Address by Prime Minister Netanyahu to AIPAC Conference

One of the main reasons for traveling to Washington was to address the annual conference of the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee. The session was attended by 40 senators and 90 members of congress. The venue afforded the Prime Minister a forum to spell out his ideas on the Israel-Palestinian settlement, Israel-America relations, his views on how to rescue the Oslo process from its current moribund state and how to move forward. The main thrust of his address was devoted to the place and meaning of Jerusalem for Jews and its role in the future. Text:

I have to confess to you that this is my first I think it is yes, it is my first AIPAC conference as the Prime Minister of Israel which now, wait a minute, wait a minute. What this means in that in this capacity I have only seven more conferences to go in this capacity. And I look forward to every one of them.

But I was discussing this with Jonathan Mitchell outside. And he said, "Well, whats it like being the Prime Minister of Israel?" And I said, "Well, its like a walk in the park." And he said, "You mean Central Park at midnight?" I said, "No, its like a bed of roses but with a lot of thorns." But it is with all the challenges of this particular job, it has great rewards, first to see the things we want to see accomplished, and we are accomplishing them however difficult it is the quest for peace. And Melvin put it correctly: the only meaningful peace is peace with security. And also a small idea that we have to make Israel and this should not shock you economically self-sufficient and a place where Jewish people make money by being good businessmen. These are all things that are happening in Israel. And the country is undergoing a tremendous revolution. It is becoming a technological power of the first order, and the world we are marrying our special capabilities technological capabilities with the idea, with the strange idea of free market principles. And the combination is explosive. It is producing unparalleled investment in Israel. And I think it will be a tremendous boon for peace. It will help all of us.

I think that we in Israel and I think all of humanity are extraordinary lucky that as we enter the 21st century the United States is the only superpower. It is a great force a force for more clarity, for democracy, for justice and for peace. And I think Israel is especially lucky that AIPAC exists in this country to present Israels case. I dont think anyone is more knowledgeable than you about the Middle East as it really is. And I think no one can present our case better. And I must say that no one does it with greater dedication. It is not enough to marshal the facts. It is not enough to muster the arguments. In order to persuade and make a difference you have to bring conviction. You have to couple the heart with the mind. And that is what you do you give your heart and your mind to Israel, and for this I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

I met with President Clinton today and with Secretary of State Albright, and we had very good meetings. We had, I thought, open talks excellent talks because we tried to get to the root of what it is that we can do to secure the peace. And I think that Israel and the United States share a common view. I found a real understanding for our position that there must be strong resolve in both our parties, but I think also elsewhere, to give the fight against terrorism the top priority it deserves. We all agree terrorism is the enemy. It is the enemy of the United States, it is the enemy of Israel, it is the enemy of peace, it is the enemy of our civilization. And it is an enemy that rears its head, and it must be stopped. Terrorism must be stopped and terrorism can be stopped. And I believe that its within our capacities when I say our capacities I mean not only the government of Israel and the government of the United States, but I think the men and women in this hall can each do their part to ensure that everyone does their part to wage the battle against terrorism.

We have, I think, a true friend in the White House actually true friends the President and the vice President. We have true friends in the State Department with the Secretary of State. We certainly have true friends on Capitol Hill that was demonstrated aptly tonight. And I am sure that all of us the administration, Congress, the government of Israel will each be doing his part to pull together for our common cause. And with your help, which I think is indispensable, we will achieve the goal that we seek, which is a secure peace between Israel and its neighbors.

Now, this is not an easy task, because peace is elusive, and it cannot be captured merely by repeating the word peace like a mantra. For peace to exist in our part of the region of the world we live in a difficult neighborhood as you have no doubt ascertained for peace to exist and survive and thrive in our part of the world, it must it must be the quintessential idea of peace which exists anywhere else is an obvious thing. Peace means the absence of violence. Otherwise there is no meaning to it. Peace means the absence of terror. If I were to say peace and terror cannot co-exist, this ought to be a redundancy. This shouldnt be said because it is so obvious. And yet it has to be said again and again and again, because we are asked to accept the notion that we can have peace on the one hand and terrorism on the other hand, both in the same process, both co-existing. It cannot be. One drives out the other, and we have to decide if peace drives out terrorism, and not that terrorism drives out peace.

