the terror organizations, Israel is taking - and will continue to take - steps to significantly improve the living conditions of the Palestinian population: Israel will remove closures and curfews and reduce the number of roadblocks; we will improve freedom of movement for the Palestinian population, including the passage of people and goods; we will increase the hours of operation at international border crossings; we will enable a large number of Palestinian merchants to conduct regular and normal economic and trade relations with their Israeli counterparts, etc. All these measures are aimed at enabling better and freer movement for the Palestinian population not involved in terror.
In addition, subject to security coordination, we will transfer Palestinian towns to Palestinian security responsibility.
Israel will make every effort to assist the Palestinians and to advance the process.
Israel will fulfil the commitments taken upon itself. I have committed to the President of the United States that Israel will dismantle unauthorized outposts. It is my intention to implement this commitment. The State of Israel is governed by law, and the issue of the outposts is no exception. I understand the sensitivity; we will try to do this in the least painful way possible, but the unauthorized outposts will be dismantled. Period.
Israel will meet all its obligations with regard to construction in the settlements. There will be no construction beyond the existing construction line, no expropriation of land for construction, no special economic incentives and no construction of new settlements.
I take this opportunity to appeal to the Palestinians and repeat, as I said at Aqaba: it is not in our interest to govern you. We would like you to govern yourselves in your own country. A democratic Palestinian state with territorial contiguity in Judea and Samaria and economic viability, which would conduct normal relations of tranquility, security and peace with Israel. Abandon the path of terror and let us together stop the bloodshed. Let us move forward together towards peace.
We wish to speedily advance implementation of the Roadmap towards quiet and a genuine peace. We hope that the Palestinian Authority will carry out its part. However, if in a few months the Palestinians still continue to disregard their part in implementing the Roadmap - then Israel will initiate the unilateral security step of disengagement from the Palestinians.
The purpose of the "Disengagement Plan" is to reduce terror as much as possible, and grant Israeli citizens the maximum level of security. The process of disengagement will lead to an improvement in the quality of life, and will help strengthen the Israeli economy. The unilateral steps which Israel will take in the framework of the "Disengagement Plan" will be fully coordinated with the United States. We must not harm our strategic coordination with the United States. These steps will increase security for the residents of Israel and relieve the pressure on the IDF and security forces in fulfilling the difficult tasks they are faced with. The "Disengagement Plan" is meant to grant maximum security and minimize friction between Israelis and Palestinians.
We are interested in conducting direct negotiations, but do not intend to hold Israeli society hostage in the hands of the Palestinians. I have already said - we will not wait for them indefinitely.
The "Disengagement Plan" will include the redeployment of IDF forces along new security lines and a change in the deployment of settlements, which will reduce as much as possible the number of Israelis located in the heart of the Palestinian population. We will draw provisional security lines and the IDF will be deployed along them. Security will be provided by IDF deployment, the security fence and other physical obstacles. The "Disengagement Plan" will reduce friction between us and the Palestinians.
This reduction of friction will require the extremely difficult step of changing the deployment of some of the settlements. I would like to repeat what I have said in the past: In the framework of a future agreement, Israel will not remain in all the places where it is today. The relocation of settlements will be made, first and foremost, in order to draw the most efficient security line possible, thereby creating this disengagement between Israel and the Palestinians. This security line will not constitute the permanent border of the State of Israel, however, as long as implementation of the Roadmap is not resumed, the IDF will be deployed along that line. Settlements which will be relocated are those which will not be included in the territory of the State of Israel in the framework of any possible future permanent agreement. At the same time, in the framework of the "Disengagement Plan", [b][i]Israel wi...
..... At the same time, in the framework of the "Disengagement Plan", Israel will strengthen its control over those same areas in the Land of Israel which will constitute an inseparable part of the State of Israel in any future agreement. I know you would like to hear names, but we should leave something for later.
Israel will greatly accelerate the construction of the security fence. Today we can already see it taking shape. The rapid completion of the security fence will enable the IDF to remove roadblocks and ease the daily lives of the Palestinian population not involved in terror.
In order to enable the Palestinians to develop their economic and trade sectors, and to ensure that they will not be exclusively dependent on Israel, we will consider, in the framework of the "Disengagement Plan", enabling - in coordination with Jordan and Egypt - the freer passage of people and goods through international border crossings, while taking the necessary security precautions.
