I do not know how to answer in three minutes, but I will try.
The first issue is very important and several members addressed it, including the two Senators who must leave. It is probably personal but I wish to say loud and clear that there was a certain assumption in this room that Israel does not have the right for security reasons to still occupy, as some of the members said, territories because it is afraid for its security and there is still no stability. I wish to say in the most personal manner possible that I would never, because of my personal beliefs, my record on human rights and having been a prisoner of conscience in the past, spend one minute in any occupied territory, other than as political tourism to learn the situation. However, I would never live in occupied territories. Nobody has the right to occupy territory or oppress anyone for security reasons. That is the wrong way to run the world.
There is a long dispute taking place in our area between people living in the area, and nobody, neither the Jews nor the Arabs, will disappear. We are there and we will be there and we will have to find a modus operandi for living there. It is easy to say: “Just finish the occupation”. Which occupation? What year was the Palestine Liberation Organisation, PLO, created? It was created in 1965. The last time I checked Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip were not under any form of Israeli control in 1965. As PLO stands for Palestine Liberation Organisation, what exact territories was it going to liberate in 1965? If anybody has a good answer for me, I will stop my closing remarks and listen to the answer.
Members said they know settlements are an obstacle to peace and ask me why we build settlements and how can I live in one. I do not live in a settlement. I live in a Jewish community. All the land in the area - there were some remarks about the land - was bought for ready money, to use the language of Oscar Wilde, in the 1920s by a Jew named Holzmann. That was long before the creation of the Jewish state and long before anyone in the world had an idea that there would ever be a discussion about creating a Palestinian state. However, we all know that settlements are an obstacle to peace. This is a very interesting theory; this theory has the right to exist. There were 16 Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip and because, as we all know, settlements are the main obstacle to peace, they were all evacuated. A total of 10,000 people were evacuated. None of them was there illegally.
This morning in Dublin, after I woke up, I looked through the Internet. Today, one does not need newspapers. The Israel Defence Forces, IDF, arrived at a certain place in the area called Benyamin outside Jerusalem and threw out a number of people who were trying to start illegal construction there. This is not what we are talking about. We are talking about communities created and built by the government, all of them evacuated from the Gaza Strip. As we all know, settlements are the main obstacle to peace, and the moment we go back to the 1967 borders, there will be peace in the area. Would it not be fair to expect that since there is not a single soldier or Jew present in the Gaza Strip and Israel has moved back to the 1967 border that there would be at least some normalisation in the area? Would it not be fair for an Israeli in the street - as somebody rightly said, when I talk it is official Israel talking - to ask why, given that there are no settlements or army there, instead of peace we get 11,000 missiles fired? They hit the civilian population in the lands that are not disputed. Ashkelon, Ashdod and Rishon LeZion - some members will be familiar with these names - are not disputed territory. People live there. There is a lady in Ashkelon who visited her dentist and the missile injured both her and the dentist.
Why is that? Is it because there are illegal settlements in the Gaza Strip? The Chairman referred to the ongoing blockade or siege; I cannot recall the word he used. Does that not contradict the basic assumption that we should simply move and the conflict will be over? Is anybody enjoying being there, the MV
Mavi Marmara and so forth? I do not see any Israeli interest in doing all these things after there is not a single Jew there if it were not after the security threats we are still facing. We cannot seriously say there is no threat as 11,000 missiles is a very serious threat. That changed after the evacuation, not in terms of the living standards of the families in the Gaza Strip. The main change was that instead of home made or hand made rockets that could hit the nearby town of Sderot we are now facing state of the art missiles.
It is important for me to mention that the issue is a little more complex than that. Those who think it is a minor territorial conflict might say, "You go to these borders, they go to those borders and that is it". One of the distinguished members of the committee said if we go to these borders and they go to those borders we will leave in peace but what is the answer regarding refugees? Palestinians claim that 6 million Palestinians have the right to come into the state of Israel. I never heard one Palestinian leader, and I am not talking about Hamas, say that he or she, in the name of peace, the peace process and co-existence, is prepared not to discuss or to drop the issue of the so-called Palestinian refugees. People sometimes believe there are 70 million Jews living in Israel. That is not the case. There are 6 million Jews living in Israel. I am not sure that bringing in 6 million Palestinians, most of whom were not born in the area and do not live in the area, would be a good idea of a homeland for the Jewish people.