Now, we are engaged today in an effort to rescue the Oslo process. This is a process which was based on two parallel ideas. The first idea was that the Palestinians the Palestinian Authority would undertake to stop terrorism from its domains. And the second was that Israel would withdraw from the population centers which would become the Palestinian domains. Two ideas. Fight terrorism, leave the population centers. Thats the basic deal of Oslo. Everything else is elaboration. And you have to ask how was this cemented. It was cemented not only in the provisions of Oslo that states this quite clearly; it was so important for Israel that the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin refused refused to sign onto Oslo until he got in addition to the provisions of the agreement a specific written commitment from the chairman of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, promising that he would combat terrorism, and the Palestinian Authority would fight terrorism. In other words, this was for Israel from the start the most fundamental aspect of Oslo.

I can say here tonight that had the Palestinians lived up to this assurance we would not be busy today trying to save the peace process. Its widely believed that I am against Oslo this is how it is portrayed. And I made my peace with Oslo. I made my peace with Oslo before the elections, and I said we will keep Oslo. It is not Oslo we are against; it is the idea that we alone shall keep Oslo, and the other side has agreed not to keep Oslo. Israel has kept its commitments to Oslo most of them before I came to office. But I completed the hardest one, the redeployment in Hebron, which as you know is the oldest point of Jewish settlement on earth, going back almost 4,000 years to the time of Abraham. We did that.

But when we look at the other side of Oslo, did the Palestinian Authority fulfill its part, then the answer is not a recent no, because in the 30 months that preceded the elections, since the signing of Oslo the first 30 months of the Oslo agreement Israel suffered the worst terrorist waves in its history from terrorist groups based in those same Palestinian Authority domains that were provided by the Israeli government. And this culminated in a week of incredible savagery, the suicide bombings of February and March of last year which cost the lives of 60 people.

I know this is redundant, but Ill say it anyway: This was before the rise of hard-line Netanyahu government. You cant have just Netanyahu hard-line Netanyahu government, of the intransigent Likud government, as it is commonly known. It was before all of this. And I can tell you and I suppose this means reminding too in some quarters this was also before Har Homa. There was no Har Homa.

There was no, quote, "provocation" in Jerusalem. There was nothing. In fact, there was the most conciliatory dovish the most conciliatory government in Israels existence. It took extra pains not to do anything that would be perceived by the Palestinian Authority as a provocation. And yet we have these incessant attacks from terrorist groups which were not stopped by the Palestinian Authority. And this is what the people of Israel asked us to correct. They didnt say abandon Oslo. They said correct Oslo make sure that they fulfill their side of the bargain as well.

I should tell you that when those waves of terrorist attacks took place last March the peace process was in danger of complete collapse. The Labor government at the time suspended the redeployment in Hebron, and in effect it stopped all of the negotiations. And it was then, and only then, that the Palestinian Authority began to do something about terrorism. They began to act then against the terrorist organizations, because they understood that failing to do so would stop the Israeli withdrawal. I have to tell you that this activity was partial, because the PA did not dismantle the terrorist organizations and did not disarm the terrorists. But its efforts, however partial, coupled with the cooperation between our security agencies and there was important cooperation all of that was enough to demonstrate that, if it wanted to, the Palestinian Authority could control the situation and significantly curb terrorism. And indeed this was the case in the following months. And in fact this was the case for a full year, until there was a decision to change the policy. And now we are faced again, once again, with terrorism and violence. The excuse of course is that we are building a housing project in Har Homa. You have heard well, its hard to say who of us has heard more nonsense about Har Homa, you or I but you have heard a lot of nonsense about Har Homa. So let me tell you the facts.

Har Homa is not an area in Arab East Jerusalem. It is a barren hill in the southern part of Jerusalem, and it is on land that is mostly private land 75 percent private land owned by Jews. It is not a settlement. I said this morning that I have nothing against settlements, but it happens to be that is a joke, by the way that there is a difference between a neighborhood in a city within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem and a settlement. This is something that is obvious to you. But of course this is not obvious to anyone who watches most of the news media of the world, because this is deliberately obfuscated, the word "settlement" connoting something bad. And Har Homa is not a settlement; it is a neighborhood designed to alleviate the severe housing shortage in Jerusalem. And it is matched by our plans to have ten such projects of differing size altogether culminating in even more housing units for the Arab residents of Jerusalem, because we consider it our obligation to take care of the citys residents, whether they are Jewish or Arab, with equal effort.

And finally, the building of this residential neighborhood in no way contravenes the Oslo agreement. Oslo doesnt forbid in any way the construction of neighborhoods in Jerusalem no government in Israel not the Labor government or the Likud government would ever sign an accord that would limit our right to build in our ancient capital. And indeed I have to say the Labor government did not do this.

