President Bush's call to change the Palestinian
leadership and to bring reform, accountability, and transparency to the
Palestinian Authority should focus attention on the financial corruption
of Arafat's regime. Before Bush's speech, Condoleezza Rice, the national
security adviser, accurately summed up the situation in the San Jose
Mercury News: "Frankly, the Palestinian Authority, which is corrupt and
cavorts with terror, . . . is not the basis for a Palestinian state moving
forward." Judging by the response of Yasser Arafat and his lieutenants,
however, no such change is likely anytime soon.
How corrupt is the PA? How much money have Arafat et al. stashed away?
Where did the money come from? How long have we known about it?
The first public evidence that Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization
had at least $10 billion came to light when the Pakistani-owned rogue Bank
of Credit and Commerce International was shut down by the Bank of England
on July 5, 1991. Britain's National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS)
published its own estimate of the PLO's loot in a 1993 briefing paper on
organizations threatening the UK, calling it "the richest of all terrorist
organizations." NCIS estimated the PLO's ill-gotten gains at $8-10
billion. In addition, the PLO enjoyed an annual income of about $1.5-2
billion from "do nations, extortion, payoffs, illegal arms dealing, drug
trafficking, money laundering, fraud, etc."
In the U.S., the General Accounting Office investigation of Arafat and the
PA's wealth in November 1995 was kept secret because the CIA insisted that
the publicity would hurt the "national security interest." This despite
the CIA's own report in 1990 that the PLO had $8-14 billion.
Then came the Oslo accords. Following the 1993 ceremony on the White House
lawn, Arafat pleaded poverty and set out, hat in hand, on a world aid
tour, claiming that the peace process would collapse without financial
support from the international community.
Exactly how much money Arafat and his gang have pocketed is hard to
ascertain. But the conspicuous consumption of Arafat and his inner circle
- rows of ostentatious villas, shopping sprees in Paris, and late-model
Mercedes-Benzes - has not gone unnoticed by ordinary Palestinians, who
live in dismal conditions.
When $326 million disappeared from PA coffers in 1996, the Palestinian
Legislative Council established a special commission to investigate
corruption within the PA. The ensuing report found that nearly 40 percent
of the PA's $800 million annual budget (coming mostly from foreign aid)
had been lost through corruption and mismanagement. The PA's comptroller
wrote: "The overall picture is one of a Mafia-style government, where the
main point of being in public office is to get rich quick." Arafat
suppressed the report but promised reform.
In October 1999, Azmi Shuaibi, chairman of the PLC's Budget Committee, had
harsh words for the PA at the 9th International Anti-Corruption Conference
in Durban, South Africa: "The recent corruption found in the PA is similar
to the corruption that exists in the rest of the Arab countries'
governments."
Soon after, the London Daily Telegraph revealed that computer hackers had
broken the security code of the PLO's computer system, uncovering records
of about $8 billion the PLO held in numbered bank accounts in New York,
Geneva, and Zurich, and smaller secret accounts in North Africa, Europe,
and Asia. The newspaper also unearthed further secret holdings of the PLO
- including front companies, European real estate, and shares in
Mercedes-Benz and the national airlines of the Maldives and Guinea-Bissau
- totaling about $50 billion for the year 2000 (up from $32 billion
recorded in 1998). Naturally, Arafat and his men denied the report.
Ongoing demonstrations by disgruntled Palestinians frustrated with this
corruption convinced Arafat that his rule was becoming shaky. It was in
large measure to deflect internal turmoil that he launched the intifada.
In 2000, Arab countries pledged $1 billion to the PA to ease the economic
hardship of the Palestinians. Past dealings with Arafat, however, prompted
them to demand that "Chairman Arafat show complete transparency in the
funds" and provide a detailed report on how the money would be spent.
Arafat refused to comply, and the Arab leaders suspended transfer of the
money, telling the PLO chairman that they were doing so "for fear that the
money will end up in the wrong pockets."
By April 2001, however, things had changed: Arab donor countries,
recognizing in Arafat's intifada a convenient distraction from their own
countries' problems, began pumping money again into the PA. At least $45
million per month was transferred directly to Arafat, most notably from
the Saudis and Saddam Hussein. This money was not given to alleviate the
suffering of the Palestinian people, but to fund PLO terrorist training
and organizations, such as Islamic Jihad and the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.
