Source: TA2309153093 Jerusalem Kol Yisrael in Hebrew 0942 GMT 23 Sep ’93
Arye Deri explains why Israel cannot permit Arab return to Israel and chastises MK Yitzhak Shamir for participating in the Madrid Conference and not boycotting the PLO there, and then in this debate having the audacity to criticize those in favor of the Oslo Accords signing, undertaken with the PLO. Peres criticizes Shamir for being a Prime Minister for eight years and doing nothing. Peres called this day a great day for the Knesset, noting significantly that he rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Commenting on the situation in Gaza, since it was being considered as territory that Israel would relinquish but not return to fully independent Palestinian control. Peres asked, ‘What is the situation in Gaza today? Do you think life in Gaza is heaven?” And then, Peres outlined his sentiments about Gaza’s population and Israel’s immediate roles there.
“There are in Gaza this year between 750,000 and 800,000 inhabitants. Within 20 years, there will be almost 2 million residents in the Gaza Strip. The population density leads to violence, the poverty leads to terrorism. I would like to ask whether Gaza is in our hands. I would like to know what ours in Gaza is. The poverty, the population density, the refugee camps, the lack of passports, the lack of a future? What is ours in Gaza? Do we have the money or resources to help 1 million people in Gaza, do we have the funds, can we resolve the refugee problem, do you want to be the lords and masters there? We will have the responsibility, but we will not be able to give them a penny. Can we resolve the Gaza problem? The only way to help Gaza is through economic aid, and that will be done with international help, and the world will never extend it if Likud policy is followed.
Do you want the Israel Defense Forces to act against poverty, against overcrowded cities, against the needy? Is that what you want? What do you mean, our Gaza? What is yours there? The refugee camps, the poverty, the shame that is ours? I believe that the Jewish people have a conscience, and they cannot bear to live with such a stain.
I would like to say this to the religious Knesset members: Can you overlook the situation, let these camps stand? Can we? Where have you been? Is there a Jewish justice? Do we not remember our own misery in [ancient] Egypt? I would like to say this: Can the Jewish people have a famine-stricken Gaza Strip on its conscience? Can it bear the poverty and the hostility which cause knife-wielding? The knives, in turn, caused the closure, which I support. They have no jobs, and having no passports, they have nowhere to turn, and yet it is being persistently said that Gaza is ours. Ours? It is our disgrace. In the words of MK Me’ir Shitrit: This agreement may possibly create new national priorities, and then we will perhaps start seriously addressing social welfare problems, our own society’s problems. Can we deal with Gaza’s welfare? Think of our own poor first! Think of our own country’s problems first!”
Why should we use weapons to fight an Arab minority and use weapons to protect an Arab majority when neither side wants us? Can one nation be the policeman of another? Where is the logic in that? The IDF, the Border Police, the Israel Police will all have an easier task. Ask the reserve soldiers whether they want it. Let them defend their country rather than police Gaza. They are the Israeli Defense Forces, not the Gaza police force.”
” Today we are the policemen of Gaza — albeit no ordinary policemen: We are one nation policing another. We, a nation with its own laws and legislative authority, are policing a nation which can neither legislate nor defend itself. And to quote Me’ir Shitrit again: The country has never been ours. Israeli citizens, he said, had been afraid to hang around in Nabulus, Hebron, Janin, Gaza, and in East Jerusalem too, he said.”
“I would like to note here that I am not seeking to implement the erstwhile Zionist idea because I realize it does not work. What was that Zionist idea? We used to say that we will heap benefits on the Arabs. How did the Arabs take it? As patronizing, as a takeover, as something negative.
Neither do I propose that we talk of economic cooperation. Why? Because the Arabs believe that the State of Israel wants to dominate the region. We do not want to do the Arabs any favors. I am not even suggesting economic cooperation with the Arabs. All I am telling the Arabs is this: There are problems that will remain unresolved unless we tackle them jointly. We should make a joint effort only when problems are insolvable without such a joint effort.”
Ken Stein, February 10, 2024
Remarks by Israel Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Arye Deri
At the Knesset Debate on the Oslo Accords
September 23, 1993
[Statement by Foreign Minister Shimon Peres concluding the special three-day Knesset debate on the accords with the PLO, live; speech frequently interrupted by heckling] [Text] Mr. Speaker, honorable Knesset, before I get involved in polemics, I would like to make a serious response to two or three remarks made in this House, because even now there are (?unclear) things, and for the sake of common sense and not politics, I would like to explain matters.Knesset Member [MK] Arye Deri said that we must decide on red lines. The first line, and I believe the entire House supports this, must be to oppose the right of return by the Arabs residents. I would like to explain why somebody like myself, and I will say it without any emotion, believes this is a red line. There are Arabs who ask us why we have the right of return and they do not? My first answer is that had the Jewish people had 22 Jewish states it is doubtful whether the State of Israel would have decided on the right of return to the Land of Israel. That is the first difference between us and them. Second, each of us-on the left and right-understands that the right of return means upsetting the demographic balance. What is called the Jewish state is, in fact, a state which has a Jewish majority. None of us came to live in Israel in order to convert the Jewish state into a non-Jewish state, therefore, MK Arye Deri, that unifies us all.