But Oslo does stipulate something about Jerusalem. It says that Jerusalem will be the issue of Jerusalem will be negotiated and decided on in the final settlement negotiations, but pending the conclusion of those negotiations, there is only one stipulation about Jerusalem: It is the curbing, not of Israeli activity in Jerusalem, but of Palestinian activity. The Palestinian Authority is prohibited specifically prohibited under Oslo to have any governmental offices in Jerusalem or any governmental activities of the Palestinian Authority in Jerusalem.

So it is not Israel that is violating the Oslo Accords vis a-vis Jerusalem; it is the Palestinian Authority which maintains illegally and contravening the Oslo Accords those offices in Jerusalem. Its a small point that I thought I should get across, because I didnt see it on the nightly news.

Now, we are told that building houses in Har Homa is introducing instruments of terror. This is a new concept of terror. Its called condominium terror or terror of the walkup rentals. Or apartment what is this? You can laugh, but its not funny, because the attack on basic human values is always preceded always preceded by a corruption of language. You twist peoples minds by twisting the meaning of words. And once you can twist it once you can say that there is this terrorism of the bulldozers and thats what they say then you can prepare the way for the acceptance by millions who listen to this pulp day in and day out that there is some kind of equality between a grievance that the Palestinians may have unjustly unjustly as far as the agreement is concerned thats for sure. In my opinion, as far as history and as far as justice is concerned, but thats not the point. Suppose they have a grievance. We have a grievance against them in Jerusalem. But that grievance cannot be used to vitiate the meaning of the word "terrorism," to apply it where it doesnt belong, and indeed to legitimize the blowing up of 50 people in a cafe in Tel Aviv, and the murder of three young women, one with an unborn child, and the other leaving aside a scarred baby girl that will never grow up a normal human being, that will always be scarred, whether her physical wounds heal or not her mother she will never see.

I said on another occasion that nothing justifies terrorism. And the attempt to exculpate terrorism, the attempt to excuse it or explain it, understand it, is an attempt, however unwittingly applied by some, to justify war crimes. Terrorism is a war crime. War crimes the basic concept of a war crime is that even though mankind is consigned for the foreseeable future to engage on occasion in the armed conflict we call wars, we proscribe we prohibit armed combatants to deliberately attack the other part of humanity outside the war that is, defenseless civilians women, children, men, babies. They might be hurt accidentally, but they cannot be deliberately and systematically attacked. Thats the whole idea behind the convention outlawing war crimes. If you dont have these limits, then anything is permissible. If you dont have these limits on attacking deliberately and purposefully and systematically, men and women and children and babies, then there are no limits that tell you that you cannot throw a million babies into ovens, or five or six million.

And therefore the attempt to in any way explain terrorism an insidious attempt that we are witnessing today is an attempt essentially to do what I recall is Pope John Pauls magnificent statement. He said the greatest danger of terrorism is that it can murder mans sense of sin. And we must never accept this attempt, using Jerusalem or any other excuse, to in any way limit or diminish the horror of the savagery committed by these terrorists. And we will never accept terrorism. Nothing justifies terrorism. Nothing, period.

I think that for the peace process to proceed amid the difficulties that still lie ahead it is important on every occasion that each one of you without exception make your outrage of this obscenity known. It is important that you hone continuously hone the perception and understanding of citizens, but especially of political leaders and government leaders of the absolute unacceptability of terrorism.

Now, its now a month almost a month since the Palestinian Authority has made it clear to the terrorist organizations that they can resume operations. The results are known. I can tell you that a week after the bombing in Tel Aviv only a miracle prevented the slaughter of scores of young children, ranging in age from four to twelve, and I saw them on the same day in my office, and I was deeply moved and deeply gratified that such a miracle took place. I think that we should make clear that we cannot accept what we are being told. We are being told that if we want the terror to stop we must stop building in Jerusalem. You are familiar in this country with this procedure. In the United States it is called a protection racket. Its extortion. And it never ends. Its something that we reject. We are not going to be a part of it. We are not going to pay a price for the privilege of not being killed.

Ive been talking about terrorism, because I think its important to understand that no peace negotiations can take place under its threat. I think thats understandable to you too. Its the position of another foreign government foreign to the United States, but a close ally as well. Britain is now considering negotiating with the Sinn Fein. And it is said that they are demanding the complete cessation of terrorism before the British government sits down and negotiates with the Sinn Fein. We are not taking that position. We are not taking that position because we recognize that in our part of the world there are enough fanatics who can crawl out of woodwork and try to obstruct peace negotiations. We dont demand from our Palestinian partners 100 percent success. We do demand 100 percent effort. We dont attribute the presence or the perpetration of occasional isolated acts as a necessary breakdown of our partners will.