Recently, the monthly donations from Arab nations were increased to $55
million, in addition to the hundreds of millions of dollars raised in
special events to fund the escalating intifada, such as the now infamous
Saudi telethon to raise money for the families of Palestinian homicide
bombers.
Money flows in from the European Union, too. Despite voluminous evidence
of use of aid money to fund terrorism collected by the Israeli Defense
Forces at Arafat's compound in Ramallah - including handwritten
instructions from Arafat himself - millions of dollars continue to pour in
from the EU. Why? Chris Patten, the EU commissioner, wrote on May 7 that
"the EU had not seen any hard evidence that the EU funds have been misused
to finance terrorism or for any other purpose."
"Arafat Bombs, Europe Pays" was the headline of the German newspaper Die
Zeit on June 7. The newspaper's special investigation into EU funding
revealed that at least 4.1 billion euros have flowed from the EU to the PA
since the autumn of 1993, in addition to hundreds of millions of euros in
grants contributed by individual European countries. When the Israelis
stopped transferring the PA's share of revenues from import duties after
realizing where the money was going, the EU stepped in to replace those
funds. Each month since June 2001, 10 million euros have been paid
directly to Arafat.
Die Zeit reported that a few European legislators called for an end to the
funding for fear that the money was being used to fund terrorism. But
Chris Patten dismissed these concerns, praising "Europe's especially
strict mechanisms for ex-ante and ex-post controls." Not even the
interception of the illegal arms shipment from Iran on the Karine-A fazed
EU bureaucrats. So, the financial umbilical cord from Europe to the PA
remains, and the IMF representative charged with monitoring how the funds
are used admits that "we do not oversee how every euro is spent, because
we are not auditors."
On June 19, following a slew of homicide bombings by Arafat's al Aqsa
Martyrs Brigades, the EU parliament voted to give an additional $17.7
million to the PA. According to the Associated Press, "Patten conceded
that corruption in Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority and other
problems made it impossible to know where every euro finally ended up
[because] 'it's an impossible question to ask in the real world.'"
But perhaps some in the Arab world have had enough. On June 5, the Kuwaiti
daily Al-Watan published documents it received from a Cairo branch of a
Middle Eastern bank showing that Arafat had deposited $5.1 million into
his personal account - to support his wife and daughter, who live in Paris
and Switzerland. According to the same report, the money came from Arab
aid funds that had been allocated for the Palestinian people.
By now, EU aid to Arafat and the PA has reached at least $4.5-5 billion.
U.S. aid to the PA runs about $75 million annually, not including the
millions of dollars sent each year from private sources. Corruption is
rife, and today the Palestinians are further away from democracy than ever
before. As long as Arafat controls the PA's funds and he and his gang
remain in power, no real reform is possible. |
|
At this very hour, the entire nation of Israel is
silent. The Jewish state is commemorating the 20,000 soldiers who gave
their lives to defend the state of Israel and the thousands of civilians
struck down by the forces of terror in our long battle for freedom. Just a
few months ago, America too lost thousands of its citizens to terrorist
savagery. And we stand here today to honor these fallen sons and daughters
of liberty.
But I've also come here today, my dear friends, to give thanks, to thank
all of you for standing up for the Jewish state when so many outside
America stood silent to thank the American people and their government for
remembering the difference between freedom and tyranny, between right and
wrong, between good and evil, to thank President Bush for boldly declaring
that terrorism, the deliberate attack on civilians, is never justified;
it's always evil and for bravely charting a course that will lead the free
world to victory.
No greater friend of Israel has ever been in the White House, and no
president has ever championed a cause that was more just. Israel and the
United States are today fighting the same battle, waging the same war,
confronting the same evil. Like the United States, Israel did not seek
this war. It was forced on us by a savage enemy that glorifies in a
culture of death, a culture where murderers are called martyrs and where
suicide is sanctified.
My friends, an enemy that sends children to die and to kill other children
is an enemy that cannot be placated. An enemy that openly preaches the
destruction of our state is not a partner for peace. With such evil, there
can be no negotiations and no concessions because the only way to confront
-- to fight such evil is to confront it. The only way to defeat it is to
destroy it. And once terror is defeated, I believe other Palestinians will
come to the fore with whom we will forge a genuine and lasting peace.