The second thing is Jerusalem. Do we need a license from you to unify Jerusalem? It is a fact that Jerusalem is in our hands, it was united by us and will remain united. That is sacred. Do you want to introduce doubts? We united Jerusalem, we will not convert Jerusalem into another Berlin, we will not divide Jerusalem, it will remain united. I want to tell the Likud’s Ariel Sharon that in my view, his speech contained a constructive tone despite the criticism, when compared, of course, to the other Likud speakers. Ariel, Jerusalem will not be the capital of the autonomy. The autonomy will be set up in Jericho, which will be its administrative center.
MKYitzhak Shamir, you attended the Madrid conference, where Haydar ‘Abd-al-Shafi said: I am speaking for the PLO, the legitimate leadership of the Palestinians, and you did not move away. You knew it — admit it — that he spoke in the name of the PLO. What right do you have to attack us? You brought the PLO into the negotiations. You are the forefather of the PLO. You spilled my blood. You spread lies about me. MK Shamir, in the name of the Israeli government — had I been Binyamin Netanyahu, I would have shown you the newspaper, since you may have forgotten — heard ‘Abd-al-Shafi say that thousands of Palestinian refugees have the right to return home. It happened to Mr. Shamir around that table in Madrid. Shamir sat firmly while ‘Abd-al-Shafi said Palestinian Jerusalem is the capital of his homeland and state and that the Israeli annexation of the Arab city is illegal. Shamir continued sitting quietly and remained silent. Shamir lived part of his life in France and became a connoisseur. He is choosy. He does not like Arafat. Does he like [King] Hussein? Does he only like Hamas [Islamic Resistance Movement]?
[Shamir shouts indistinct remarks at Peres] Do not shout; you have been wasting our lives for eight years. You are a prime minister who did nothing. You did not bring peace. It is a great day for the Knesset, and you do not understand anything going on, you do not realize with what you are dealing. It is a great day for the majority of the MKs,not such a great day for some of the factions in the Knesset. In actual fact, there is no more debate on the peace accord since it is clear that there is a majority among the people and in the Knesset in favor of it. The only debate is over party discipline in the vote. This side gave its MKsa free vote while the head of the opposition tells his members to do as they are told. ’Ovadya ’Eli, Me’ir Shitrit, As’ad As’ad, and Roni Milo are told to raise their hands and not let their consciences dictate to them. I have also been an opposition leader. Freedom should be given in a vote on such an issue. The majority of the people and the majority of MKs support it.Many MKs spoke to the point, they referred to the future. Opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu spoke about the present and the future, but both in one-dimensional terms, as though there is one dimension in life, that of the prophet. What prophecy? Jeremiah without the prophecy of the resurrection of the dead. His reference to the present is also one-dimensional and not updated. He refers to many risks. MK Netanyahu: Are there no risks to Israel today? Is everything safe here at present? Israel does not have enemies. There is no intifadah? In the debate, one thing that did not get addressed is the current situation, as though Israel now is Denmark or Norway or Switzerland. Is Israel not facing dangers at present? Is the only danger to Israel the establishment of a Palestinian state, which I reject, or is there also a danger that Israel will not be able to be a Jewish state? What is the situation in Gaza today? Do you think life in Gaza is heaven? I hope it will not prevent Me’ir Shitrit from voting the way he should. He gave one of the best speeches. He asked: Is Nabulus in our hands now? He asked whether Nabulus, Jenin, and Gaza are in our hands. He asked the right questions.
There are in Gaza this year between 750,000 and 800,000 inhabitants. Within 20 years, there will be almost 2 million residents in the Gaza Strip. The population density leads to violence, the poverty leads to terrorism. I would like to ask whether Gaza is in our hands. I would like to know what is ours in Gaza. The poverty, the population density, the refugee camps, the lack of passports, the lack of a future? What is ours in Gaza? Do we have the money or resources to help 1 million people in Gaza, do we have the funds, can we resolve the refugee problem, do you want to be the lords and masters there? We will have the responsibility, but we will not be able to give them a penny. Can we resolve the Gaza problem? The only way to help Gaza is through economic aid, and that will be done with international help, and the world will never extend it if Likud policy is followed.
