|
Wednesday, October 18, 2000
In an interview granted today by President Mubarak to the TV program “Good Evening Egypt”, he declared that he would present a report to the Emergency Arab Summit which will convene in Cairo on the coming Saturday. He ruled out anew that any pressures could have been exerted for the convention of the Arab Summit, confirming that never had he called for any summit under the pressure of any party, and that he never tolerates any pressures; he added that there have been no pressures from America or else for the convention or the cancellation of the summit. The President indicated that the very convention of the Arab Summit is an important event, because the Arab fragmentation is dangerous for the Arab Nation. Q: Mr. President. We would like to start with Sharm El-Sheikh Summit which was held recently among certain circumstances. We heard that the summit was to be held on Egyptian conditions then it was held unconditionally. The Egyptian and Arab public opinions want to get acquainted with the realities abort this summit. A: This summit was considered ten days ago upon a proposal presented by the American President who called me and asked my opinion about holding a summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, attended by me to discuss the explosive situation. I answered him, expressing my surprise and asked to give me time till tomorrow. The situation was still tense but not too deteriorated as happened last week. So the next day I met the top officials and we reviewed the proposal. We concluded by not refusing to hold the summit but it should be on the condition of the pullout of forces in order not to be under any pressure. If the situation remained as it was, Barak would attend while his forces were overpowering the Palestinians, meanwhile Arafat would attend in low spirits under siege. So Barak should pull out. I faxed this request to Barak who called me later on, and told me that the Israelis would refuse, so I replied that the summit cannot be held under such circumstances. After that the situation deteriorated rapidly as Israeli tanks and gunships began to bombard everywhere. I watched the Palestinians on the Egyptian TV screaming for help, so I called Arafat on Thursday afternoon when I was meeting the British Minister of Foreign Affairs and then King Abdullah of Jordan. My thoughts were not crystalised at that time but in the evening I found the situation too dangerous and the public opinion was waiting; so I called the American President and informed him of the complications of the situation and the extreme necessity of finding a solution. I suggested that a four-way summit be held to stop fighting. He appreciated the idea and asked me to make some contacts. I called Arafat and found him hesitant; so I asked him to think about it. Some claimed that this summit will be harmful to the Arab Summit, but this was totally unreasonable. We were only doing our best to save the Palestinian people. I also contacted many Arab leaders and they all expressed their confidence in whatever measure I would take for the interset of the Palestinians. I contacted the Algerian President who was visiting China, and the Tunisian President as well. I contacted any Arab leader I could reach. After that we decided to hold the summit on Monday. Q: Mr. President. We were informed that till last Sunday consultations and discussions were being held between you and the rest of the parties, leaders and the Palestinian partner. There was a focus on the importance of having a clear agenda for the summit, supported naturally by Egypt, to express the demands of the Palestinians in clear-cut terms. We would like to know from Your Excellency what were the fundamental points which in dispute between Palestinians and Israelis. A: I called the American Secretary of State who informed me, after ensuring her that Araft will attend the meeting, that they have composed an agenda for the summit which all partners will abide by. I told her that I do not know anything about it and so I will let our Foreign Minister contact her. She told me that the agenda includes the formation of a fact-finding committee. I asked her if the American President will declare the names of the members of the comnmittee or it is still under discussion. She answered that it is under discussion. When our Foreign Minister talked to her, she said that the names will be declared by the President, so we asked her to send the agenda written. She sent it on Saturday night. After that we summoned a Palestinian representative to see it and make amendments. We also gave him a second agenda. The representative read both and drew up a Palestinian one. Among the top priorities which we insisted to be included in the agenda were lifting the seige, withdrawing the forces, forming the fact-finding committee and resuming the negotiations. So the final version was made and sent to the Americans on Sunday. I was still doubtful of holding the summit. Q: Mr. President, all these Egyptian-Palestinian moves were run through an Arab support and consultation- and that means that the Arab side was fully aware of what was going on and in detail?. A: I got in contact with a great number of heads of state, those whom I could find.. the Algerian President was in Yemen; I spoke with king Fahd, and so many others. They all welcomed taking any action to save the Palestinian stance, and they were acquainted with everything. And when we started, they were also aware of everything through the Media; but as for the evolutions of Sunday, they were not declared. Q: Mr. President, by the end of the summit you were subject to a series of criticisms that it did not realize its relevant objectives. How do you see such speedy judgments directly at the end of the Summit without waiting for a while to see the implementation on the ground? A: For the first Summit we put conditions, but the situation was deteriorating; casualties reached 120, no provisions, no medicines, and it might have ended by the elimination of the Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority, and thus we could have returned to square one. It was imperative to move in order to save the lives of the people, and that was the aim of the Summit, otherwise they could have criticized us, too. Criticism would have been made, whether we move or not. Q: Mr. President, may be some of the criticism is that there was no signed agreement pledging the parties to what was agreed upon, and that there was no direct meeting between Arafat and Barak. So, when can we say that the summit was a success or a failure? A: The Summit as such was a success, because it was agreed