Ill give you an example. Three weeks ago we had a terrible terrorist incident. A Jordanian soldier killed, in a terrible act of savagery, seven schoolgirls aged 12 and 13. We didnt point an accusing finger at Jordan. We knew that the army of Jordan, the security forces of Jordan, the government of Jordan, and the king of Jordan make every effort and spare no effort in order to fight terrorism. And you saw how movingly King Hussein expressed this attitude when he came to Israel to comfort the relatives of the slain girls.

So as much as wed like to have 100 percent success, what we are asking from our Palestinian partners is 100 percent effort.

And right now what we are receiving is close to zero percent. And that has to change. And if it changes if it changes in the coming days and weeks, I can assure you that I will be the first one to welcome this change.

So it is the fulfillment of the most basic provision of Oslo that we seek. But I dont want to leave you with the sense that we have given up on the other provisions. We have kept our side of the bargain. And we should be judged on whether we have done so. Well, in the last three months actually in the last two and a half months we have done the following: We have redeployed in Hebron not easy. We have released female terrorist prisoners some of them with a lot of blood on their hands a commitment taken by the previous government not easy, but we did it. We passed over significant funds to the Palestinian Authority, even though they still owe us a lot they dont pay their phone and gas bills not easy, but we did it. We decided on the first redeployment something that caused a lot of controversy within my own cabinet not easy, but we did it. We lifted the closure. We encountered a situation where there were 25,000 workers, Palestinian workers, entitled to work in Israeli cities. We raised it to 56,000 some risk not easy, but we did it. We did all these things and other things because these were solemn commitments that we took, and I said we keep Oslo.

Now, look at what happened on the other side. You have already heard about Palestinian offices in Jerusalem a violation of the agreement. The fact that we have terrorists that are released rather than incarcerated is a violation of the agreement.

The fact that there is hostile incitement towards terrorism and violence is contrary to the agreement. The fact that the military size, the size of the military forces and the police forces of the Palestinian Authority well exceeds the limit set by the agreement is a violation of the agreement. All of this, and other violations, are shunted aside. And the equation is put forward in the following way: Israel, which keeps the Oslo Accords, is accused of violating them. And the Palestinian Authority, which violates the Oslo Accords, is credited with keeping them. This is the reality within which we find ourselves. I dont have many opportunities to reach such an important audience, so I have gone through in some elaboration on this point. But it is very, very important that the truth comes out. We cannot fight this battle for peace if we dont fight the battle for truth. And you are our ambassadors for truth.

So if you want to be truthful, then there are two essential conditions for peace. One of them is the mutual fulfillment of obligations, which I call reciprocity. And the other is the abandonment of violence and terror and the systematic fighting against terror which can enable us to proceed down the road for peace. We have to assure ourselves that this battle against terrorism is not episodic, its not ephemeral, its not something that is done for the next three weeks, but is something that is consistent and remains a permanent feature of Palestinian policies and attitudes. And this requires us to be convinced that the sword is not unsheathed to be used periodically every time we have an argument and then sheathed again for a few weeks until weve reached the next impasse. What we want is this sort of terror to be beaten into plowshares and pruning forks and computers, into anything but terror. And that I think encapsulates the twin expectations that we have from our negotiating partners.

And if that is achieved, if we can have an assurance of a change of policy and a change of heart, then we can proceed towards final settlement negotiations. That is not a diktat; its an option. Its an idea. And the idea basically says that rather than spend time on a protracted path, eroding mutual confidence, that we try to telescope the final settlement process and try to engage all our energies, all our efforts, on trying to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict altogether. One can spend an enormous amount of effort on a small thing, or one can spend an enormous amount of effort on a big thing. Id rather spend it on a big thing and get to the end of this conflict. Both our peoples Palestinians and Israelis deserve such a solution. And I am convinced that an accelerated process will benefit both sides. But this is an option that must be considered alongside other options. And the United States and President Clinton are considering their ideas. I am sure they will be presented to us in full form over the next days and weeks and months, and I am sure the same will apply to the Palestinian Authority. I trust the United States to be not only an indispensable partner for peace it has been the mainstay of all our successful efforts for peace all of them, from Camp David on and it will be in this successful effort as well.

But I think the key ingredient to assure that these peace talks succeed is the narrowing of the distance between the sides. And this requires, of necessity, tailoring expectations to reality. Its not easy to do that. Its the main job of leaders to do that, because your constituents will always demand more.

