60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

Transcript Are We There Yet? 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

HE Ron Prosor Ambassador of Israel to the Court of St James’s

Ambassador Collette Avital Director General, Berl Katznelson Foundation’s Ideological and Educational Center

Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP Intelligence and Security Committee, House of Commons

Sophie Honey Head, Near East Group, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

30 March 2011

The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/ speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document’s author(s). The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery.

Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

Sir Malcolm Rifkind:

Thank you very much indeed for inviting me this morning. We’ve just had an extraordinary performance from a fantastic President and statesman who, well into his eighties, has given that very powerful speech. I couldn’t help but recollect: it was said that Churchill when he was 80 was photographed by a young man who said, ‘Sir Winston, it’s a great honour, I hope I’ll have the honour to take your photograph on your 90th birthday and on your 100th birthday’ and Churchill apparently replied, ‘I don’t see why not, you look perfectly healthy to me!’ That could have been our guest this morning.

Today we are discussing Israel-British diplomatic relations, the relations over 60 years. And may I begin by suggesting in the nicest possible way that there’s a certain wistfulness in the choice of title: 60 years of a search for common ground, implying first of all that that should have been relatively straight forward and easy, but it turns out to have been having its rocky patches, and generally a note of sadness and lack of achievement of a kind that might have been aspired to at the beginning of this great period.

Now the reality, of course as we all know, is two things; first of all that there are an enormous number and range of shared values and interests between Israel and the United Kingdom which goes back that whole period of time. Starting of course from the fact that we share the democratic principle, the system of government, which has served both countries so well over those years. I am remembering hearing Abba Eban speaking in London some years ago, when he made a point that was equally relevant to the United Kingdom. He said, you know when he was asked the difference between when your party is in government and when your party is in opposition. And his response, I thought was splendid, he said: “you know when your party is in government you wake up in the morning and you say to yourself ‘what shall I do today.’ When your party is in opposition you wake in the morning and say, ‘what shall I say today.’” You don’t have power, it is a fundamental distinction and it is the essence of a democratic society.

I want to just make a couple of points in these few minutes that I have to address you this morning. And the first is to just look at this general question. Israel is a democracy. Britain is a democracy. Sometimes the inference is that democracies should always be of common mind and countries should not seek to expand their foreign policy relationships beyond those who share their values. Of course the reality is that, for neither the United Kingdom, nor for Israel has that been a fundamental principle. When it comes to foreign policy countries have to take in to account what is the consequence not of the

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 2 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground domestic policy of another state, although that is relevant, ultimately it is the foreign policy, the strategic regional or international interests that will ultimately determine these relationships. For much of the last 60 years the United Kingdom and Israel have had an enormous amount in common and have shared fundamental interests. Although Britain has often been critical of Israel it has always treated as a basic, basic requirement of its own foreign policy that Israel should have secure independence and must be able to be certain of its future in a difficult world.

When I was at the Foreign Office, I was occasionally asked, as are all Foreign Secretaries, ‘the Foreign Office - is it pro-Israeli or is it pro-Arab?’ Of course the obvious answer and the one you’ve heard before is that it is pro-British and that can lead to different conclusions on different issues. But that is not specific to the United Kingdom. Israel itself has not hesitated to have relations, some overt, some covert, with some of the more unpleasant regimes around the world. If for wider reasons of foreign policies those countries were prepared to be supportive of Israel either in the United Nations and in other fori. So that is the world of international diplomacy, it doesn’t imply hostility it doesn’t imply indifference. But of course during, for example, the Cold War, Israel and Britain had good relationships but it was of crucial importance to Britain’s own national security that we also had good relations with the Arab world because of the strategic and crucial importance of that region to the well-being of ourselves and of the wider Western world. And that continues to be true today at a time when terrorism, much of it emanating from the Middle East, creates the necessity for us to have close working relationships with many Arab governments. A very major act of terrorism could have happened in the United Kingdom but for the intelligence provided by the Saudi authorities to the United Kingdom a few months ago, which enabled a particular plot to be uncovered just in time, which could otherwise have been disastrous. So national interest inevitably is what determines the policy, not just of Britain, but of Israel, that will always be true. But it doesn’t mean there is not a very wide spread of common ground, and we want to build on that.

Can I turn to this question of the ‘Arab Spring.’ This extraordinary dramatic developments that are taking place throughout the Middle East at this particular moment in time. It is said that in 1789 after the Bastille fell, Louis XVI asked one of his aides, ‘Is this a revolt?’ and he replied, ‘No sire, this is not a revolt. It is a revolution.’ A very important distinction. What is happening throughout the Middle East is comparable to what happened in Central and Eastern Europe in 1989 to 1991. But also what has happened in Latin

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 3 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

America, which used to be a bastion of generalissimos, now only Cuba, the only country of that whole Latin American region that doesn’t have an elected government. It also happened in the Far East, with Taiwan and South Korea and Indonesia, and so forth. And it’s not a question of Muslims being unable to deal with democracy, when you look at Indonesia the largest Muslim country in the world, that has a flourishing democracy now for well over ten years. When you think of Turkey, Malaysia, Bangladesh. The phenomenon has been the Arab world’s inability, until now, to be able to be counted amongst that number. Now I’m conscious that many in Israel have been ambivalent at least to start off with, in regard to these changes. And I understand the reasons why, because clearly when you’ve had a very constructive working relationship with Mr Mubarak or other leaders who have since been deposed, you become nervous as to the consequences of what happens with their departure when it must remain unknown at least to the short- to medium-term who is going to fill that vacuum. And I say without any embarrassment, countries that are undoubtedly autocratic, like Mubarak’s Egypt, or Saudi Arabia or a number of other states of the region, have nevertheless pursued quite constructive foreign policies, have not been aggressive towards their neighbours and to that extent, not just Israel, but also the Western world has had close relationships that are quite often criticised but which I believe have worked towards stability and peace rather than the opposite.