Now, I don't want you to be fooled by the apologists of terror. They tell
us that the way to end terror is to appease it, to meet or give in to the
terrorists' demands -- because -- listen to their argument -- because,
they tell us, the root cause of terrorism -- did you ever hear that? --
the root cause of terrorism is the deprivation of national and civic
rights.
Well, let's examine that proposition. If that were the case, then in the
thousands of conflicts and struggles for national and civil rights in
modern times, we would expect to have found endless examples of terrorism.
But guess what: We don't. Mahatma Gandhi did not use terrorism in fighting
for the independence of India. The peoples of Eastern Europe did not
resort to terrorism to bring down the Berlin Wall. But one other example;
one other example. Martin Luther King did not resort to terrorism in
fighting for equal rights for all Americans. In fact, speaking in this
city, in this very place, four decades ago, Martin Luther King preached a
creed that was the very opposite of terrorism -- not violence,
non-violence; completely the opposite.
So now we must ask ourselves, why did all these people pursue their cause
without resorting to terror? Because they believed in the sanctity of each
human life, because they were committed to the ideals of liberty, because
they championed the values of democracy; simply put, because they were
democrats, not terrorists. That's why.
But, you see, those who practice terrorism do not believe in these ideals.
In fact, they believe the very opposite. They believe that the cause they
espouse is so all-encompassing, so total, that it justifies anything and
everything. They believe that it allows them to break any law, to discard
any moral code, to trample all human rights into the dust. They believe
that their cause permits them to indiscriminately murder and maim innocent
men and women. They believe that it lets them blow up a bus full of babies.
My friends, there's a name for the mindset that produces this evil. It is
called totalitarianism. Indeed, this is the root cause of terrorism. The
root cause of terrorism is the totalitarian mindset, a tyranny that
systematically brainwashes the minds of its subjects, to suspend all moral
constraints for the sake of a twisted cause. And this is why, from its
inception, totalitarianism has always been wedded to terrorism, from Lenin
to Stalin to Hitler to the ayatollahs to Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden
to Yasser Arafat.
My friends, I want you to listen to me carefully, because I want to say
something else. It is not merely that the goals of terrorists do not
justify the means they use. It is that the means that they choose tell you
what their real goals are, because those who target the innocent will
never protect freedom and human rights.
And how can we see that? We can see that clearly every time terrorists
come to power. Those who fight as terrorists rule as terrorists, setting
up dark dictatorships, whether in Iraq or in Iran or in Afghanistan or in
Arafatistan.
And indeed, Yasser Arafat is the quintessential terrorist. Both his means
and his goals are illegitimate. Arafat pursues a goal of policide, the
destruction of a state, by employing the means of suicide, suicide and
mass terror. Arafat does not want a Palestinian state next to Israel. He
wants a Palestinian state instead of Israel.
But my friends, any time that Israel was confronted with an Arab leader
who was genuinely interested in peace and delivered a message of peace to
his own people in Arabic, every time we were confronted with such a
leader, we made peace.
Menachem Begin made peace with Egypt's Anwar Sadat, and Yitzhak Rabin made
peace with Jordan's King Hussein. But five Israeli prime ministers have
been unable to make peace with Arafat. Do you know why? For a simple
reason: Because Arafat does not want peace.
Now, let me show you the difference between one leader and another. Until
the day I die, I will not forget the day that King Hussein came with me to
visit the bereaved families of seven young Israeli school girls, 12 years
old, gunned down by a deranged Jordanian soldier. He knelt before the
families, before the mothers and fathers. He was weeping. There were tears
streaming down his eyes and he said, "Please, please forgive me. Please
forgive me."
Now, contrast that to Yasser Arafat. Do you know what he does? He
glorifies these mass killers. He calls public squares after them. He names
buildings, streets in their honor. He has suicide kindergarten camps. He
has suicide universities. He has suicide museums. For God's sake, this is
the man who pays the checks. He signs the checks for the explosives of the
suicides. He is a terrorist, if there ever was one.
Now, you may remember that many right here, right here in this town, and
many in Israel, many in Washington and many in Jerusalem, had hoped, at
the beginning of the Oslo accords, that Arafat would prove to be a
statesman, a Palestinian King Hussein. Instead he's proved to be a
Palestinian Saddam Hussein.
And I ask you, what do you do with Saddam Hussein? Do you negotiate with
him? Do you make concessions to him? Do you appease him? No, exactly. You
do the same thing to him that the U.S. just did to the Taliban. You defeat
him.