Now, we had to take a significant move, and we took it before the elections and after the elections. We recognized that we could not fulfill all our dreams. We recognized there were facts on the ground. We recognized there were agreements that had been signed. And we said that we would honor those agreements and recognize those facts and it wasnt easy not before the elections, not after the elections, not before Hebron and not after Hebron not today. But that is the job of leaders. They have to tell their people the truth and make them see the forward vision and the reality of the present. We do not see yet such a movement on the Palestinian leaderships part. They still cling to an impossible idea. They cling to the idea that we will return to the 67 boundaries, that we will redivide Jerusalem, that we will build a Palestinian state. I have to tell you we are not going back to the 67 boundaries. We will not risk ourselves and the lives of future generations. And we are not going back to those insecure and indefensible lines. We oppose the Palestinian state because those sovereign powers that accrue to statehood such as control of the airspace or control of the borders, and the importation of weapons of mass destruction, or even focused destruction could endanger the very survival of the state of Israel. And we certainly under no circumstances will ever redivide Jerusalem.

You hear references today references today that you hear about Jerusalem or Arab East Jerusalem as a separate city there is no such thing. Jerusalem is one city. It was divided for 19 years. It was reunited in the Six-Day War. It shall stay united. I spent my childhood in that city from Day Two when I was two days old. And so I grew up in that city, and I remember it. I remember it as a city, a walled city. In the middle of the city there was a wall with barbed wire and sniper positions. And I remember that people could not sit on the terraces of the King David Hotel without fear of being shot from the Old City. They preferred always the rooms facing the other way. Now thank God it has changed. It will remain changed.

And the fact of our bond with the city of Jerusalem is something that all of humanity recognizes, and certainly those that dont recognize it they dont do so because they dont know our special bond. We have a bond with that city unlike any other bond of any other people to any other city in the world. It is a bond that has existed for 3,000 years. And no other people had Jerusalem as its capital during those three millennia except the Jewish people. No other people will have Jerusalem as their capital for the coming millennia as well.

I dont think there is any other body in the world that recognizes our attachment to Jerusalem and our rights to Jerusalem more than the U.S. Congress, the Senate and the House together. Since the Six-Day War, since Jerusalem was reunited, Congress has recognized the unity of Jerusalem in 30 special and separate initiatives, and this includes initiatives by such extraordinary figures in American life as Scoop Jackson and Hubert Humphrey and Everett Dirksen and Immanuel Celler the youngsters here dont remember those names, but I remember those names wonderful, wonderful Americans. And Jacob Javits and Hugh Scott and Edward Kennedy and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Joseph Lieberman, and Connie Mack, and Newt Gingrich, and Daniel Inouye and many, many others who have raised their voice in Congress on behalf of Jerusalem.

And there are many, many leaders here tonight who are doing and who will continue to do much with the unity of Jerusalem. I think that some of them have spoken in remarkably moving ways. I think of since this is a bipartisan meeting that Dick Gephardts description of Jerusalem as the crown jewel of modern civilization is a wonderful penetration of the truth of what Jerusalem encapsulates in peoples aspirations. He called it a triumph of faith and freedom not just for the Jewish people, but for all people. And on the other side of the aisle Trent Lott, in another house, talked from this podium on his next visit to Jerusalem, and he talked about touching those great stones of the Western Wall that still speak to us over all the tragic ages stones which remained the enduring foundation of faith that has survived the unthinkable and accomplished the impossible.

These are words that come from the heart of people who share our aspirations, because Jerusalem is more than a city. It is a great ideal. It is sacred to the three great faiths of the world to Islam, to Christianity and to Judaism. And it is something that we will always hold as precious for them as it is for us. It is the city on the hill. It is often the city of harsh reality and conflict, but its also the city of light and dreams. And it is the city of song and prayer prayer for a better world, prayer that there will be peace for men and women of good will, that we will see this peace in our lifetime and bequeath it to our children for all time. The people of Israel and the government of Israel are determined to do whatever is possible to realize this hope for peace peace for Jerusalem, peace for Israel, peace for Israels neighbors. And with your help all of your help I am sure we will succeed in this effort. Thank you.

I want to thank Senators Stevens and Kerry for having the patience to endure. And I have to apologize to them and to you I have a plane to catch. Its mine but I have an appointment in Jerusalem. So I want to say thank you again, and see you soon in Jerusalem not next year, but this year. Thank you.

Source: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs