ZGram - January 11, 2002 - "The Paul Revere Series" - Le Monde interviews former head of Shin Beth

[irimland@zundelsite.org]

  Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland

 ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny

 January 11, 2002

 Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Continuing with the Paul Revere series, today I let you listen to an
unusual Israeli voice coming from the most unusual quarters.   The
interview below is with the former Israeli Intelligence Chief of the
all-important internal security service, Shabak - important to the survival
of the Israeli state, that is! - where he expresses his assessment and
strong reservations about current Israeli policies in an even more
surprising forum, the prestigious liberal leftist French paper, Le Monde.

Ami Ayalon served from February 1996 to May 2000 as the head of the Israeli
internal security service known as Shin Beth. Described by Le Monde as
"small, lean, dressed in jeans and an open shirt, Ayalon  speaks calmly,
but forcefully."  In a few terse answers to fundamental questions about
well-known Israeli founding myths and forever-hyped formulas for "peace and
victory" he cuts right through some of the current Israeli self-delusion
and self-deception.

This interview is one more step in the right direction - and it is,
frankly, astounding that it was given, and even more astounding that it was
printed!  It will help and, hopefully, encourage responsible Diaspora Jews,
Israelis and Gentiles alike, to come to a realistic assessment and
comprehension about what must be done as an absolutely essential first step
to start any honest attempt at a settlement of the festering Middle East
conflict.

Observing Sharon and his fanatical friends, it is easy to predict they will
ignore this sound advice as they have so often - at their peril!

[START]

AN UNCONDITIONAL WITHDRAWAL FROM THE TERRITORIES IS URGENTLY NEEDED

 Jerusalem -- Sylvain Cypel  (Le Monde):

 How do you see the state of political debate in Israel?

 Ami Ayalon

Israeli society, top to bottom, is sinking into confusion. There are no
reference points. People mask this reality with swaggering slogans: "We
will vanquish terrorism!" At a colloquium, the army chief of staff
declares: "We are winning"; he evokes the "superiority of Tsahal"-- the
Israeli army -- and his "feeling that the nation is finding its strength".
Then he adds "there are today more Palestinian terrorists than a year ago"
and says there will be even more tomorrow! If we are winning, how come
terrorists are multiplying?

 In Israel, no one is in touch with reality. This is a consequence of a
misperception of the peace process.  "We have been generous and they
refused" is ridiculous, and everything that follows from this misperception
is skewed. Moreover, our obsession with the Palestinians makes us forget to
ask questions about ourselves. What do we want to be? Where are we going?
No leader addresses these questions. Thus the confusion and general
anxiety.

 Sylvain Cypel

The majority of leaders though are convinced that time works in favor of
Israel.

 Ami Ayalon

Since September 11, our leaders have been euphoric. With no more
international pressures on Israel, they think, the way is open. This
obscures the consequences of our holding onto the Palestinian Territories.

 This is not only a moral matter. Our founders saw a state that provided a
homeland for Jews and was a democracy. From both points of view, time plays
against us!  Demographically, it works in favor of the Palestinians. And
politically in favor of Hamas and the settlers. But to fight against Hamas,
we must evacuate the settlers, whose proximity to the Palestinians
reinforces hatred.

 Among the Palestinians, the weight of the Islamists is increasing, and
also that of intellectuals who used to favor a two-state solution, but who
now say: "Since the Israelis will never evacuate the settlements, well,
then, there will be a binational state". This is something I absolutely
oppose. It would not be a Jewish state any more. And if it remained a
Jewish state while dominating the Arab population, it would not be a
democracy.

 Sylvain Cypel

Do you exclude the possibility of an Israeli victory, despite the power
differential?

 Ami Ayalon

We have had our "victory"! In 1967, we occupied all the Palestinian lands.
Once "terrorism is vanquished", what shall we do? This is absurd. The
Palestinians want self-rule. Whoever wants to "vanquish" them, then offer
them bread and circuses, understands nothing. The Israeli army is stronger
than ever, our secret services are excellent; then why is the problem not
resolved? Reoccupying the Palestinian Authority lands, and killing Arafat,
what would that change? Those who want victory want an unending war.

