On the "Peace Process" General Comment: Like Colonel Nicholson in The Bridge on the River Kwai who became obsessed with the mission he was assigned by his Japanese captors, Peres has refused to recognize anything that interferes with his mirage of peace, even if the price is the safety of his nation and its citizenry. }~ We are learning that the peace process has a strength of its own and that politics cannot stop the peace process. (Jerusalem Post Weekly Edition, January 25, 1997) }~ We assume that peace is larger than government. (Boston Globe, Oct. 22, 1997) }~ I don't think there is any government which is stronger than peace. Peace will overcome all governments. }~ (Speech on receiving honorary doctorate, San Diego State University, August 1997) You cannot kill life and you cannot kill peace. So peace is not dead. Peace is not dead even if someone declares it is dead. (Reuters, October 17, 2000) }~ [Asked what would happen if an Arab leader who made peace with Israel was killed] Well, the system of government is transitional, peace is permanent. (Middle East Quarterly, March 1995) COMMENT: As the five preceding quotations illustrate, Peres frequently treats "peace" as a physical entity, rather than as a term describing a relationship between states or peoples. }~ [Discussing the appointment of Carmi Gillon as Ambassador to Denmark in remarks to the Knesset] "[Gillon] has not lost his faith in peace as the best option for making peace between the peoples and bringing it to each people separately" (Foreign Ministry Bureau, July 24, 2001) COMMENT: Peres reifies "peace" to such an extent that he can speak of peace itself as an option for peace; to anyone else it is gibberish. }~ [Interviewed on the fourth anniversary of Oslo, and asked whether the peace process could be defeated by its opponents] The Oslo Process will obliterate everybody. (Interview Israeli radio, September 13, 1997) COMMENT: Peres was corrected by the interviewer who commented that Peres surely meant that Oslo will defeat its adversaries and Peres concurred. But what a Freudian slip! }~ After we won the land that we didn't intend at all to win, we returned it — we returned the land and the water to Egypt, to Jordan; we withdrew from Lebanon. We offered the Syrians a complete return of the Golan Heights. It's supposed to be 'land for peace' — we gave back all the land, I'm not sure we got back all the peace, to be truthful. (Briefing to Diplomatic Corps, September 4, 2001) }~ We gave back all the land. We are not sure that we got back all the peace. Land is tangible. Peace is airy or, shall I say, moody. So when you give back tangible real estate, that's it. But when you hang on the return, you have to follow the passing and changing winds, some of them very unpleasant. (Speech, Annual Meeting of the American Jewish Committee, Washington D.C., May 3, 2001) }~ We are trying to negotiate discreetly, because we feel if we shall be able to achieve a cease-fire, then we shall be able to return to the agenda of peace, the sooner the better. (Speech to American Jewish Committee, May 3, 2001) COMMENT: Peace does not have an agenda; the two parties must have peace on their respective agendas. And even though Peres says in the same speech that Prime Minister Barak offered the Palestinians 99% of the land, and they reacted with violence and terror, Peres will not admit that peace may not be on the Palestinian agenda. }~ In Argentina, the home of the tango, you know that in order to dance well you have to close your eyes and let the romance begin. . . . Peace is a romantic process. (The Jerusalem Report, May 1, 1997) COMMENT: A government leader advocates "closing your eyes" in dealing with existential matters of state. }~ We can overcome terror. We are strong enough. We can reach peace. We are willing enough. (Speech to American Jewish Committee, May 3, 2001) COMMENT: For Peres it takes only one to tango. }~ We have to replace the fire of hatred with the water of existence. (Peres on "Natural World", broadcast over New York's Channel 13 — PBS — on April 10, 1999) . COMMENT: Apparently Peres hopes to fight terror bombings with water, or perhaps with "existence." }~ [After nine months of Arafat's war, Peres says the "emotional gap" between the sides] is deeper than the territorial one. What we have is a crisis of confidence not less than of land — two peoples, each outraged vis-a-vis the other. Each lost a great deal of trust. (Jerusalem Post, July 12, 2001) }~ [After eleven months of Arafat's war, with Arab attacks escalating rapidly, Peres says] It's an extremely difficult situation. The two peoples are really angry. But