Let us be responsible: Do you want the Israel Defense Forces to act against poverty, against overcrowded cities, against the needy? Is that what you want? What do you mean, our Gaza? What is yours there? The refugee camps, the poverty, the shame that is ours? I believe that the Jewish people have a conscience, and they cannot bear to live with such a stain.
I would like to say this to the religious Knesset members: Can you overlook the situation, let these camps stand? Can we? Where have you been? Is there a Jewish justice? Do we not remember our own misery in [ancient] Egypt? I would like to say this: Can the Jewish people have a famine-stricken Gaza Strip on its conscience? Can it bear the poverty and the hostility which cause knife-wielding? The knives, in turn, caused the closure, which I support. They have no jobs, and having no passports, they have nowhere to turn, and yet it is being persistently said that Gaza is ours. Ours? It is our disgrace. In the words of MK Me’ir Shitrit: This agreement may possibly create new national priorities, and then we will perhaps start seriously addressing social welfare problems, our own society’s problems. Can we deal with Gaza’s welfare? Think of our own poor first! Think of our own country’s problems first!
And then there is, of course, the security problem. I have to say that in this sense, it will naturally be more difficult, because more settlements will have to be defended. However, why should IDF soldiers serve as a barrier between Hamas and the PLO? Why do we, as a nation, want to put another nation’s affairs in order? Why should we use weapons to fight an Arab minority and use weapons to protect an Arab majority when neither side wants us? Can one nation be the policeman of another? Where is the logic in that? The IDF, the Border Police, the Israel Police will all have an easier task. Ask the reserve soldiers whether they want it. Let them defend their country rather than police Gaza. They are the Israeli Defense Forces, not the Gaza police force.
I would like to quote some more. Here is another quote from Me’ir Shitrit, whose speech, by the way, was the best of all: What is our alternative? Will we close the door on peace? That will bring us back to the intifadah and to war. I am telling the Likud — I am quoting Me’ir Shitrit — and the Labor: Neither the Likud nor the Labor government managed to curb the intifadah. And I am telling Me’ir Shitrit: You are absolutely right. It is time to change the policy, not the government. The intifadah raged under the Likud government, too; nothing abated, terrible assassinations were perpetrated. It is now time to change our policy rather than our government.
Violence is caused by two things: hostility and hunger. We want to put an end both to hostility and to hunger. We want to tackle the situation from the root, not from the crown. Today offers a good opportunity to end the hostility; putting an end to hunger is up to the world, but the world will not do it unless there is peace. Otherwise, fundamentalism will surge and rise.
Today we are the policemen of Gaza — albeit no ordinary policemen: We are one nation policing another. We, a nation with its own laws and legislative authority, are policing a nation which can neither legislate nor defend itself. And to quote Me’ir Shitrit again: The country has never been ours. Israeli citizens, he said, had been afraid to hang around in Nabulus, Hebron, Janin, Gaza, and in East Jerusalem too, he said.
With regard to Jerusalem, I would like to quote from the speech of MK Refa’el Eytan, whose facts, I am sure, were utterly accurate. Basing his remarks on mysterious and anonymous sources, he said: The secret Israel-PLO agreement speaks of a freeze on construction in Jerusalem — notice the wording — from the day the document is signed until the termination of the negotiations on the city’s permanent status. We signed the document a week ago; has construction in Jerusalem stopped, Raful [Eytan’s nickname]? Has anyone given instructions to stop it? You spoke in such assertive terms: No construction at all since the signing day. Did you see anyone stopping construction? Did you see anyone giving instructions to stop construction? And MK Raful added: If such a document exists, why are you hiding it? For a simple reason, Raful: Because it does not exist, because there is nothing to hide. He went on to say: Will you deny it, if there is no·document? Yes, you can relax: We are hereby denying. I have a lot of respect for you, and I do not want you to suffer in vain. Therefore, I am telling you: There is no such agreement; there is neither a secret nor an open agreement to this effect. There is only one agreement: that Jerusalem is outside the autonomy.
I would like to note that I usually respect MK Beni Begin’s remarks, which are usually accurate. I would like to tell MK Beni Begin, the accurate man who deals with delicate things of the past: You spoke of conciliation and arbitration, and you asked about the fate of Jerusalem. I am really surprised that a man of your intelligence should not know that conciliation and arbitration pertain solely to the autonomy period, while Jerusalem is outside the autonomy. There is to be no conciliation or arbitration; Jerusalem is outside the autonomy.
[At this point, the Knesset speaker, having received Peres’ consent, allows two questions from the plenum. MK Refa’el Eytan says: “I will read from a document issued by the Municipality of Jerusalem: The secret Israel-PLO agreement speaks of freezing the construction in Jerusalem from the day the document is signed until the termination of negotiations on the city’s permanent status.” A Kol Yisrael correspondent notes: “Having glanced at MKEytan’s document, MK ‘Imanu’el Zismann said: This is not a municipality document; this is a National Religious Party document.” The second question is not asked at this point.]I would like to tell MK Refa’el Eytan: There is no secret document either on Jerusalem or … [prolonged catcalls] Raful, you have been sold damaged goods. There is no such agreement, either secret or public.
With regard to conciliation and arbitration, I would like to say that neither side can have arbitration without the consent of the other when one of the following three issues is at stake: A. Arbitration can take place only during autonomy, but even then, it cannot be applied either to Jerusalem or the settlements. B. It can happen only if we agree that a certain issue should be arbitrated. C. It can happen only if we agree to arbitration in the first place. Then what do we have here? Neither Jerusalem nor the settlements, and no arbitration without our consent. [MK Beni Begin is now allowed to pose a mostly indistinct question about the status of Jerusalem.]
Knesset members, is it conceivable that a Palestinian delegation that comes to negotiate the permanent status will refrain from raising the issue of Jerusalem? What is the difference? These are mere polemics, anachronistic polemics.
With regard to settlements: The present government of Israel is committed to maintaining the security of all existing settlements in Judaea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip, and we will do so most seriously, honorably, and responsibly. Furthermore, we will protect them although it is very difficult and very expensive, and despite the fact that the Likud’s hopes to have the settlements help the IDF defend the country, instead of the IDF defending the settlements, may have been dashed. The IDF will defend the settlements. I would like to tell MK Ariel Sharon, who wanted protection through territorial continuity: There will be operative continuity, namely, the IDF troops will be able to move in order to protect the settlements in case of need.
I anticipate three principal tasks. One is bringing peace for the Jewish people and the entire region: our Arab neighbors and our Palestinian neighbors. This is a noble objective befitting the Jewish people’s heritage of justice and peace. The second task: An enormous opportunity to strengthen the State of Israel has arisen, but not with territories populated by Arabs, but rather with open areas like the Negev, which will beckon to Jews from the CIS, Ethiopia, and other places. The era of hostility is over; it is now time to welcome immigrants and settle our country.
Now for the economic aspect. Knesset members, we learned after World War II that a nation can gain independence while forfeiting its true substance. [Labor MK Zismann is now permitted to make an observation. He accuses MK Eytan of falsifying the origin of the document he read.] After World War II, tens of thousands of Algerians sacrificed their lives for their country’s independence, but instead of independence, there was tragedy. Some 50 percent of that nation is unemployed, there is no equality for women; the nation is rebelling against the corrupt regime, and as a result, moving on toward extremism. And here is my central thesis: Without the genuine blend of a strong army, a truly deterrent power, with political wisdom and economic investment, none of the nations will have any future here. This combination, rather than segregation, is the real thing. Weapons also require money, as do armies, and education.
I would like to note here that I am not seeking to implement the erstwhile Zionist idea because I realize it does not work. What was that Zionist idea? We used to say that we will heap benefits on the Arabs. How did the Arabs take it? As patronizing, as a takeover, as something negative.
Neither do I propose that we talk of economic cooperation. Why? Because the Arabs believe that the State of Israel wants to dominate the region. We do not want to do the Arabs any favors. I am not even suggesting economic cooperation with the Arabs. All I am telling the Arabs is this: There are problems that will remain unresolved unless we tackle them jointly. We should make a joint effort only when problems are insolvable without such a joint effort.
I will explain. For instance, we cannot curb the arms race without a regional accord. Israel will not diminish its security and military efforts unless the entire region does likewise. Today the region spends $50 billion on weapons. What for? Therefore, we — the Likud really — have set up a joint committee to discuss arms control. That committee has begun its work, and its work makes a lot of sense. I would like to cite another example: One of the spheres which can greatly benefit both Israel and the Arabs is tourism. Without quiet, there will be no significant tourism in this region. Tourism will create hundreds of thousands of jobs. It is the most modern, the most political industry, since it generates a desire to maintain the peace. Another example: The Middle East will be worthless without a joint transportation and communications infrastructure. My fourth example: The Arabs have an area of 13 million square kilometers, only 11 million of which are fertile. And they are expected to lose a quarter of this land over the next 11 years.