But having made those preliminary comments, let me say that if I think if I were an Israeli – a dangerous thing to say if you something you’re not – but if I was an Israeli I would see this period of turmoil in the Middle East as having quite serious short- to medium-term problems but in the longer term to be the best thing that could possibly have happened. Because it cannot be other than beneficial to Israel and it’s aspirations and its ultimate security if more of the countries, and hopefully all of the countries of the region of which it is inescapably part of, gradually move towards societies which respect the rule of law, which have governments that are accountable to their electorate, which have free media, which can put different views and not simply parrot whatever the government is saying. And even though the transition to a democratic system and a more accountable system is rocky, and although it can disturb existing relationships which in other respects might be quite helpful. From Israel’s point of view it ought to be seen as a major plus.

But what is its impact with regard to the Palestinians? And to the Israeli- Palestinian negotiations that one day might get going again in a substantive way. I think it must be said that if, and it’s a big if, if we are in the situation in 2

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 4 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground or 3 years where Egypt has some sort of functioning accountable government, with a greater appreciation of the rule of law, with a genuine multi-party system. If that was to happen, gradually to other countries of the region, to Jordan, to the Gulf states, to Libya (we hope) to Tunisia and so forth, then the pressure on Israel will be greater not less. The fact that the Palestinians not only don’t have a state but don’t have the basic political rights that go with statehood and with citizenship will become much more of anomaly in that region than it currently is. It’s been possible for Israel and for others to say, you know the West Bank, the Palestinians may not have full democratic rights, but then who else in the region does apart from Israel. And that was pretty impressive point because it had a lot of substance to it. In so far as that may be gradually changing, then a lack of a clear resolution of Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians will become more anomalous, more difficult to handle, less sympathy will exist around the world unless the serious effort that is required is made to resolve it.

The final point I want make, is simply this, there is another consequence that should flow, which is of quite profound importance to the future of Israel and to the future of the stability in the region. For many people in the Middle East, Israel - fairly or unfairly - is essentially seen at the moment as an extension of Europe. As essentially a western country that happens to be in a region of which it is not truly and fully part. Because there have been so many differences, in values, in systems of government, as well as all the other aspects between Israel and its neighbours. If we are moving, now I’m not talking about next week or next month, but of over the next 10, 20 to 25 years we see a Middle East where Egypt, where possibly Lebanon, where Jordan, Tunisia, where the other countries all have varying degrees, but genuine degrees, of accountable government and respect for the rule of law and multi- party systems and a free press, then Israel - instead of seeming anomalous to its region, of simply being of something implanted from outside - will be, I would have thought, facing the prospect of a more comfortable relationship with a region of which it is inescapably part. Israel is not part of Europe. It’s close to Europe, its relationships with Europe should always be intimate but it is a Middle Eastern country. It’s a country that must have a natural, not just a legitimate, but also a natural relationship with its neighbouring communities and states. And I think these extraordinary revolutionary changes that are happening now, at least allow that to be a prospect, and if it happens it should be warmly welcomed. Thank you very much.

Ambassador Collette Avital:

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 5 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

A story’s been told that Albert Einstein once gave a test to his students and after the exam one of his students came up and said, ‘Professor Einstein you gave us this year exactly the same questions like last year.’ ‘Yes, yes,’ replied Professor Einstein, ‘but the answer this year is quite different.’

I am honoured to be included in this panel discussion, obviously some of the questions that will be asked will be the same. Perhaps at the end of the day we can also provide different answers. This may be because the circumstances, the conditions and even some of the perceptions have changed over the years. Diplomacy, no doubt, is still determined in Chancellories. But the development and use of mass media have given public diplomacy much more weight and parliaments and public opinion have become increasingly important. There’s no doubt, and I think we heard this morning enough about it, that the revolutions that are shaking the Arab world, and that really most of us failed to predict, will change the geo-strategic position of Israel. For the first time these have been popular uprisings, not of the army, mainly of young people, let us not forget about 60% of the population of the Arab world today is under the age of 25. But these youngsters as we know are not organised and hence no one really knows where these revolutions will lead. This means that for some time there will be no real stability in our area and this increases Israel’s vulnerability. Also, after President Obama’s decision that the United Nations has ended its role in Libya and that further responsibility of the security of other countries in North Africa is being now transferred to NATO and the EU, Britain too will now have to rethink some of its policies in our area. They may create, also, a better opportunity for the EU in general and Britain in particular to play a more important role in the solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. My other partners on the panel have no doubt a deeper understanding of these relations. I have neither served, nor have I lived, in England, I have been in charge of European matters at the Foreign Office. But what I bring with me is the perspective a former diplomat-become-politician, and what is more I might very well confess, to those of you who are not aware of it, I belong to the left- wing part of the Israeli political spectrum.

Looking at these relations with a birds-eye view, our dialogue is sound, permanent, intensive and frank. And yes I will probably join Lord Weidenfeld and say this is room temperature. We do have shared values; political, scientific and cultural exchanges have grown and flourished over the years and should be a reason for satisfaction. Our relations have weathered many crises and after the Suez crisis most Prime Ministers have understood the

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 6 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground particular position of Israel, have cared about its well-being about its security, but not always made these positions very public.

Israelis view Britain as a superpower and London is still the Mecca of many intellectuals who hold British institutions, schools, universities, the theatre and the arts in very high esteem. And yet, there is reason for worry. More and more members of the civil society in Israel feel that the anti-Israel atmosphere is excessive, and that we get more criticism than our fair share. We are far from being perfect, I think you’ve heard it before. My own views of the present governments policies are critical too. For many years I fought for the only moral and viable solution to end the conflict with the Palestinians, which is a Palestinian state alongside with Israel, allowing us and the Palestinians to live in peace and mainly in human dignity. I am fully aware that time does not work in our favour, and what might be still possible today could become not achievable in the future. And yes, I do believe that under certain circumstances, the Arab revolt that is today is turned inwards towards the leaders, towards a need for more democracy may turn against Israel if and when we do false moves.

But, having said that and having followed closely all the negotiations and initiatives, I know that Israel is not the only party responsible for the failure. And one might ask in all fairness why crimes and atrocities in other parts of the world go unnoticed, why the killing and suffering of Israeli citizens do not get attention or sympathy or the same attention and sympathy. And why have we become depicted as the villains of the neighbourhood, one of the worst countries in the world. Trade Unions, universities and lately cultural organisations called for the boycott of Israeli institutions completely ignoring by doing so that they alienate the public in Israel who supports peace. This campaign in the deligitimising of Israel can only be described only as destructive. Not only is it immoral it can only result in hampering the peace effort or any peace initiative since large segments of the Israeli population will be discouraged by what they perceive as a lack of consideration for basic Israeli needs. Equally worrisome is the fact that a whole generation in this country grow with a complete lack of understanding of what Israel stands for, some even with resentment. The leaders of tomorrow, whether in politics, in the economy in the arts are part of this generation, and this does not bode well for our future relations.

When our diplomatic relations were established, some 62 years ago, no one would have believed that Israel would have become a success sorry, and this in the face of adversity. In past days we were sadly reminded that missiles and rockets placed around us by Iran can reach densely populated areas www.chathamhouse.org.uk 7 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground anywhere in Israel, and our geo-political situation is still precarious. And this precisely makes the Israelis more vulnerable and more worried today. And it is perhaps this part of the equation that the public in Britain should be made aware of.

As you have noticed I have chosen not to address the formal part of our relations since I think this subject will be vastly covered and is known by the public here. Rather my comments refer to the undercurrents which I believe have the potential to negatively impact them. Events in the past week in the Arab world teach us that public opinion does carry a lot of weight, even in the most unexpected places.

One last word however on our diplomatic relations. For many years I have been following closely the French-Israeli relations, and after an initial period that can be termed as a love affair, and much closeness between us and the French, these relations soured and got to be a question of alienation. No wonder that the French media were hostile to us as well. A few years ago however the French government understood that in order to have a greater influence in our area its policies must change. Deliberate and important efforts were made at all levels: officials, commercial, cultural, state visits to bring about this change. And so a couple of years ago President Sarkozy came to Israel and addressed the Knesset, Israelis accepted willingly, because they felt it came from a friend who cared. The same could happen to our relations, they could turn warmer and I think it is up to us. Thank you very much.

Sophie Honey:

Thank you Claire, I will. My name’s Sophie Honey and I’m head of the department team in the Foreign Office that is charge of policy on Israel and the Palestinian Territories on Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. So as you can imagine we are having quite a busy week. Now, Christian was hoping to be here: he couldn’t because he was very involved in the Libya conference that took place in London yesterday, so he asked me to send his apologies. When he said to me last night he was keen for me to step in today, I was thinking about the question that has been posed for this panel. And in my view there is a yes and a no, and I wanted to try and give you very briefly, because I haven’t had that long to think about it, what that yes and that no is. And I’d be very interested to hear when we come to questions views from colleagues and friends who are here.

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 8 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

So let me give you my version of the yes. And that is the UK and Israel have huge common ground and enduring friendship that has been established over 60 years. The UK is a strong supporter of Israel, it is fantastic to have President Peres here today to hear his remarks and he will be seeing the Prime Minister this afternoon. But away from the diplomatic tables and our strong cooperation that covers a very wide range of issues such as Iran, we also have very, very strong people-to-people links.

I’m going to give you a short anecdote on that. My family’s not particularly unusual: my step-father is Jewish, he was born in Slovakia, he has and we have a huge amount of family in Israel, who went to Israel in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s via a whole range of European countries. So that’s just an example of family-to-family links. I can tell you one thing’s for sure that at family weddings that we have, the Israeli family are much the most lively and fun. The hottest and liveliest debates are at the tables where they are seated, so I often head for those tables.