I started by talking about the issue of occupation and security but there is another thing to mention in this discussion, even matter of factly - the Holocaust and the bad behaviour of the Europeans, and now it is at the expense of the Palestinians. We are not where we are because of the Holocaust. The United Nations probably decided, after not deciding for many years and letting the Holocaust happen, because of the Holocaust. We are not there because of the Holocaust. The first Zionist congress took place in Basel approximately 40 years before the Holocaust. It is not because of the Holocaust that the Jews want to go back home. It is not because of the Holocaust that they were thrown out of their home and to the best of my memory there was no talk about the Palestinian people when all those decisions were taken.
Having said that, I am not implying that I should not notice the interests of the Palestinian people. Something that hurt me here personally was in terms of identifying with the pain of the Palestinians. I identify a lot with the pain of the Palestinians and I am sorry for being so immodest but I will mention again that I have some idea what it means to be oppressed. That is why I cannot understand how people can say they are good friends of the Palestinians because they are friends of Arafat or the PLO or that they are good friends with Hamas because they care about the Palestinian people. I am not sure that in the country where I grew up someone who said he was a good friend of Stalin or Brezhnev would say he was a good friend of mine. I am not sure that is the equation - being friends of the leaders of the terrorist organisation that was created before the issue of Judea and Samaria arose means being a friend of the Palestinian people.
In terms of co-operation and investments in the area, there are other ways to do that. One does not have to be friends with the bad guys to try to operate. It is not easy but being friends with the PLO includes $8 million spent in one week by Madame Suha Arafat in Paris. She had a nice exit from her high tech company. From where did she take $8 million? Was that money not supposed to help the Palestinian families? I refer to a specific case. It is not Israeli propaganda; it is a well-known fact. In one week she spent $8 million on shopping in Paris. That is European money. It is taxpayers' money, including taxpayers in this country.
It is very important for us to understand that co-operation does not necessarily mean raising hands and saying, as one of the distinguished members of this committee said, that they were democratically elected. They were not democratically elected. I do not recall many parties running in those elections. I do recall speaking of the issue of human rights, which is important. Regardless of whether they are the human rights of Jews, Christians or Muslims, human rights are important. I totally agree that they are important in every place around the world. Shall we check on women's rights or the rights of homosexuals? I would not recommend anyone who wants to be openly homosexual to travel to one of the Arab countries. Gay parades are happening in Tel Aviv, not in Damascus, Riyadh or Amman. We must have proportions when we speak of human rights. Israel is not perfect. As I said to the members tongue in cheek and with a smile, when I am in the opposition I have many nice things to say about my government. I promise them that if they were sitting in a committee on defence and foreign affairs, which is what it is called in Israel, they would hear the members of the opposition saying terrible things about the government, including myself, but that is democracy. We are not perfect but one cannot compare the human rights situation in Israel with the situation of any neighbouring countries.
Speaking of diaspora affairs, we are so far away from that. If I said to Jews in any country around the world that they all had to move to Israel but they did not want to, what would I do about it? Would I get the well-known Israeli paratroopers to put them in a plane, as they did in Entebbe, and bring them to Israel? The creation of this ministry of diaspora affairs is a very good answer to that.
The members were right to mention, in terms of the classical Zionist approach, that Israel was created for the gathering of the exiles but it turned out that things were a little more complicated. Not every Jew, upon the creation of the state of Israel, said it was their dream for 2,000 years to move to Israel. The reality is more complex, and it is important, just as it is important for this country to be in touch with the Irish for, as one of the members said, economic reasons but not only for economic reasons. It is legitimate for the country of origin to be in touch with its people around the world, even if they are not planning to move in the near future and are not always supportive of and happy about all the actions of the country or of this or that government in the country. It does not matter, and even more so in the case of the state of Israel because the raison d’être of the creation of the state of Israel after 2,000 years was the gathering of the exiles and helping out Jews.
That brings us back to the issues of threats. We are not, God forbid, some kind of world Gendarmerie. We are not happy about taking care of issues. We expect different governments around the world to protect and serve their citizens - Christians, Muslims and Jews - against anti-Semitism. Thank God that is the case in most places around the world but, unfortunately, as someone mentioned earlier, when someone is talking about the destruction of the state of Israel I hope I will not be told I have to see a psychiatrist. I tend to take very seriously, after the Holocaust, the threats of those who tell me openly at every stage that they want to destroy the Jewish people and the state of Israel. That is what Ahmadinejad is saying quite openly. I am not putting words in his mouth. That is his open policy. He says it even in the United Nations and throughout the world.
It is legitimate for us to remember that when there was no Jewish state various conferences took place on this continent trying to find out whether some European countries would receive additional quotas of Jews, and most countries on this continent said they had enough Jews. It is vitally important for us to keep in mind that we want to have Israel as our homeland.