America rightly defeated the Taliban. And today, in an historic mission
that deserves the support of civilized peoples and nations everywhere,
President Bush is courageously leading the free world to dismantle
Saddam's regime before it acquires nuclear weapons.
Well, if we're to end terror and begin peace in our own part of the world,
Israel must too now dismantle Arafat's regime, a mission also worthy of
support from all foes of terror and all friends of liberty. I think that
garnering this support is much easier now than it was a year ago. I think
that the face of Palestinian terror has finally been unmasked.
The people of this great nation are not fooled by Yasser Arafat and the
conartists he employs on American television. Americans know that Yasser
Arafat is nothing more than Osama bin Laden with good PR. Americans know
that if it looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it talks like a duck,
it's a terrorist.
Today, gathered in the capital of liberty, we send a powerful message to
the entire world. To those in Europe who 60 years ago did nothing to
prevent the slaughters of millions of Jews and who today side with the
mass killers who seek to destroy the Jewish state, we send this message:
History's shame will once again fall on you.
To the anti-Semites of the world, we send a message of defiance. The
Jewish people are not afraid. We will roll back the savage assaults, those
assaults that you direct against us. We will courageously stand up to you
and to all other enemies. And to the terrorists and terror regimes that
support them, we send a warning: The free world, led by President Bush,
has awoken to your evil. Terror will be given no quarter, no peace, until
it
is wiped out from our world.
My friends, I want to congratulate all of you on the largest rally in
support of Israel in Israel's history. I want to assure you that standing
tall, standing proud, we will win this war. We will secure our states and
we'll preserve our liberty. And in defending the Jewish state, all of you
here today in Washington, Jews and non-Jews alike, are defending the cause
of liberty, a cause that has once again made America, Israel and the
defenders of freedom the last, best hope on earth. We shall win.
Thank you very much, all of you, and God bless you.
Lindy Schulte-Zurhausen
Press Office - Embassy
of Israel |
|
"In our meeting today, which is aimed to survey the
central elements in our strategic assessment, the threats against Israel
and the nations aspiring for freedom in the world, we cannot hide from the
savagery and brutality of the events of this month, June 2002, in which
suicide attacks have reached new heights, and have caused the killing of
more than sixty people within only two weeks.
Since the beginning of the Palestinian Intifada against Israel, more than
sixty suicide attacks have been executed against us. It is no longer a
marginal phenomenon, which characterizes a small and extremist sector of
the society. It is a phenomenon that is developing at a quick pace into a
half legitimate form of warfare, which receives encouragement and aid from
the leadership level in the Palestinian camp.
I have chosen to direct the spotlight on this aspect of the continuing
Palestinian/Israeli conflict because it is so characteristic of what the
whole world has been experiencing since the start of the new millennium.
Terror acts, as it were tactical and short range, are quickly becoming
strategic threats with international significance.
The 11th of September was, if you will, an official and biting declaration
of World War III. Also in the '90s there were terror attacks - the
explosions that were executed simultaneously at the US Embassies in
Nairobi and Dar Es Salaam: the attack on the American naval vessel Cole in
Yemen.
There were terror acts in New York that brought about arrests and
convictions, but only on September 11, was the die cast, and the true
character of the new war was revealed to the eyes of all. This is a war in
which the sides are not only countries but also terrorist groups, that
operate almost with impunity. It is a war which does not have clear
fighting lines; it is a war that is being waged against free societies,
with weapons and strategies we have not known until now. It is a war which
does not adhere to the rules of war, or the international legal norms.
Reality And Realpolitik
We in Israel followed developments in NATO in response to September 2001
with great interest: sending naval units to the Mediterranean Sea in
October 2001, the cooperation of your AWACS in patrols over the air space
of the US for 220 days, meetings of your defense ministers in your meeting
of June 6, during which you discussed the threat of weapons of mass
destruction in Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Cuba, Lybia and even Syria, in
connection with the terror threat.
We have taken note of your discussions regarding NATO's new strategic
concept, which is no longer limited to the European/Atlantic arena, but is
intended for a confrontation with the enemy "anywhere he could be", to
quote. Therefore it was very encouraging to read your address, Mr.