People-to-people links though, they go both ways. The Jewish community in the UK makes a huge contribution to our national life. We also have about 1000 Israeli students who come to study in the UK every year, as well as many thousands of visitors who travel in both directions. The UK and Israel are both very diverse countries including a wide range of communities, and I think the goal that was laid down in Israel’s founding documents to be both a homeland for the Jewish and a state that respects the rights of all its citizens regardless of race, religion and creed, in my view is close to the best of British aspirations. And that is to recognise and celebrate diversity but to treat all our citizens equally.

Here’s a bit more of the yes answer. We have record and growing trade, our trade increased by 30% last year between the UK and Israel. We have very deep cultural and scientific links. The British-Israel arts training scheme was established about 15 years ago. In fact I think it is on your crib sheet on the pamphlet of British Israeli relations in the packs. And this fund promotes collaboration in a wide range of artistic areas. Our very active Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, has just helped launch a new five year scientific collaboration between the UK and Israel to support joint research in regenerative medicine.

Coming back a bit more to where I started. The UK is very committed to Israel’s future and its security. And Sir Malcolm spoke a little bit about how that has been an enduring principle of British foreign policy, including during his time in government. And I think that the Foreign Secretary is going to say

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 9 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground a bit about this later today when he comes for the closing address. You’ll have to see what he says but I think he will set out that this isn’t for the British government a question of discussion or compromise, it’s strong and steadfast support from a country and a government which deeply cares for Israel’s future. So that’s a quick version from me of my version of the yes answer to the question.

But I think that there is also a no, but if you’re being an optimist and I am an optimist, a ‘not yet’ answer to the question. And that might run, and there will be lots of versions of it around this room, something like this. Sixty years on from Israel’s foundation the conflict that has accompanied her and affected Israelis, Palestinians and also countries around the world including the UK, that conflict endures. The vast majority of Israelis, Palestinians and British people want to see these issues and this conflict resolved and resolved peacefully. But the path is proving difficult. Within the UK I think there’s strong support and belief in Israel, but I do also believe that there is quite deep concern amongst the public on specific issues - on the situation that persists in Gaza; on the continuation of settlement programme in the West Bank; and also to an extent, and this is harder to pin down, on the impact of the occupation on the daily lives of many, many people. In part I say that because of some of the quite interesting surveys that have come out recently showing the trends in British opinion and how that has changed in recent years. In part it’s something that William Hague and Alistair Burt have talked to us as officials about in terms of the shift they have experienced and deeply regret within the Houses of Parliament during their tenure as MPs. But I also say it because my team in the Foreign Office deal with all the letters from Members of Parliament, members of the public, parliamentary questions on any issues, any policy issues, for which we are responsible. And slightly unfortunately for us we get more than anyone else in the Foreign Office. It’s quite interesting to know that about 30%, this may change with the Arab Spring, perhaps my fingers are crossed that it will, but last year over 30% of all the issues that were raised by the public with the Foreign Office touched specifically on these issues. I don’t think personally that’s all together a bad thing. I do think it shows partly how much the UK and British people care about Israel and her future. But it also shows, I think, a concern and some quarters, disquiet, that we all need to make sure that things are moving in the right direction.

I have a slight advantage coming later in the panel, and I wanted to pick up on something that Collette said, concern in the UK that people don’t always feel Israeli pain and don’t always understand deep security concerns that contribute to some of these issues. I think and I hope that that’s not true. I do

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 10 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground think that in terms of the sort of statements and comments that William Hague made last week following the bombing in Jerusalem, which obviously also killed a British national. His statements and reactions to that were very strong. And actually his comments, and that was before we knew there was a British national involved so it was nothing to do with that, were to do with our concern that this is the first bombing that has been seen in Jerusalem for quite a number of years.

But just in terms of wrapping up. That’s my yes, that’s my no. I guess where I come out is not yet, but I am an optimist. And I am an optimist right now for two reasons. Firstly, I thought the President gave a very inspiring address, and it is inspiring to hear someone in his position talk about the way forward that he sees and the need to jump on the galloping horse. And secondly about the Arab Spring. I think, and I think Malcolm was talking about this there are lots of different ways of looking at the dramatic changes that are taking place in the region and it’s easy to understand why in some ways it can be very concerning, particularly for friends and people in Israel that it looks like a bumpy road ahead. But I do fundamentally believe that those are positive developments, and that moves towards more representative and democratic governments across the Arab world are in both the UK’s interests and also Israel’s interests. For me I think looking at the events of the last couple of months now, of the Arab Spring, the main lesson that I draw from it is one about legitimate aspirations. And what, for me, what the events really show is that you may think that legitimate aspirations, for instance for a more representative government in part of the region, have died or gone to sleep and many people in the Foreign Office were caught slightly by surprise by what happened in a number of countries. But what it shows is that they don’t actually go to sleep. Legitimate aspirations, whether it’s for a secure future, where Israel is recognised and living in peace and security with its neighbours or whether it’s a Palestinians aspiration for their craving for a state that gives them dignity, what it shows is that those aspirations don’t die, they have to be addressed. It’s tough to do that, but I think that’s the challenge and opportunity looking ahead. Thank you very much.