you make peace between enemies and you make cease-fire out of fire. (Associated Press, September 6, 2001) }~ Peace is very much like love. It is a romantic process — you have to be living it, you have to invest in it, you have to trust it. As you cannot impose love, so you cannot impose peace. (San Diego Union-Tribune, August 29, 1997) }~ You know, the biggest catastrophe for Israel is the lack of peace. If you don't have peace you have conflict. (Australia/Israel Review, June 6-26, 1997) }~ Oslo can never die because the Palestinians are free and freedom is never dead. (Australia/Israel Review, June 6-26, 1997) COMMENT: (i) "Oslo" is presented as a religion that "can never die" (ii) Peres falsely asserts that "the Palestinians are free," when he knows that they live under the autocratic rule of Arafat and his coterie and (iii) Peres identifies freedom with Oslo. He is unwilling to consider the possibility that Arafat used Oslo as a tactic for Israel's staged destruction. }~ Peace is not the pursuit of war by other means. Peace consists of putting an end to the red ink of past history and starting anew in a different color. (Shimon Peres, "Why We Need a Palestinian State," Le Monde, August 22, 1999) }~ And I do believe that the Socialist International morally and otherwise, can continue the great role to bring an end to those complicated conflicts that have existed in this century. (Speech to Socialist International, May 18, 1998) COMMENT: The Socialist International is an organization of little influence and less morality. In regard to Israel its main role has been to support Arafat (for decades) and to improperly interfere in Israeli elections by clandestinely funding the Labor Party. }~ The Oslo Process real sin was that the agreement was not upheld. We were left stuck in the middle, with one government [Netanyahu] proposing a too-little alternative and another government [Barak] proposing too much. (Yediot Achronot, Sept. 17, 2001) }~ [Asked by an interviewer if he is sure "everything will be fine once an agreement is reached" Peres says] This will all be a done deal at the moment when there are agreed upon borders. (Yediot Achronot, Oct. 1, 2001) COMMENT: Peres has complained that Barak offered "too much;" how then does he believe there will be "agreed upon borders?" }~ [When Assad refused to meet with Israel despite U.S. assurances to Assad that Israel was prepared to return the entire Golan Heights] The season of peace is over. We shall have to wait for a new season. . . . I see Assad all the time buying tickets on the train in order to miss it. (Reuters, April 30, 2000) }~ I think if the Oslo process would have been implemented, the whole situation would be far better. (Briefing by Peres to Foreign Press, Sept 10, 2001 released by Ministry of Foreign Affairs). COMMENT: This remark of Peres is reminiscent of the deathbed statement attributed to Chamberlain — "If only Hitler had kept his word." }~ I think in Oslo we laid the basis for understanding. . . . It has shown the Middle East how the Middle East can be different. . . . I think the hopes and potential of the Oslo agreement is incomparable as a proposal for the people, more than any other process that they know. (Transcript of briefing to Foreign Press, Sept 10, 2001) }~ We achieved unbelievable things. We recognized the PLO, we brought in Arafat, we provided the Palestinians with land and authority. Nobody did it. When you are negotiating about peace, it is more difficult to negotiate with your own people. (Transcript of interview published in Al-Ahram Weekly, Cairo, December 2-8, 1999) }~ [Asked whether he will meet with Arafat even if violence continues] Our meetings are without any prior conditions. I think that putting conditions is contrary to the spirit of negotiations. I don't know for the moment if he did arrest people or not, but I appreciate the fact that we have had another half day with a real cease-fire. And if this will be continued through another sunrise, another sunset, then we shall meet. (Press conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Ismail Cem, Tel-Aviv, Sept 21, 2001) COMMENT: For Peres, a half-day elicits gratitude! }~ [Asked if he thought the national unity government would survive long, Peres replied] Sharon must do some soul-searching, no one can escape the dilemma. There is no substitute for an agreement. Fences will not stop Katyusha missiles or suicide bombers. (Yediot Achronot, Oct. 1, 2001) }~ When the interviewer says he wonders if the Palestinian dreams of returning to Jaffa and Haifa will disappear when an agreement is reached, Peres replies] On this issue I recommend to kill and annihilate. (Yediot Achronot, Oct. 1, 2001) COMMENT: Since Arafat continues to insist he will not give up "the right to return," Peres incongruously seems to be recommending all-out war. }~ In Oslo, for the first time, we embarked on a daring path. We went far, without leaving reality behind. (Article by Peres, Yediot Achronot, September 17, 2001) COMMENT: On September 24, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking in Washington D.C., called Shimon Peres "the first Israeli astronaut. Peres is in outer space,totally unconnected to what is going on here. He did not learn a thing from the great bloodshed caused by Oslo that he brought us." }~ It is worth remembering that in order to reach an agreement, one needs a partner, not just a plan. Both of these conditions were created at Oslo. For the first time, there was a Palestinian leader and a Palestinian movement that sufficed with the 1967 map (22% of the entire Land of Israel). Even if we did not like this, there was no ignoring the Palestinian viewpoint, which saw this as a compromise. (Article by Peres, Yediot Achronot, September 17, 2001) COMMENT: Peres echoes the false assertion that Judea, Samaria and Gaza comprise 22% of "the entire Land of Israel." Moreover, the Palestinians demand the right to return within the 1967 borders. }~ [After Oslo] For the first time the State of Israel was recognized in fact and in deed, and things began to happen on the ground: terror decreased dramatically, the start of self-rule began in Gaza and Jericho, a new mood prevailed in relations between Jews and Arabs, the peak of which was the Casablanca conference, the most impressive conference on peace and economics ever to take place in the Middle East. (Speech by Peres, Yediot Achronot, September 17, 2001) COMMENT: The only "achievement" of the Casablanca conference was the decision to create a regional development bank, which died on the vine. Only Peres perceived the "new mood" between Jews and Arabs. QQ }~ [Asked why the Rabin cabinet had a dinner party the same day a cab driver was murdered by terrorists] Almost every day there is an attack. (Israel Army Radio. Feb. 14, 1995) COMMENT: Contrast this with the previous quote in which Peres rewrites history to claim "terror decreased dramatically" after Oslo. }~ In my opinion the Oslo agreement was rendered null and void when the government changed in 1996. (Haaretz, October 21, 2001) COMMENT: This is breathtaking. Peres actually blames the government of Israel for the collapse of Oslo. In fact, of course, Netanyahu continued the "peace process," withdrawing from Hebron and making substantial new concessions at the Clinton-brokered Wye meeting. }~ We have offered the Palestinians full liberty: all of the land, a position in Jerusalem, without any Bin Laden and without any bomb. And even if there is a remaining difference of 1 or 2 percent this doesn't justify killing thousands of women and men and children in New York or in Washington or elsewhere — no justification. (Remarks by Peres at National Press Club meeting, Washington, D.C., October 22, 2001) }~ [Asked to comment on the Arab claim that the failure to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict was responsible for the terror attack on the U.S. on September 11, Peres replies:] Ithink it's 100 percent right. (Interview, CNN, October 23, 2001) COMMENT: Incredibly, in both the above quotes, Israel's Foreign Minister (on a mission to bolster Israel's foreign relations!) endorses the Arab claim that the Arab-Israel conflict is responsible for the huge loss of life in the U.S. Apart from being a terrible blow to Israel's public relations, the charge is false. In 1998, three years before the World Trade Center bombing, Foreign Affairs published an article on Bin Laden by the distinguished Middle Eastern scholar Bernard Lewis entitled "License to Kill." In it Lewis describes Bin Laden's motivation, as outlined by Bin Laden himself. His foremost ground for jihad was that the United States was occupying Saudi Arabia "the holiest of its [Islam's] territories." The second most important ground was the U.S. attacks on Iraq; and third place was U.S. efforts to maintain "the survival of Israel." The document concluded that it was the duty of every Moslem to "kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military" until "their armies, shattered and broken-winged, depart from all the lands of Islam, incapable of threatening any Muslim." The last thing a spokesman for Israel should be doing is to foster the false notion that eliminating Israel would end the West's problems with the Islamic world.