Having said all that, I agree with all those who said we must work hard to solve the conflict. It depends on what happens at the moment the conditions are right in terms of having a partner for the solution. I cannot promise the committee that I know exactly what the solution will be, where exactly the borders will be or what will happen to a specific community, but the desire for a solution is such - I say this to committee members as colleagues, as elected officials - that any peace plan, unrealistic as it might be, when put to a referendum in Israel by a strong government, will pass. One can explain to Israelis logically that it cannot work or will not work, but people are so thirsty for a solution that they are eager to buy any peace plan. However, thank God, Israeli governments are responsible; we have learned the hard way that there are no short cuts. There are no scissors, if I may use the expression again, to cut the map accurately in a way that will result in peace. However, we will continue trying and working on this. There is a great role for the international community to play, including those who really want to help the Palestinian people.
I will address issues such as the Goldstone report. It was absurd to witness, when we said the Goldstone report was, to say the least, inaccurate, the international community saying to us, "You Israelis never listen. Whenever people criticise you, you say they are anti-Semites. We cannot deal with you because you will not accept any criticism." However, Judge Goldstone then published an article in one of the American newspapers saying his report was inaccurate and that he did not know many of the facts. Why are we always getting into the same situation? It is so easy to bash Israel. The United Nations accepted all kinds of resolutions, even before the results of the Goldstone report were published. Once again, people confront Israel, saying, "How come even the United Nations has certain resolutions, but you do not listen to them?" On the day the Goldstone committee was appointed, there was already a resolution that Israel was to blame for the MV
Mavi Marmara; why, therefore, was a committee even appointed? Why did it not wait for its own committee’s results? I am sorry if I am a little emotional; I remember the Chairman’s remarks at the beginning.
We continue to look for a solution. It is absolutely legitimate that some in this room, in a discussion about practical solutions, do not agree with my views, as I would not agree with the views of others, but there is one thing I can promise. With all due respect to the remark made here that sometimes in a coalition government extremists rule or have a veto, no one in the government was ever going to topple the Prime Minister, Mr. Netanyahu, because of the peace process or the negotiations. He is unable to start the peace process because it takes two to tango. The moment there is an understanding that the other side is at least willing to negotiate, there will be negotiations. There will probably be some progress, if we are talking about trust-building measures and practical co-operation.
It has been mentioned that it took 24 hours for some lady to get to the hospital in Bethlehem because of roadblocks. My government, the so-called right-wing government, removed more than 300 roadblocks in Judea and Samaria. There are no roadblocks dividing Bethlehem from any village in the area. I will not accept argument on that point because I live five minutes from there and travel those roads together with the Palestinians. I was passed by Palestinian cars on my way to the airport to travel to Dublin. There are no roadblocks. The only so-called roadblock is at the entrance to the State of Israel and I do not think anyone can question the right of Israel to check who is going into its capital. There cannot be a situation where someone will have to wait 24 hours at a roadblock if there is no roadblock. I thought the story was going to be about a woman who wanted to go to an Israeli hospital but could not get there. I do not understand how a woman could not get to Bethlehem, as there are no roadblocks on that side of it. In terms of measures on our part, we are removing roadblocks and asking for co-operation. As I said, the Prime Minister froze settlement construction work for ten months, which obviously did not please anyone. In terms of openness towards negotiations, we are ready.
The situation in the area about which the Chairman asked - Syria - makes us even more conscious of the need for negotiations. I remember the many times I sat in committees in various parliaments, including the European Parliament, and someone said, "Mr. Edelstein, how come you are still in the Golan Heights? Give it to Assad and Syria and there will be peace." I said, "But Assad is a dictator. We do not know what will happen tomorrow," and everyone said, "Assad is there forever." It turns out Assad has not been there forever.
The Chairman, rightly, asked me for my comments. I can comment a lot, but I cannot do much because this is not about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and it is definitely not about Israel playing a role in what is happening in Syria, which is a terrible massacre. In using the words "terrible massacre" I am directly quoting my Prime Minister at the opening meeting of the Cabinet on Sunday. We are witnessing a terrible massacre and at the same time a situation in which the building of a balcony in Ma'ale Adumim is a terrible crime against human rights. The Security Council sits for hours and days and weeks and cannot take a decision on the situation in Syria because, I guess, killing 80 or 100 citizens a day is less of a violation of human rights than building a balcony in Ma'ale Adumim. We must see things in proportion and realise Israel is not perfect, but it definitely desires a peace process and an effort to achieve peace. It is not about helping other countries or the area; it is our utmost goal in order to invest in all of the wonderful things suggested by some of the distinguished gentlemen here. It will be easier for us to talk to each other and make some progress in the area. I thank you for your patience, Chairman.