HE Ron Prosor:

Thank you. Good day I hope I won’t be a party pooper here. I think it was amazing to listen to our President Shimon Peres and basically think about the fact that three of Israel’s Presidents - beginning with Chaim Weizmann, who basically is a chemist at the Admiralty under Churchill, and Chaim Herzog and Ezer Weizman – wore the King’s uniform. Ezer Weizman, I remember accompanying him here for the first State visit, as the President of the State www.chathamhouse.org.uk 11 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground of Israel to the United Kingdom. And I think is one of the only Presidents that can stand in Buckingham Palace and speak to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and say, ‘I had the honour and the pleasure of serving under your Father King George VI in this great nation and this great country in the RAF.’ And this relationship, as you know, goes way and beyond the establishment of the State of Israel. And there’s a history there with the Balfour declaration, the British Mandate, the white paper for better or for worse, this relationship has a history. And today without any Jewish guilt feeling, in a second I will tell you why we are blamed for everything, I’m going to blame you a bit and say something controversial. But I blame the United Kingdom and Britain for much of the unrest that takes place presently in the Middle East. Every time I turn on the news, I see another British University graduate grabbing the headlines. Whether it is Saif al-Islam for Libya, doing his best to put his PhD in practice under the banner of developing democratic institutions in Arab, that’s not a joke. Or whether it’s Bashar al-Assad in Syria who basically is the only graduate in ophthalmology who has a blind eye to what happens in his back yard and has blind spot for terrorists as he crashes the vision of his own people. Or for that matter, and I saw on TV lately, very, very impressive, the spokeswoman of Bashar al-Assad, Bouthaina Shaarban, with a PhD in romantic poetry from Warwick, who uses all her literary skills to deliver love poems in honour of the Baa’thist fascist party, but she does it in an eloquent way. And basically it looks to me like a British University education seems to be a useful commodity when conducting Middle East tyranny. I wonder therefore if it is a coincidence, that the university level in the United Kingdom today, there’s never been more hostility, hatred and hypocrisy towards the State of Israel and for everyone who doesn’t know that, I’d like to really emphasise this.

And you know it’s not just the funding of dictatorships, repeated attempts of academic boycotts. It’s things that I personally feel, running out here in the United Kingdom in every university campus. Increased radicalisation on campuses. OK, to substantiate some factual evidence. Last December a British resident, a student at the University of Bedfordshire, blew himself up in Sweden. Previous Christmas a former student of UCL attempted to detonate his underpants on a transatlantic flight. Now, unlike underpants, these issues cannot be whitewashed. Those extreme examples that basically show you what goes on at British campuses and what is happening to future generations that basically have to deal with the Israeli-British relationship. And yet, I would like to give you the analogy on how I see the bilateral relationship between Israel and the United Kingdom, and I would like to put it in a way that it is like a luxurious penthouse, sweet when you look at it from www.chathamhouse.org.uk 12 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground the top and under that there is a deteriorating apartment block where there is flooding in the basement, the lift doesn’t work and basically if we really don’t take time to work on the foundations the whole structures might crumble. Why do I say an amazing luxurious penthouse? Because, and I’m amazed to say that, surprising myself, I would say that the governmental relations between the United Kingdom and Israel are very strong, and there is a gap between those relationships, on the governmental level, and the people-to-people. Hence the government of the United Kingdom is much more positive, governments, towards the State of Israel than their respective public opinion as can be defined in the media, in the university level, in the public domain, the NGOs and others. By the way I think that phenomenon is also relevant to Merkel’s Germany, France’s Sarkozy, or Berlusconi’s Italy. Governments are more positive than their respective public opinions. What does it mean, it means that if the gap closes, it will close against us because of that gap. So we have to do a lot in order to close that gap.

I would even define the relationship under the radar screen, an amazing relationship. On Iran, on defence issues, on counter-terrorism, and everything that goes above the radar screen on the public domain, very, very problematic, and it’s problematic. Here I’d like to say something, and Collette Avital, was not only our Ambassador to Portugal, not only our Consul General in New York, but when I was a young cadet in the Foreign Ministry, she headed the training department at the Foreign Office, and she produced a couple of youngsters who did a lot of damage since then. She’s an amazing diplomat and is front line in the Labour party, and I had sometimes, sometimes not, to get a grilling from her in the Israel Knesset, not once and not twice as permanent under-secretary of this Foreign Service. But we are talking about, trying really to explain and, it’s funny in the sense talked about it on the issue of scientific relations or cultural relations. It took us more than three years to sign a thin agreement between Israel and Britain. Only because of political issues, that do not pertain to this government but to the former government. Science cooperation is amazing, we should do much for it. And why is it important and here is Baroness Greenfield sitting who can tell all of us about that, the minute you have John from Cambridge working with Chaim from Weizmann institute, there won’t be an academic boycott because there’s merit to that relationship. But if we really look closer into this, and we take BI RAX [British-Israeli Research and Academic Exchange] for example, and something that we really enjoy and something that would make a difference which is the British-Israeli Scientific cooperation, what do we see truthfully, we see apart from seed money given by the government, most of the funding to this is being done by British citizens of Jewish origin. There’s www.chathamhouse.org.uk 13 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground not even one pound put in there by someone else. Why, why is it important in certain directions? And this is something Matthew Gould is pushing very, very strongly, we are trying to do that together. This is something that I would think would bring people together on both sides, because there is a lot to bring together.

And I would like to state something: I solemnly believe that the United Kingdom has a right to exist. Now you ask me, Ambassador, you probably drank something, I mean whiskey, what are you saying? Most of the politicians standing start their positions with ‘I solemnly believe that Israel has a right to exist.’ Well that’s very nice, it’s not relevant since the 28 November 1947. We need something more. Especially when one talks about Israel’s security. And even the most cynical of cynics today see what is happening in the Middle East would understand the issue of security, not just as a pretext for basically Israel trying to say we can’t move forward on this or that, because of security. No: security is paramount, and if someone talks about the importance of Israel’s security then we really want to feel that that really is a statement that has some background or merit behind it. What does that mean? Someone stands up and says, ‘I believe the Palestinians should have an independent state, but we think that an independent Palestinian state should be demilitarised because that’s part of what Israel needs in order to achieve peace.’ That is substantial. Can one say that? The answer is yes, why can one say that, because when Egypt made peace with Israel in 1980, the biggest of the Arab countries decided that the Sinai peninsula would be demilitarised. So they impeded on their own sovereignty because of understand Israel’s security anxieties, hence to achieve peace. This is substantial, this would also merit a seriousness on the Israeli side.

Give us some credit that we know this neighbourhood, not less than others. When we started 25 years ago to check people at airports. Oh, what went on, how much ink and paper was used, Israel, human rights, profiling people, people on airplanes. What else will you do. I don’t have to make the gap on how the world looks after 6 years. And the conventional wisdom that is part and parcel of Israeli-British relationship. Solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict solves all problems in the Middle East, leave that, the merit of solving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is important for the State of Israel on its own merits. What happens in the Middle East today, it is very hard to blame Israel. Though I can tell you that approximately six months ago the mayor of Sharm el-Shiekh stood up and said the recent shark attacks against Egyptian tourists at Sharm el-Sheikh were done by a shark which was a Mossad agent. By the way the BBC on their website, and I quote, said Israel denies that shark was

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 14 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground a Mossad agent. Wow, we would deny that wouldn’t we. By the way, tragically, we lost another Mossad agent recently - it was a vulture from the Tel Aviv University, in a migration flight over to Saudi Arabia, he was caught with a thing that was called R65, and he was interrogated and have fear the bird sang in the interrogation. But this is no joke, we are blamed for basically what happens in the region.

Now Wikileaks. Someone mentioned that before to the President, gave us all a wonderful example in to the Arab leaders do not have sleepless nights of the Arab-Israeli conflict. They have sleepless nights on the Iran nuclear programme, but it doesn’t mean it’s not important. But the solution for that would solve the problems in Bahrain, in Yemen, in Libya, in Tunisia I can go on. Today I don’t have to repeat that.

Last but not least, and I can’t resist that, the issue of money of funds. When was the last time, this esteemed institute which we are standing in today. And I’m not joking - this is serious - when was the last seminar that took place on how can some Arab countries, that are saturated with petro-dollars, how can they contribute to peace or economic development in the region. When did that seminar take place [interjection by Chair: ‘last autumn’]. You know the Saudis sometimes remind me of those two elderly gentleman in the Muppet Show, Waldorf and Statler sitting on the balcony and shouting, it’s a lousy show.

Most of the funding that goes out from the European Union to the Palestinians in Israel in London, in Berlin, in Paris, in Oslo. Millions of dollars go over to the Palestinian Authority, where is the concern of their brothers and sisters, you could give us some crumbs off the table that would give us some economic parameters in the region. This is something that is as important to achieving peace than anything else. And I’m saying that completely aware that there is a lot that we can do, and we deserve a clobbing on the head from time to time, we’re not angels. But by God we are doing everything that we can in this volatile region to achieve peace which is something that for any Israeli, is something, that is obvious. And I’d like to end with, having the President here speak at Chatham House today, is the Head of State of the State of Israel, I personally would relish the opportunity to return that compliment and host Her Majesty the Queen in Jerusalem. We Israelis are not always famed for our patience. But the Jewish people are very patient, after all we waited almost 2000 years to restore sovereignty in our homeland, and I hope it won’t be another 2000 years to welcome a British sovereign.

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 15 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

I could not think of something more fitting to celebrate 60 years of diplomatic friendship, cooperation and good will between our two nations than having the President of the State of Israel here. And I hope this discussion now will be of the next, enhancing of this relationship. Last, I think this will be one of my last appearances publicly, I would like to tell you that I admire this country and what it stands for and with everything that I have said. I think I represent a lot of what the ways Israelis see the United Kingdom, see Great Britain, I just wish that we could enhance that relationship and not be afraid on both sides to talk very openly with each other. Thank you very, very much.

Question One:

I’m a recent British graduate - don’t worry my underpants were scanned on the way in. I just wanted to talk a little about the hostilities you heard in British universities and I think maybe it points to a loss of faith in Israel’s sincerity in its approach to the peace process. I just wonder whether things like recent leaks that we saw in Al-Jazeera about the level of concession that for example Palestinian negotiators actually went to risking their own legitimacy in the West Bank and any last vestiges of popular support that they might have had. And things like the ongoing settlement programme that so few mentioned. Whether those are really the signs of a sincere effort to, like you said, do everything you can to achieve peace in the region.

Question Two:

I would like to ask the panel - particularly Israeli members - if they see a role for Israel spearheading a new Middle Eastern economic community made up of states of Turkey, Israel itself and any other states. It could be a wonderful vision for the future.