Secretary General of NATO, Lord Robertson, on April 29 2002, entirely
devoted to the Mediterranean dialogue, in which there was a clear
statement that NATO's reciprocal considerations create the need to include
the Mediterranean dialogue in your standing up against your new
challenges. You detailed six areas in which there is a tie between
European security and the Mideast.
Today I will deal only with two of the six, terror and the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction.
For many years terror is serving to achieve political objectives. History
knows many cases in which terror was an extremely powerful and effective
means for achieving national liberation. The result of this, in the last
period, is the attempt to define and to differentiate between categories
and various nuances of terror: so for example, the ten Palestinian groups
that operate out of Damascus are defined as half legitimate movements,
which work on behalf of the liberation of Palestine. We have identified an
effort that has continued for a long time, to avoid a confrontation with
the true reality of this phenomenon, and this is in the interest of "realpolitik".
So, it is possible for Syria, which gives protection to these groups, to
receive a seat as a respected member of the security council, and its
representative even serves this month as Chairman of the council, and this
at the very time when the Palestinian Islamic Jihad sent a suicide
attacker to blow up a bus in the north of Israel, and caused the killing
of around twenty people. The leader of this organization, Ramadan Shalach,
publicly took responsibility for this attack from where he sits in his
Damascus headquarters, when he was interviewed by the Al Jazeera
television network, which millions watch all over the Arab and Muslim
world.
My appeal to you, here today, is that the attempts to differentiate and
distinguish between colors and targets of Islamic terror are quickly
losing their relevancy. Why? First of all because of the extent and the
intensity of these terror actions. They are no longer limited to specific
areas in the world. Hamburg, Milan, Brussels, London, Miami, Koala Lampur
- this is only a random list of large cities in which terrorists are
living, and in which they are slowly making their plans and preparing
their operations. Secondly, the operation of suicides in New York,
Washington, or Jerusalem, is the manifestation of a "modus operandi" that
is motivated not only by professional efficacy, but by its being perfectly
fitted ideologically and religiously. Therefore the method has attained
transcendental, supernatural meaning.
The Mothers Of The Martyrs (Shahidim)
In recent weeks we have seen mothers escorting their children on their
final paths, waving goodbye to them as they go to a lofty and desirable
death. The more that acts like this become more widespread, the more their
success grows in spreading death and destruction, and even more, to the
extent that they approach achieving political success, so also the chance
grows that they will become an extremely powerful weapon and receive
preference in future confrontations, in which there will be involvement of
Muslim societies from around the world.
Violent Radical Islam has been until now a minority stream in the Islamic
religion, and most Muslims were - and one hopes they will continue to be
in the future - aspiring to peace and moderate in their approach to life.
But if the violent minority groups are not restrained, and in many cases,
completely eliminated - then the statement "nothing succeeds like success"
is liable to symbolize the terrible threat to the basic fabric of the
member countries of NATO in which Muslim communities are growing and
developing, in numbers and in influence, while they preserve their unique
identity and culture.
In light of this complicated situation we need to give our strategic
assessment tremendous weight in a "form of warfare" that we will employ in
the coming months and years. We identify terror in its entirety, and
suicide attacks in particular, as "a form of warfare" that must be
outlawed and prohibited in international law. Any support for these
actions, or any authority that is allowed to execute them, must be
prohibited in the clearest way. Dispatchers, movements, countries and
entities that are involved in actions of this kind, or which encourage
them, whether specifically or through the power of suggestion, must be
taken out of the area of law and justice. By our doing this we will serve
not only a country like Israel, but also as I suggested above,
preservation of the free societies in Europe, Asia, on the American
continent and everywhere else.
I believe that good service will also be done thereby to the moderate
regimes of the mideast, which are also threatened by extremist Islamic
groups whose purpose is to remove the existing leadership in these
countries.
"Reforms" In A Display Window
In defining the threat of terror, we must contend with terrorist
movements, which are identified by us and by you, with reciprocal ties and
mutual support that they supply to each other, and with countries that
host these groups and make their actions possible from secure bases.