I would like to emphasize: the "Disengagement Plan" is a security measure and not a political one. The steps which will be taken will not change the political reality between Israel and the Palestinians, and will not prevent the possibility of returning to the implementation of the Roadmap and reaching an agreed settlement.
The "Disengagement Plan" does not prevent the implementation of the Roadmap. Rather, it is a step Israel will take in the absence of any other option, in order to improve its security. The "Disengagement Plan" will be realized only in the event that the Palestinians continue to drag their feet and postpone implementation of the Roadmap.
Obviously, through the "Disengagement Plan" the Palestinians will receive much less than they would have received through direct negotiations as set out in the Roadmap.
According to circumstances, it is possible that parts of the "Disengagement Plan" that are supposed to provide maximum security to the citizens of Israel will be undertaken while also attempting to implement the Roadmap.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
My life experience has taught me that for peace, as well as for war, we must have broad consensus. We must preserve our unity, even in the midst of a difficult, internal debate.
In the past three years, the Palestinian terrorist organizations have put us to a difficult test. Their plan to break the spirit of Israeli society has not succeeded. The citizens of Israel have managed to step into the breach, support each other, lend a helping hand, volunteer and contribute.
I believe that this path of unity must be continued today. Whether we will be able to advance the Roadmap, or will have to implement the "Disengagement Plan", experience has taught us that, together, through broad national consensus, we can do great things.
Let us not be led astray. Any path will be complicated, strewn with obstacles, and obligate us to act with discretion and responsibility. I am confident that, just as we have managed to overcome the challenges of the past, we will stand together and succeed today.
We will always be guided by the words of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, who said, on the day after the Declaration of Independence:
These days, our purpose is only to build the State of Israel with love and faith, in Jewish brotherhood, and to defend it with all our spirit, and as long as necessary. We are still in the midst of a difficult battle, one that has two fronts: political and military. Let us not embellish our deeds and, of course, our words, with grandiose names. We must remain humble. We achieved what we have achieved by standing on the shoulders of previous generations, and we accomplished what we have accomplished by preserving our precious legacy, the legacy of a small nation which has endured suffering and tribulations, but which is, nevertheless, great and eternal in spirit, vision, faith and virtue.
I am also a great believer in the resilience of this small, brave nation which has endured suffering and tribulations. I am confident that, united in the power of our faith, we will be able to succeed in any path we choose.
Thank you very much, and happy Hannukah.
ISRAEL NEWS AGENCY
Ivanhoe, I feel that if you're going to copy and paste material about this obviously charming and charismatic leader, that you should at least post something interesting:
Sharon began his military career at a young age, when he became involved in fighting with the Israeli Haganah, leading commando units specialising in behind-the-lines raids and forcing Palestinians to flee their homes.
In August 1953, Sharon founded and led the infamous Unit 101, which carried out a series of terror raids across the Israeli borders into refugee camps, villages and Bedouin encampments.
In September 1953, he led the Unit 101 in an attack on Bedouins in demilitarised Al Auja (a 145 square km juncture at the western Negev-Sinai frontier), killing an unknown number.
October 14, 1953, Sharon led Unit 101 into an attack on the village of Qibya in Jordan. Under his command, Israeli soldiers moved about in the village blowing up buildings, firing into doorways and windows with automatic weapons and throwing hand grenades, killing 69 civilians (mostly women and children). He later claimed he believed that the demolished houses had been empty of inhabitants, but according to the UN observer who inspected the scene, “One story was repeated time after time: the bullet splintered door, the body sprawled across the threshold, indicating that the inhabitants had been forced by heavy fire to stay inside until their homes were blown up over them.”
In 1971 - The “Pacification” of Gaza. Under the euphemistic title the “Pacification of Gaza,” Sharon imposed a brutal policy of repression, blowing up houses, bulldozing large tracts of refugee camps, imposing severe collective punishments and imprisoning hundreds of young Palestinians. Numerous civilians were killed or unjustly imprisoned, their houses demolished and the whole area was effectively transformed into a jail.
