September 22, 1978 Mines And Hazards On The Road To Peace
Addressing the Knesset
Only by the end of the five years will we know whether the agreements indeed yielded the hoped-for results. The historical breakthrough of peace between Israel and Egypt, and perhaps other Arab states, was achieved in Camp David with the signing of the two framework agreements. These agreements contain far-reaching mutual compromises to be made by Egypt and Israel. Egypt indeed achieved everything it asked for concerning Egyptian-Israeli mutual relations, but had to forgo its demand for an Israeli commitment to a full withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 [prior to the Six-Day War] borders in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Egypt also had to forgo its demand for the establishment of a Palestinian entity whose fate and future will be determined solely by the Arab world. It should not be concluded from this that Egypt has given up on pursuing these demands, once the negotiations
are renewed in a few years, and once a final settlement is reached regarding the problems that are connected to the peace on Israel’s eastern front, when the five-year interim period comes to an end.
Gravely Mistaken
In order to reach a comprehensive peace with Egypt, Israel forwent all of its demands in the Sinai, thus consenting to the full evacuation of the IDF and the settlements there. In addition, Israel has committed itself today to several principles regarding a solution to the Palestinian problem and the fate of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Israel agreed that the solution should indeed recognize the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and its demand for the establishment of a full autonomous rule in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip in the first stage or within a short period of time. The responsibility for internal security in the territories will not be in Israel’s hands. The establishment of new settlements in the territories will be put on hold for an as-yet-undetermined period of time. The question of the legal
authority under which the IDF will stay in strategic positions in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip also remains unclear. The question of under what legal authority Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip can be maintained also remains unclear.
The Israeli achievement lies in the fact that a peace agreement with Egypt has been reached, based on the fulfillment of all of Egypt’s demands. But Israel is not reserving the right to insist on fulfilling its own demands regarding the sovereignty over and the borders of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip at the end of the interim period.
Reviewing the achievements contained in the agreements that were signed this week in Camp David, we ought to be aware of the fact that we have paid a dear and painful price for these agreements. Those who claimed in the past, or those who presently think, that it is possible to achieve peace without forgoing much of the conceptual world we have adopted since the end of the Six-Day War, are gravely mistaken. This week, reality slapped them in the face.
Regarding the agreement with Egypt, for the first time in the annals of the State of Israel we shall face the necessity of uprooting an entire system of settlements, spread between Yamit and Ofir. We must therefore take into account that this constitutes a fundamental precedent. In case Syria decides to join the negotiations, the gravity of this precedent will be understood much better when it concerns the settlements on the Golan Heights. In addition, no [Israeli] security forces will remain in the Sinai, with all of those consequences. This fact will have serious significance at the end of the five-year interim period in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, when a confrontation will undoubtedly take place between us and Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinians. They will demand a complete withdrawal from all the territories, including East Jerusalem.
Many Questions We are facing a period of approximately five years that will be strewn with mines and hazards. Only by the end of this period will we know whether the agreements indeed yielded the hoped-for results. On the one hand, this will be the test for the reality of peace that will take place between Egypt and Israel and its ramifications on the two nations and the entire Middle East. On the other hand, simultaneously with the signing of the peace agreement with Egypt in three months’ time, the self-rule, the autonomy, must be established in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip.
There is a connection and a relation between signing the agreement with Egypt and the abolition of the military rule and the Israeli civil administration in the territories. Later on, we shall face a series of problems arising from the Palestinian self-rule in the territories. This self-rule will, in fact, manage the lives of the Arab inhabitants there, and Israel’s involvement in anything that happens in the territories will be very limited.
A lot can happen. Many questions will arise: Who will control the back and forth movement of people across the Jordan bridges? Who will control the ’right of return’ to their homes of those inhabitants who left their homes after the Six-Day War or prior to it? Who will own the state-owned land in the territories? Who will have the authority to approve the purchase of land? Who will oversee the basic overall planning in the territories? Who will deal with terrorist operations which stem from the territories and attack inside Israel? And what will happen if at the end of the first year of the Palestinian Administrative Council it requests observer status at the United Nation General Assembly?
Wisdom and Restraint I could have mentioned here quite a few more questions which today have no answers. However, despite apparently having reached a separate peace agreement with Egypt, there is a link and a connection between it and the framework of peace in the Middle East, which is the second agreement that was signed at Camp David. For Egypt could always claim that as long as the terms of the framework agreement regarding Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip (which it co-signed) are not fulfilled, Egypt has no obligation to observe all the terms of the first agreement.
We must remember that in President Sadat’s response to UN Secretary General Gunnar Jarring in 1971, the following position was included: the readiness to sign a peace agreement with Israel, alongside the determination that there are additional conditions for reaching a just, stable and lasting peace in the Middle East. Then, as now, the relation between the two remains vague, and its interpretation is also in Egypt’s hands.
From all of this it becomes clear that Israel still has not reached a state of peace and security. During the five years ahead of us, we shall face many difficult trials which will require wisdom, restraint, and stern insistence on the fundamental issues in order to guarantee peace and security for the State of Israel.
Iran News
Français