Before I comment on the hosting countries, I would like to note the
following:
There is growing influence for the support for terror in the mideast from
the inspiration of the Iranian regime. The most prominent revelation of
this phenomenon is the continuing supply of weapons and capability for the
presence of Hizbulla in Lebanon, along Israel's northern border, and the
continuing support of the Iranian regime for international terror branch
of Hizbulla. Let us not forget that three of the 19 most wanted terrorists
on the FBI list are Lebanese Hizbulla activists. None of them have been
captured yet. The Iranian influence has grown inside the Palestinian
Authority, both because of the expansion of cooperation between Iran and
Hamas and on account of the direct tie between the established Palestinian
Authority and Iran. The famous case of the Karine A ship, which was
transporting 50 tons of Iranian weapons and ammunition that were purchased
with the direct authority of Chairman Arafat, as he was forced to confess,
is only one example of this.
Iraq is trying to involve itself more and more in the destiny of the
Palestinian Authority by means of distributing funds to families of the
suicides and other Palestinian fallen fighters. In the territories, at the
population level, one feels support for Saddam Hussein, and from time to
time he receives encouragement from the leadership. The traditional tie
between Chairman Arafat and Saddam Hussein remains in place despite all
the transformations that have taken place in the Mideast.
Now I will move to a discussion of "the hosting countries", which, as
mentioned, enable terror and suicide attacks. To our great regret, we must
place the Palestinian Authority, together with Syria, Iran and Iraq at the
head of this list. For many months Chairman Arafat has placed the matter
of the suicide attacker, the tortured saint, the "shahid" at the top of
his list of priorities. In his uninhibited inciteful speeches he diverts
his people to these acts: the climax was his resounding call to millions
of "shahidim" to overcome Jerusalem. There are defining, revealing
moments, in the history of a country or of a political movement. Placing
the ideal of suicide - "the shahid status" at the peak, in my opinion, has
become such a defining decision, and its results will soon be known.
Israel is forced to use aggressive counter-measures: Our Operation
Defensive Shield was aimed to uproot the terror infrastructure, and as you
know, it merited temporary success. Following this operation we had a
short period of quiet, that was broken with time, and during which it
became possible for all the parties to assess the situation and to decide
on future policy. The almost unanimous call for "reforms in the
Palestinian Authority" reflect the opinion that there must be a real
change in the character and functioning of the Palestinian Authority. This
demand is considered a condition for ensuring the success of the
Palestinian national movement.
One cannot hide from the unique phenomenon in which Egypt, Jordan, Saudi
Arabia, the European Union and strong voices in the Palestinian Authority
are singing the same notes, along with Israel. And how does Arafat
respond?
At first by means of "reforms" in the Authority that were nothing but
changes without significance in a display window. "The reforms" in the
justice system were executed within one hour - really a world's record of
all time. The government was diminished, and Nabil Amar, a former minister
who resigned in disgust even before dispersal of the earlier government
said, "this is a cosmetic change that will lead the Palestinians to a
disaster". Or as Hamas leader Rantisi said, "this was a reorganization of
the same corrupt people". Arafat refused to appoint a prime minister, as
he was asked - among other things - by the European Union; he appointed a
minister of internal security, who the Arab countries define as a clown in
Arafat's hands.
Even more significant was the message that Arafat relayed to his people,
in a policy speech that was given to the Palestinian legislative body on
May 15. After he paid lip service to his critics, in his carefully worded
and ambivalent call for halting suicide attacks, he told his audience that
they had to remember the "Hudeiba Treaty", which he defined as "a minor
treaty".
He reminded his supporters that this treaty was signed between the prophet
Muhamed and the tribe of Kuraish. It was signed at a time when Muhamed was
in an inferior position in the battle field, and the understanding
prevailed that this was the only way to prevent a loss, until the
conditions of war changed, and Muhamed would have the upper hand. When
this happened, Muhamed had the obligation to break the treaty and attack
his enemy. And so Muhamed acted. On May 15 this year Arafat announced to
his people that this was his strategy - to sign an agreement with the
purpose of breaking it, at the moment when circumstances allowed it.
An Urgent Time Table
I believe that leaders of the region are well aware of this strategy. Some
of them have suffered in the past at Arafat's hand, and they carry with
them a bitter experience of this strategy, in the past and also today. But
the urgent time table of the war against terror doesn't conform with the
political time table. At the moment there is an immediate urgency to
restrain terror, and to eliminate it with a coordinated campaign. It
obligates full cooperation from all of us on a long term basis, to prevent
and counter terror in all its forms. It requires constant pressure on the
Palestinians, to act against terror before it brings more death and
destruction, and before it destroys their national movement.