In 1977, the Likud party won the general election under Begin. Sharon joined Begin’s first administration as Minister of Agriculture in charge of settlements; an avid supporter of the religious Gush Emunim movement he was one of main facilitators of a settlement boom aimed in part at preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories.
In 1982 “Peace for the Galilee.” As Defense Minister Sharon masterminded the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which he dubbed the “Peace for the Galilee.” In all, this operation killed many thousands of civilians and rendered nearly half a million homeless.
On June 5,1982, he sent tens of thousands of Israeli soldiers across the border to fight their way up the Lebanese coast. They eventually occupied Beirut. Heavy Israeli sea, air and land bombardment devastated a substantial portion of Lebanon. By the end of July, the Lebanese government stated that at least 14,000 people had been killed - over 90% of whom were unarmed civilians - and twice that number seriously wounded.
August 12 became known as Black Thursday after a massive artillery barrage lasting some 11 hours killing some 500 Lebanese & Palestinian civilians.
On September 15, 1982, after the evacuation of PLO fighters from Beirut on the condition of international protection for the Palestinian and Lebanese civilians in the region, Sharon invaded Beirut. Ariel Sharon declaring that this was in order to dislodge 2000 Palestinian fighters remaining in the city. The task of purging the camps Sharon gave to the Phalange (Lebanese force armed by and closely allied with Israel since the onset of Lebanon’s civil war in 1975).
Sabra & Shatila: The slaughter in the camps at Sabra and Shatila took place between 6:00pm on September 16 and 8:00 am on September 18, 1982 in an area under the control of the Israeli army. Sharon’s troops, having held the camps under siege, allowed Phalangists to enter. Israeli searchlights illuminated the camps, while Israeli army personnel watched through binoculars as the death squads spread unchallenged through the camps. Whole families were murdered, many were raped and tortured before being killed. So many bodies were heaped into lorries and taken away, or buried in mass graves, that the exact toll will never be known, but Palestinian sources estimate at least 2000 people were killed.
On September 28, 2000, Ariel Sharon's incursion into Al Aqsa sanctuary accompanied by at least 1,000 armed soldiers and police officers triggered the outbreak of the current crisis that has so far led to the death of hundreds of Palestinians and the wounding of thousands.
(Courtesy Of: LAW - The Society for the Protection of Human Rights)
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/truthaboutpalestine/sharon.html
Originally posted by shavixmir.... and how do you think the listing of Sharon's past actions will contribute to a true and lasting peace between Israel and Palestine ?
[b]Ivanhoe, I feel that if you're going to copy and paste material about this obviously charming and charismatic leader, that you should at least post something interesting:
Sharon began his military career at a young age, when he became involved in fighting with the Israeli Haganah, leading commando units specialising in behind-the-lines raids an ...[text shortened]... r the Protection of Human Rights)
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/truthaboutpalestine/sharon.html[/b]
Originally posted by ivanhoeI would presume that removing, putting him on trial in front of a UN tribunal and then locking him up in Spandau where his likes should be residing, would give the peace process a true stimulant.
.... and how do you think the listing of Sharon's past actions will contribute to a true and lasting peace between Israel and Palestine ?
The man's vicious assaults on Iran, whilst Israel happily breaks and ignores God knows how many UN resolutions is astoundingly hypocritic.
Originally posted by shavixmirYou do not make peace with your friends, but with your enemies.
I would presume that removing, putting him on trial in front of a UN tribunal and then locking him up in Spandau where his likes should be residing, would give the peace process a true stimulant.
The man's vicious assaults on Iran, whilst Israel happily breaks and ignores God knows how many UN resolutions is astoundingly hypocritic.
Originally posted by shavixmirAnd what better testimony to bring forth, than the objective, unbiased views of your quoted source.
I would presume that removing, putting him on trial in front of a UN tribunal and then locking him up in Spandau where his likes should be residing, would give the peace process a true stimulant.
The man's vicious assaults on Iran, whilst Israel happily breaks and ignores God knows how many UN resolutions is astoundingly hypocritic.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYe of little faith:
And what better testimony to bring forth, than the objective, unbiased views of your quoted source.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/universal/univindex.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/1390979.stm
Originally posted by shavixmirIf both sides keep accusing eachother, peace will not be achieved.