 Sylvain Cypel

Yet, since September 11, many think that Israel can change the regional
situation in its favor.

 Ami Ayalon

An illusion! September 11 has changed many paradigms in the U.S., but
nothing basic in the Middle East. Whatever Arafat's errors, the Palestinian
people will continue to exist. As long as the Palestinian question is not
resolved, the region will not know stability. Only a Palestinian state will
preserve the Jewish and democratic character of Israel. We do need
international political and financial help to resolve that problem and that
of the refugees, because as long as the refugee problem persists, even if a
Palestinian state exists, it will poison our relationship.

 Sylvain Cypel

But the Israelis are traumatized by the Palestinian demand for the return
of refugees.

 Ami Ayalon

Let us stop worrying about what our adversaries say and ask what we,
ourselves, want. We do not want the return of the refugees. But we can
refuse only if Israel acknowledges unambiguously its role in the suffering
of the Palestinians and its obligation to help solve the problem. Israel
must accept the principle of the right of return and the PLO must commit
itself to not question the Jewish identity of our state.

 Sylvain Cypel

What do you think of the view put forth by the head of Mossad of Israel in
the front line of the "third world war" against terrorism?

 Ami Ayalon

Anyone who equals Arafat with Bin Laden understands neither Arafat nor Bin
Laden. The latter is the guru of a very harmful sect, but one that is very
marginal to Islam; it aims to bring chaos and cares nothing about the
international community. But Arafat dreams of being accepted by the
international community -- since 1993, he has constantly made reference to
it, demanding the application of the UN resolutions, while we, Israelis,
refuse! If Bin Laden is killed, his sect may disappear with him. If we kill
Arafat, the Palestinian people will continue to want its independence.

 Sylvain Cypel

Do you fear that the Palestinian Territories may become a quagmire?

 Ami Ayalon

We say the Palestinians behave like "madmen" but it is not madness but a
bottomless despair. As long as there was a peace process - the prospect of
an end to the occupation -- Arafat could maneuver, incite or repress
violence to better negotiate. When there is no more peace process, the more
terrorists one kills the more strength their camp gains.  Yasser Arafat
neither prepared nor triggered the Intifada. The explosion was spontaneous,
against Israel, as all hope for the end of occupation disappeared, and
against the Palestinian authority, its corruption, its impotence. Arafat
could not repress it. The peace process is what allowed Arafat to be seen
as the head of a national liberation movement rather than a collaborator of
Israel. Without it, he can fight neither against the Islamists nor against
his own base. The Palestinians would end up hanging him in the public
square.

 Sylvain Cypel

>From Oslo to Camp David, did Israel miss a rare opportunity for peace?

 Ami Ayalon

Yes. It is not all the Israelis' fault. The Palestinians, the international
community, bear some responsibility, but we missed an extraordinary
opportunity: the international situation was incredibly favorable after the
fall of communism, the Gulf war, the emergence of globalization, all these
phenomena led Israel to reexamine its own assumptions. Now, we are
regressing.

 Sylvain Cypel

Do you favor a "unilateral separation" from the Palestinians?

 Ami Ayalon

I do not like the word separation, it reminds me of South Africa. I favor
unconditional withdrawal from the Territories -- preferably in the context
of an agreement, but not necessarily: what needs to be done, urgently, is
to withdraw from the Territories. And a true withdrawal, which gives the
Palestinians territorial continuity in a Transjordan linked to Gaza, open
to Egypt and Jordan. If they proclaim their own state, Israel should be the
first to recognize it and to propose state to state negotiations, without
conditions, on the basis of the Clinton proposals, to resolve all pending
problems.

 [end]

 (Source:  " L'urgence, c'est de se dsengager inconditionnellement des
territoires" Le Monde, http://www.lemonde.fr, originally published on 23
December 2001)

=====

Thought for the Day:

"Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."

(Thomas Jefferson)