The second element that you mentioned in your address, Lord Robertson, is
the threat of the spread of weapons of mass destruction. In this
connection we must mention Iran, Syria, Iraq and Lybia. In recent years
the threat of weapons of mass destruction from Israel's confrontation
states has grown immeasurably. Firstly sir, in Iran.
In recent years, Iran has invested tremendous sums in developing launch
systems, mainly ground to ground missiles, which are based originally on
North Korean expertise. The missile, Shihavi 3, with a range of 1,300 km,
was tested successfully. The Iranian defense minister, Shamhani, declared
openly that the Iranians are trying to increase its range, its payload
capability and "its destructive capability". Iran is involved also in
research and development of missiles with even longer ranges, which can
reach Europe and in the future - even the US. The Iranian defense minister
denied this publicly, but we have a different view. This effort is being
made under the camouflage of launching civilian satellites. I must tell
you that I see no reason for this entry into development of missiles with
such long range. Who and what are the potential targets of these systems?
I don't know.
Iran is also involved in an intensive way in developing a military nuclear
capability. For clear reasons I will not detail our information regarding
this sensitive issue. The combination of this activity and of the
abovementioned investment in launching systems must be an issue for the
constant attention of all of us in this room.
Likewise, we believe that Iran's signing the treaty against the use of
chemical weapons is no more than camouflage for building an infrastructure
for dual purposes - a civilian infrastructure, which can be turned very
quickly into a system for producing large quantities of the poison gas VX.
The Iranians are investing also in research and development in the area of
biological warfare.
As you know, on the eve of the Gulf War, Iraq was on the verge of
attaining nuclear capability. The Iraqis were only months away from
producing fissionable material. Starting from 1998, the year in which the
UN monitoring was halted, we must assume that the Iraqis renewed their
efforts in this area; we have clear indications that this is what has
happened, and it is their great and unshakeable ambition. Together with
these efforts, we have reason to believe that the Iraqis have succeeded in
preserving parts of their capability in the fields of biological and
chemical warfare. We have partial evidence that they have renewed
production of VX and perhaps even anthrax germs.
Regarding launching systems, we have sufficient evidence to determine that
they are investing every possible effort to preserve the capability they
still have, and to increase them through new means.
For years we have been following the purchase - and later the production -
of North Korean missiles of the SCUD B and SCUD C and SCUD D types by
Syria.The warheads are mainly conventional, but the Syrians also have
chemical and biological capability related to ground to ground missiles.
They have produced large quantities of nerve gas of the Serin type (GB)
and in recent years they are working hard on producing VX nerve gas. These
materials are suitable for military targets not only by means of bombs
carried in jets or SCUD missiles of all kinds, but also on rockets of 220
and 302 mm diameter whose range is 50 to 100 km.
To Overcome The Threats
As I approach the end of my address, I suggest that we turn our eyes to
Lybia, which is developing long range missiles with the aid of North
Korea. The range of these missiles - more than 1000 km - also brings up
Europe and Israel as future focal points of Lybia's capability. And
perhaps I will add that Lybia has been declared more than once as a
country that is interested in attaining nuclear capability. I will make
only a few comments on this important issue.
A. What is clear to us as the sun at noon is that responses need to be in
conformity with the size of the threats, and they have to be planned so
that they will overcome the threats through providing the greatest chance
for their success. The war of today and tomorrow has to be organized with
weapons and strategy that befit the challenge. This is what we are doing
in our region: with all due respect to what you did in Afghanistan, and
what you will be forced to do in every place and at all times when you
cope with challenges, as you will definitely need to do.
B. Israel cannot abandon any effort to counter, prevent or delay
attainment of the capability of weapons of mass destruction. Cooperation
with certain NATO members has led to results deserving all praise.
C. Terror and suicide attacks cannot be executed unless there are secure
refuges for training, planning and acquiring weapons. It must be
understood that both countries and individual leaders bear direct
responsibility for the actions being executed in the territories under
their control. In the final analysis, the international community has no
alternative but to force them to bear this responsibility, since if this
isn't done the international system of nation states that manifests its
sovereignty over territory and populations will be placed in danger. The
status of the state and the right of sovereignty must be conditioned on
proper behavior.
D. To sum up, preservation of the free societies and the lives of their
citizens must be recognized as a basic right of every man and woman on the
earth. We must shorten the days of criminal countries and entities, that
act not only as lords of their destinies, but as lords of your destinies
and ours."
|