Ye of little faith:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/universal/univindex.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/1390979.stm
Edit: Have you read Sharon's speech ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeI have. He:
If both sides keep accusing eachother, peace will not be achieved.
Edit: Have you read Sharon's speech ?
1) Insists that the the major problem is "terror" when the major problem is the illegal Israeli occupation;
2) Insists that the Palestinains dismantle all "terrorist" organizations and stop all "terror" before Israel has to do anything. The first means a Palestinan civil war as I've pointed out before; the second means that any organization which physically resisted the illegal Israeli occupation must be destroyed since Sharon regards any physical resistance, even against Israeli military targets, as "terror";
3) Insists that the Palestinians must "reform" their political process to Israel's liking before Israel has to do anything. Since the political affairs of a sovereign state are none of the concern of a foreign state, this is contrary to international law;
4) Makes a big deal about Israeli withdrawal from "unauthorized" settlements which is ridiculous. By "unauthorized" he is referring to those not "authorized" by Israeli law. Some of these have been dismantled because they are considered not easily defended. ALL Israeli settlements are unauthorized by international law; the UN voted 131-1 in 1977 that Israel had no right to establish such settlements (GA Res 3215). The United States and every other country I know of has consistently argued the same;
5) Continues to threaten to build the "Security Fence" he has already started which would put large areas of the West Bank in an Israeli Security zone. The boundaries of the Security Fence are clearly intended by Sharon as the minimum areas of control he will accept over the West Bank.
In short, Sharon's speech is the typical grossly one-sided position you endorse. Why don't you copy and paste a speech by one of the leaders of the Palestinian Authority responding to Sharon's ideas for "peace"?
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: "In short, Sharon's speech is the typical grossly one-sided position you endorse."
I have. He:
1) Insists that the the major problem is "terror" when the major problem is the illegal Israeli occupation;
2) Insists that the Palestinains dismantle all "terrorist" organizations and stop all "terror" before Israel has to do anything. The first means a Palestinan civil war as I've pointed out before; the second mean ...[text shortened]... by one of the leaders of the Palestinian Authority responding to Sharon's ideas for "peace"?
No, marauder, you deliberately keep misrepresenting my position. You want to push me into the same corner Ariel Sharon is in. I endorse the negotiations based on the road-map. Now, that's quite a different cup of soup.
Can you discover any positive points in the Israeli policies concerning the Israel-Palestine conflict described by the Israeli Prime-Minister in the above speech ?
(I shouln't ask such questions ... I know ..... but hey, today I might be lucky.)
marauder: "Why don't you copy and paste a speech by one of the leaders of the Palestinian Authority responding to Sharon's ideas for "peace"?
Why don't you ? Who is stopping you ? I haven't found them yet. Maybe you can lend me a hand. You might also consider to post some speeches made by Hamas and Hizbullah leaders. I'm looking for those pieces of peace poetry. I'm sure we all will be enjoying the moderate stances they take which, by the way, you certainly will endorse ...... or am I mistaking ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeI can't find anything in the speech favorable to a long term peace except Sharon's spoken commitment to an independent Palestinian state. Since he puts preconditions that would assure it can't exist as a free, independent state that's not much, but at least it's something. I'm already given my view of Bush's "Roadmap"; supporting it is supporting a grossly one-sided approach to peace that cannot work.
[b]marauder: "In short, Sharon's speech is the typical grossly one-sided position you endorse."
No, marauder, you deliberately keep misrepresenting my position. You want to push me into the same corner Ariel Sharon is in. I endorse the negotiations based on the road-map. Now, that's quite a different cup of soup.
Can you discover any positive ...[text shortened]... erate stances they take which, by the way, you certainly will endorse ...... or am I mistaking ?[/b]
I'll try to find something official from a Palestinian Authority leader. Hamas and Hezbollah are not the leaders of Palestine so their views are of no more importance as statements of official policy than the views of the ultra-nationalist parties in Israel. It would be interesting to compare speeches from those two views; I suspect they have a lot in common.
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: " I'm already given my view of Bush's "Roadmap"; supporting it is supporting a grossly one-sided approach to peace that cannot work."
I can't find anything in the speech favorable to a long term peace in the speech except Sharon's spoken commitment to an independent Palestinian state. Since he puts preconditions that would assure it can't exist as a free, independent state that's not much, but at least it's something. I'm already given my view of Bush's "Roadmap"; supporting i ...[text shortened]... ld be interesting to compare speeches from those two views; I suspect they have a lot in common.
Then why do the Palestinians themselves support it ?
marauder: " Hamas and Hezbollah are not the leaders of Palestine so their views are of no more importance as statements of official policy than the views of the ultra-nationalist parties in Israel."
Of course speeches of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders are not representative for "official" Palestine policies. That's correct. The difference between Israeli ultra right wing groups and factions like Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas is that the Israeli government has its own ultra right wing groups under control as was shown by the disengagement of the Gaza strip. The Palestinian authority doesn't control Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah at all. On the contrary, Iran and Syria have much more influence. They even sometimes act as an instrument in the hands of those countries. That's where they differ from the Israeli right wing groups. That's why their stances and actions have much more impact on the actual developments in the region. That's why their speeches are a lot more important than their Israeli counterparts's speeches.
"At the conference, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke to the representatives of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, members of the Society for the Defense of the Palestinian Nation, and members of the Islamic Students Union, and an audience of hundreds of students."
http://www.isna.ir/Main/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-603386
Originally posted by ivanhoeThe Palestinian Authority is dealing from a position of weakness; they have accepted the "Road Map" as the best they can hope for without agreeing to all its conditions. Abbas has pointed out that an attempt to disarm and disband Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups would lead to a civil war, something he is unwilling to do. Political reform is something that the Palestinians recognize is needed; but that is quite a different thing from Israel insisting that it only incurs obligations once the Palestinian government is what Israel wants. The Palestinian view of the Road Map is that it is just that; a "Road Map" who's contents are flexible and not written in stone. Sharon's view is not to accept any deviations from it except those which are favorable to Israel. IMO, Sharon's interpretation of the "Road Map" i.e. that the Palestinian Authority must somehow crush all physical resistance ("terror" to Sharon) to Israeli occupation before Israel does anything of significance is unworkable and unreasonable and it certainly not the interpretation of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority.
[b/]marauder: " I'm already given my view of Bush's "Roadmap"; supporting it is supporting a grossly one-sided approach to peace that cannot work."
Then why do the Palestinians themselves support it ?
marauder: " Hamas and Hezbollah are not the leaders of Palestine so their views are of no more importance as statements of official policy ...[text shortened]... an audience of hundreds of students."
http://www.isna.ir/Main/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-603386
So long as Israel is in illegal occupation of Palestinian territory, the Palestinian people have a right to militarily resist their occupation and oppression. It is absurd to insist that the Palestinian Authority crush the resistance to Israeli occupation BEFORE Israel sets a firm withdrawal date. In truth, the PA has bent over backwards to accomodate the Israelis; trying to arrange ceasefires and such that they have no moral obligation to do. George Washington never agreed to any cessation of hostilities or the disarment of militias prior to the peace treaty with Great Britain; why should the Palestinians?
Your continued fantasy that certain organizations are the "armies" of other countries under their influence and control is noted. It is BS as even the US State Department knows. A peace can't be built on paranoid fantasies; Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the groups engaging in most of the armed struggle against Israeli occupation are composed of and run by Palestinians. Pretending otherwise gets you nowhere.
Originally posted by ivanhoeThe whole problem with the Israeli approach is the zionistic tendency (Israel for Jews).
[b]marauder: "In short, Sharon's speech is the typical grossly one-sided position you endorse."
No, marauder, you deliberately keep misrepresenting my position. You want to push me into the same corner Ariel Sharon is in. I endorse the negotiations based on the road-map. Now, that's quite a different cup of soup.
Can you discover any positive ...[text shortened]... erate stances they take which, by the way, you certainly will endorse ...... or am I mistaking ?[/b]
Abstract the situation to understand it.
Instead of Israel, the Jews are given the US and most Americans are horded into Alabama, Oklahoma, New Orleans and Alaska.
Now go through Israel's actions through the last 40 to 50 years, but place it in the US scenario.
Think of Canada, England and Ireland as the Middle-Eastern States opposing the division of US land for this purpose. How do you think they would react?
How would Americans react?
Only when you put this tale into a fictional arena will you understand what's going on.