I want you to know that one of the things that makes me proud — besides the IDF — is Israeli agriculture. It has had colossal successes! We will never forget how kibbutzim and moshavim have been mistreated. The Food and Health Federation [preceding four words in English] has published some very interesting facts. It said that due to technological backwardness, the Middle East will require a period of one generation — 25 years — to double its agricultural production. By the way, the Middle East population will be 500 million, instead of 230 million, in 25 years. Even if productivity doubles, there will still be no food surplus.
Now for Israel: Within one generation — 25 years from 1950 to 1975 — our agricultural production grew 12 times; 1200 percent within 25 years is an unprecedented achievement — and this is not our own definition.
Moreover, most of the Middle East does not have a particularly fertile farming land. The desert occupies a large part of it, and there is serious water shortage. Now listen to what is being said about Israel: In the l 950s, the contribution of water and land to the advancement of agriculture was 60 to 70 percent, while the contribution of technology, research, education, and planning amounted to 30 to 40 percent. Yet in the past decade, research, technology, organization, planning, and education were 95 percent, while water and land were only 5 percent. This is the most advanced agriculture in the whole world, and the Arabs — as well as China, India, Kazakhstan — seek this tremendous Israeli expertise.
We do not want to dominate anyone, and we do not want to do anyone any favors. We are ready to share our experience with all nations. David Ben-Gurion was serious when he referred to this nation as the chosen people, a light to the world. We will continue in this spirit.
Thus, only a security-political-economic combination, only the combination of the world, the region, and us in every sphere … [pauses]
And I would like to tell those who are constantly looking back to past wars: The wars of the past are nothing like those of the future in a world rife with missiles and nonconventional weapons. These things have no answer except for the combination of economy, politics, and security. This combination is reflected perfectly in this important agreement, which was endorsed by the prime minister, as well as the Cabinet members. I have said the same to the Arabs: In the Middle East, we can buy a ticket to one of two places — either revert back to the darkness of the Middle Ages of fundamentalism, or to the 21st century. The 20th century is over, done with. We can march either backward or forward. All those who are pulling us backward in the name of nonexistent things do not see how things have changed, do not see their country, do not understand their fellow Israelis, do not appreciate their talents. This is a country poor in crude oil but rich in brainpower, a country that can create more with intelligence than with an oppressive rule.
On the eve of Yorn Kippur, I have the right to say just this once to this audience: No one in this country has been maligned and libeled as often as I have been. My life is too short to be able to refute all the lies about me, starting with the identity of my late mother down to the factories I was supposed to own. I refuse to let this be, and you have no moral right to behave as you have. Enough of your false allegations, your mud-slinging, your hurting me and making things up about me.
Despite my bitter feelings, I would like to say in the spirit of Yorn Kippur: My anger has never interfered with my understanding of what is right, although everything I have ever done generated opposition. It happened many times. I am proud to work with Yitzhak Rabin for a genuine peace for the State of Israel. We do not serve each other; we serve a great and genuine cause, a historic cause. You can see that the nation is not with you. Look at what goes on in your own camp!
Despite my anger, I will recite this prayer: Our Father, our King, remember thy mercy and suppress thy wrath, and vanquish all plague, sword, hunger, captivity, evil, and all disease, and all disaster, and all evil edicts, and vain rancor. I am past 70, and I remember what a Greek sage once said. He said: What is the difference between war and peace? In war, he said, old folk bury their young, while in peace it is the other way around. I would like to make the world younger, I would like the young to own the world, the future, to have life and security. I am calling on everyone, including the religious people, to vote for the young generation, to let them live their lives in peace, security, and justice in accordance with the heritage of the Jewish people.
MKs Vote 61-50 to Endorse Accord
TA2309125493 Jerusalem Kol Yisrael in Hebrew 1200 GMT 23 Sep ’93
[Text] The Knesset has voted confidence in the government and endorsed the agreements Israel signed with the PLO. Sixty-one Knesset members supported the agreements, and 50 opposed them. Eight MKsabstained, including five SHAS[Torah-observing Sephardim] MKs and three Likud MKs:Roni Milo, Me’ir Shitrit, and As’ad As’ad. SHAS MK Yosef ‘Azran did not attend the debate.The Knesset rejected all the draft resolutions summing up the debate submitted by the opposition factions of the House. The prime minister said he would consider the draft resolution submitted by the Likud, Tzomet, the National Religious Party, and Agudat Yisrael a vote of confidence. This resolution was also defeated, although the three Likud MKswho had earlier abstained in the vote on the agreements with the PLO voted for it.