Question Three:

I’m Singaporean, so come from a very neutral position. My question is, how does the panel perceive, the perceived bias of the BBC as influencing British public opinion negatively?

Question Four:

I’d just like to address a remark to HE the Ambassador about the British attitude to Israel. I think we can trace it right back to the Balfour declaration, which in full says that Her Majesty’s government views with favour the establishment of the homeland of the Jews in Palestine. And at that point in the Jewish museum in London, there’s a full stop. But it should go on, subject to a limitation to the amount of immigration and to proper cognisance of the www.chathamhouse.org.uk 16 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground rights of the existing population. Now I think that’s the fundamental problem between us and Israel, we interpret the Balfour declaration in full, where are Israel puts a full-stop after the homeland for the Jews.

Malcolm Rifkind:

I’d like to make a couple of points. First of all I think the first question which opened up the issue of why there has been a deterioration of support, not just in Universities but elsewhere in Britain for Israel. If one had to identify a single issue, it is a growing belief that successive Israeli governments have been willing to allow the peace negotiation process to take as long as possible so that the settlements can continue to either be created or expanded both in Jerusalem and on the West Bank. I’m grossly over-simplifying it, but we have seen, not just under Netanyahu, but under previous Israeli governments, settlements have remorselessly increased and there is a deep perception that that is seen as a strategic decision to try and ensure that whenever eventually settlement, peace-settlement is achieved it will be too late to reverse much of what has been done. I think that is seen as fundamentally unfair and destabilising influence.

The second point, the final point I make, is on this question of the bias of the BBC, or bias against Israel. All I can say, was when I was Foreign Minister, Foreign Secretary, constantly meeting Arabs in both the Middle East and in the United Kingdom, constantly receiving the reverse: why is the BBC, why is the British government, why is the British public, irredeemably committed to Israel and only going to give lip service to Palestinian aspirations. It depends on your starting point which side of the argument is more persuasive.

Sophie Honey:

I’m going to leave question two to Ron and Collette. But I wanted to say a word about the questions one, three and four. And I think there are some links between them. In terms of the BBC my view is that the British public is smart enough to make up their own minds, so I don’t see that as...and you get the arguments one way or the other. There is so much information floating around, in terms of blogs, twitter, all sorts of things that I don’t think the BBC or what they might be saying has a monopoly on British public opinion.

I personally do think that both questions one and four are on to something, in the questions that they pose. I see that very much coming through the sorts of letters, I was talking about earlier that come flooding in to my team every day. It’s interesting hearing Ron’s perspective, and obviously it’s different perspective. But from the perspective of the British government, and one of

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 17 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground the things William Hague will say very regularly is that finding a way to make progress on this tricky, tricky issue, and finding ways to secure progress on the peace process is a major foreign policy priority for the UK. I’m not going to go in to the Balfour declaration because Terence is probably hotter on it than I am but I do think that the fundamental, that the British government supports the aspirations of the Israeli people to live in peace in security that they deserve. But it also supports the aspiration of the Palestinian people to have a state and the dignity that they deserve, and the view that those are not contradictory objectives, they can be reconciled. It’s tough but that has to be done and there is concern of whether or not there is enough being done about that and the deep concern of the settlement projects, I think comes back to these concerns. And I think that effects a lot of younger opinion in the UK and I think that probably feeds in to the sort of picture you see in British universities, but Will will know more about that than I do.

Collette Avital:

I’d like first of all to address this issue of the perception that Israel is dragging its feet and hasn’t done enough for peace, and so on and so forth. My take on that is that basically we’ve made mistakes on both sides. There were mistakes made at Camp David not necessarily only by us, there were opportunities made to the Palestinians many times at Camp David, by the Clinton parameters. I’ll go as far as the freeze in settlements for ten months. It took about nine months for the Palestinians to accept to come to the negotiating table. So it’s very difficult to really put all the blame on Israel and come and say that it’s because we want the right wing governments want to increase settlements that they drag their feet and don’t want to come to the negotiating table. I’m sure we made a lot of mistakes, personally I would like to see as soon as possible, as of yesterday, negotiations start again because we simply don’t have time, the window of opportunity is very small. And as I said today there is a leadership that is good, a leadership that is trustworthy, a leadership with which we can come to terms. You never know what will happen in a few months, whether Hamas will take over the West Bank, we mustn’t miss this window of opportunity. And about the settlements, I’m not exactly known for supporting them, but I think the whole issue has been really blown out of all proportions. And as soon as the negotiating teams will get together the sooner that may stop. So I think really we have not much time left.

www.chathamhouse.org.uk 18 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground

The other thing that I would like to say, or address, is whether Israel should lead an effort, or spearhead and effort for economic cooperation in the Middle East. There was a dream like that when the Madrid conference started, was actually if you all recall there were five teams on multi-lateral negotiations. And we at the time thought we would make a big economic conference in Cairo. And low and behold what really happened, what we discovered was that the Arab nations were very sceptical or didn’t exactly trust Israel on this issue because they thought that we wanted to take over the Middle East economically. So I think yes, there should be economic cooperation but all things in due course, when there’s more trust established, when the Palestinians on the one hand the Arabs on the other hand will discover that they really have something to gain.

