Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1378870
8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 30 MAY 2021 INTERVIEW The first war we lose, will be the last Mr Ambassador: can you ex- plain Israel's long-term vision for the future of the Middle East? Is it a permanent occupa- tion of Palestinian territory? A single state, modelled on apart- heid policies? Or a 'two-state solution', where one of those states is rendered completely unsustainable and unviable? What, in a nutshell, is the final aim of the Israeli government? Ever since its establishment, and even before, Israel aims to have peace with its neighbours: with our Palestinian neighbours, with the Arab countries sur- rounding Israel, and with other countries that do not directly border Israel. It was not easy. The Arabs always rejected, in the beginning, all of the programmes on offer: in 1947, 1967… but on the other hand, positive things happened, too: [the agreement] with Egypt, in 1979, and later with Jordan; more recently, the Abraham Accords with some Gulf countries: the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain… and, further afield, Morocco, and even Sudan. So the main goal is to enhance [peace], as much as we can, with almost everyone that is ready to live in peace in the region. But not everyone wants to live in peace. Not everyone is moderate. By the way, in the moderates, I am also including the majority of the Palestinians… also, the Pal- estinian authority. But we can- not close our eyes, and say that everyone in the region is moder- ate. We have extremists. There is Shia extremism, whose centre is in Iran; and whose proxy is main- ly Hizbollah in Lebanon. There is Sunni extremism: like Isis… Al Qaeda… and the Islamic Broth- erhood movement, of which Ha- mas is a part. These are extremist actors in the region. They don't want sta- bility. They don't accept anyone who is not Muslim; they want to live according to Sharia law; they won't accept anyone who is liber- al… LGBT, women's rights, etc… But how can you claim that the end-goal is 'peace', when the whole world can see that Israel is actively engaged in violence against Palestinians? No, Israel is ready to have peace with its Palestinian neighbours… based on negotiation. But up un- til now, they said no to all of the programmes that have been of- fered. They probably think that they will get what they want, like we think we will get what we want… but that requires negoti- ation… That is precisely what I'm ask- ing, though: what does Israel want, in practical terms? Do you agree with the two-state solution, for instance? The two-state solution is still the main solution that the ma- jority of the Israelis would like to have. But when we talk about a two-state solution, the state you envision is probably different from the state we envision. For instance: we would like the state not to have military capabilities. See what's happening now in the Gaza strip. How can a small place like that launch 4,000 missiles at a civilian population in 11 days? What we want is that, before a [Palestinian] State is established, they will guarantee the security of our people. […] This is what we would like to discuss. Our security was, is and always will be the most im- portant factor. The first war that we lose, will be the last war… Fair enough: but the current situation did not start with rock- ets fired into Israel by Hamas. It started with the storming of the Al Aqsa mosque during Ram- adan; the expulsion of families from Sheikh Jarrah; and it con- tinued with the destruction of Palestinian property in Area C, and the bombing of civilians in Gaza. How is any of that condu- cive to the sort of 'peace' you are now talking about? Those are all excuses. Don't play the hand of terrorist organ- isations. They looked for excus- es… It seems they found them quite easily… Let me try and explain to you how we see things from our side. The situation is this: Ha- mas wants to replace the Pales- tinian authority. They want to be the rulers of the Palestinians. They want the Palestinians to live by their Shariah ideals. They thought there would be Pales- tinian elections; that they would probably win, and get more sup- port and legitimacy. Now: Hamas is a terrorist or- ganisation. So if they did win the election, they would have turned to the international community, and said: 'We are OK now. We are a legitimately elected govern- ment'… But – not for the first time – the Palestinian authority decided not to hold elections. So Hamas looked for an opportunity to be- gin that kind of conflict. As for Sheikh Jarrah: that is to- tally a legal issue. Jews lived there before; they were the owners of those houses, up until 1948: when we lost [Sheikh Jarrah] to Jordan… But the borders we are look- ing today are not the same as 1948… These are just examples. The point is that Jews bought the land over there; and this is now a legal issue, to be decided by the courts. Now: we tried to ease the tension, by doing three main things. First, we asked the courts not to deal with the issue. Imagine the same thing happens in Malta: that the government asks the law courts not to delve into this or that is- sue, because of tensions. This is not a usual request, in demo- cratic countries where there is separation of the authorities. But because of the circumstances, we made that request; and the courts accepted. Israel's ambassador to Malta, EYAL SELA, strongly rebuts criticism that his country is engaged in the violent suppression of Palestinians: arguing instead that a peaceful solution can only come through negotiation Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt JAMES BIANCHI