And last but not least because it really has not been touched. I think there’s a really important plan on the table, and that is the Arab League plan. It started as the Saudi initiative, that plan has been on the table, since year 2002 if I’m not wrong, 2003? OK. It’s a 2002, it’s almost, what, nine years. It has not been taken off the table. Today I think issues have to be dealt with regionally and not only on the basis of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Probably from what we see there is not very much that can be done with Syria today. But certainly the Palestinians can gain a lot and we can gain a lot from having that support and I think we should work on it much much more.

Ron Prosor:

To the issue of the Wikileaks on the Palestinian negotiating, that you asked me there. I’m very, very happy about that, I’m happy about that for two reasons. One that there is going to begin a debate inside the Palestinian society about the issues of compromise. I think that real problem we had until now that the leadership, the Palestinian leadership, doesn’t really prepare its own people for the things that they have to compromise on in order to achieve peace. Do I gather from your questions that sometimes people here in the United Kingdom feel a bit disappointed on how many concessions the Palestinians did in negotiations with Israel, maybe. But I feel that this is a choice that shows seriousness on the Palestinian side. And being personally both at Wye river memorandum, and Camp David being the permanent under-secretary of Israel’s foreign service I can tell you that that seriousness is also on the Israeli side. What does it mean? It means that the more discussions that you see coming and you always can quote and you can quote anyone in Israel, because you know we are the only country in the world that has a Prime Minister that can say X and a Foreign Minister that can say Y and a Defence Minister that can say Z on the same issue, on the same www.chathamhouse.org.uk 19 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground subject, on the same day. It’s obvious that you can take something out and say look Israel doesn’t agree to this, or to that. The fact that it comes out and is going to be a debate and people are going to cry and fight against those concessions is I think something that is very positive and at the end of the day will lead us in to the right direction.

The second issue, the issue of settlements. You know I’ll start differently, and I won’t run away from the question. Look at the Israeli public, the Israeli public voted in 1992 for Yitzhak Rabin, in 1994 for Shimon Peres as Prime Minister, in 1999 the voted for Ehud Barak as Prime Minister before he went over to Camp David. Camp David in 2000 we can argue anything we want, we can argue whether Israel offered 92% of the territories of 94% of the territories but we put everything on the table. It is surprising that the Israeli public after a series of suicide bombings of terrorist activities basically voted for a different government, and here they vote for Sharon as Prime Minister and now we are getting in to the settlement issue. Sharon as Prime Minister, and we do it in tangibles. The fact that we went out of Gaza like the President said, took out twenty-two settlements and four additional settlements in the West Bank, that people forget, in order to show there is a political horizon. Basically you are going out of Gaza not to look back at Gaza, shows the ability of the Israeli people to make tangible decisions in going in certain directions, changing the equations.

By the way for me this was a lesson I’ll never forget in life, I will never sign or do anything that is unilateral because we told ourselves an amazing story, look at us Israel’s democracy strength, the inner strength of Israel’s society. National catharsis, we cried on each others shoulders, children, evacuating their own parents out of Gaza, that was an amazing story some people here in this crowd cried with us, in Europe. The issue is how it was perceived in the region or Hamas or the Arabs, look at big Israel, strong Israel, it’s running away with its tail between its legs all we have to do is continue violence and terror and that is what they are going to do. So let’s not belittle what Israel is doing.

Now this government headed by Binyamin Netanyahu has a certain constituency that voted for it, it’s a different constituency than the Labour party but in a democratic country, I know that it’s not something we can change every day, but people vote for the governments of a certain platform. This government under Binyamin Netanyahu him as Prime Minister stands up, not only in the [inaudible] speech and decides on a ten month freeze on settlements, which is unprecedented. In order to really do something. And by the way, do they think that this government is going to implement it, of course, www.chathamhouse.org.uk 20 Transcript: 60 Years of Bilateral Relations and the Search for Common Ground everyone say that no satellites up, photographs, surprisingly enough governments were very serious about this. What happened on the Palestinian side, basically nothing, sitting on the fence, and the more, and I want to tell you, and this is a good opportunity to do that. Pushing to internationalise the conflict is not going to bring peace it’s going to bring war. The minute the Palestinians or anyone else feels like they don’t have to do anything, put nothing on the table in order to move forward we won’t go anywhere. And I feel, this is something I feel very strongly about, and I think the only way forward is direct negotiations. And yes you see both of us going out to the referee, like any good football game, and say he kicked me in the shin, that’s a yellow card, and that’s a red card. And the more noise you hear out of the negotiation teams you would know we are more serious in achieving peace.

I agree completely with Collette on spearheading economics. We saw that, the Arabs fear we want to dominate them economically as they think we do otherwise, it’s not something that we can move forward on.

And on the BBC, I don’t want to use this opportunity, but I can say that the BBC has huge influence. And just one thing, because we can go in to that and I don’t want to use this opportunity. It has a certain charter the BBC, but just think of the flip side. If in Itamar or not in Itamar, if you had a situation where you had an Israeli settler go out and kill a family of five and decapitate a three-month old baby, I think you would have seen that on some of the BBC coverage or some other media outlets even if there is Japan and Libya as part of the real issues in the news. And what I’m saying is, I know that this is something that you cannot control, and I’m sure that the present government would have something to say, and the former governments, it’s like the Israeli governments have absolutely no control on the media. That’s the way it should be, I think it’s an issue this country understands very well. It should be done with sense, sensitivity and sensibility and sometimes all three lack or two out of the three. Thank you.