upon lifting the siege and the withdrawal of forces, besides other points such as the Committee and the like. As for the practical success, it depends on the will of Palestinians and Israelis. It is not a matter of papers and signatures. In fact they had signed papers before here in Sharm El-Sheikh in the time of Netanyahu and nothing has been implemented; it is a matter of intentions and whether the two parties want to go on the course of peace for their peoples to survive. As for the Summit, it has succeeded in reaching these results through the consent of the two parties. Q- Mr. President, the Summit has actually succeeded in defusing the crisis. But President Arafat and the Israeli Prime Minister did not meet directly and alone during the Summit. Does this represent an indication that the peace process, the return to the normal situation and the talk on the rights of Palestinians have become out of reach now? A: No, Arafat and Barak saluted one another several times. They stood side by side during the lunch and dinner. They talked together. But May be there was no chance for them to sit together alone. I think they understand each other quite well, more than we do. I do not see any problem. Q: Mr. President, going back to the criticisms against the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit. You have just said that among these is that the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit would abort the Arab Summit due to convene on October 21. There are some who think that if the latter would not adopt tough stances, then there is no place for it to be convened? A: How could the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit abort the Arab Summit. If the former was not convened, the number of casualties could have reached 200 to 300. and God knows what could have happened to the Palestinian Authority? In fact the Arab Summit still has the peace issue to consider. And remember that the 1996 Arab Summit had unanimously adopted the peace strategy, and it has to consider whether the peace process is on the track or not. So what is this tough stance they want?- declaring war? Anyone talking about declaring war should be aware of its dangers and impacts on his people, unless they want to declare war till the last Egyptian soldier; we have experienced these stands and we are not ready for them. The logic of war has become quite out-dated, and all issues should be solved only through negotiations and international pressures. Q: What is your evaluation of the public opinion whether Egyptian or Arab concerning decision-making? A: Public opinion is very important as we cannot ignore it. We put it into consideration when we take any decision concerning any issue. Demonstrations are a very good thing for people to express themselves. As for us, the officials, we behave wisely according to the concerns of the people. I have for example,to consider the opinion of the 65 million of Egyptians when taking any decision. I believe most Arab leaders do the same. Q: Despite all that Mr. President, as an Egyptian and Arab citizen, we saw that you were moved by the events. We saw you also speaking of the killing of the child Mohamed El-Durrah which you watched yourself on all TV screens. However, leaders have another opinion when it comes to estimating the situation . A: No, of course I was completely moved by such events. I saw a nine-year Palestinian child with an open abdomin at our hospitals . This is something painful and discontenting. But when it comes to making a decision, one should be reasonable because such a decision will affect a whole people and even a whole nation. I cannot sacrifice the fate of a nation. Of course I am moved and discontented as well as sympathizing with them, but when making a decision I must think deeply about it and be reasonable. Q: Mr. President. I would like to go back once more to the peace process. Sharm El-Sheikh Summit did not tackle the peace process directly or strongly or getting it back to its normal course. The peace process came to a halt a long time ago and the American Administration is preoccupied with the elections. What is the future prospect of the peace process in the coming few weeks? A: The peace process came to a halt a little after Camp David and after the Paris and Sharm El-Sheikh meetings. The Israelis are so stubborn while the Palestinians are not well-prepared. Thus, there is something wrong. After the break-out of these events, people became tensed up and the killing increased. A hostile situation erupted between the two sides. If the peace process is to be resumed, people should calm down in order to think objectively. Now it is time for pulling out the forces first, then consultations within two weeks, and after that they will get back to the negotiating table. We cannot solve such an issue through war. The 1996 Arab Summit acknowledged unanimously the strategy of peace, so the peace process must be resumed. Q: Mr. President. Do you believe that the peace process will get back to its normal course especially with the loss of confidence between the two parties who are now accusing each other of not being the reliable or basic partner in the peace process? A: They do not trust each other because each one has its own demands. Barak wants Jerusalem and Arafat refuses, hence there is no trust. They keep issuing mock-heroic statements for local consumption. They should calm down to resume the negotiations. This will happen within two weeks when the forces pull out. You did not ask me about what the people say concerning the abortion of the Intifada by the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit. There is no abortion at all. We only attempt to lift the siege, send foods and drugs to the Palestinian people and make Israeli forces return to their previous positions. All these attempts have nothing to do with the Intifada. We are saving people from death, hunger and disease. Such talk about abortion is nonsense… like the mock-heroic statements. In an interview granted today by President Mubarak to the TV program “Good Evening Egypt”, he declared that he would present a report to the Emergency Arab Summit which will convene in Cairo on the coming Saturday. He ruled out anew that any pressures could have been exerted for the convention of the Arab Summit, confirming that never had he called for any summit under the pressure of any party, and that he never tolerates any pressures; he added that there have been no pressures from America or else for the convention or the cancellation of the summit. The President indicated that the very convention of the Arab Summit is an important event, because the Arab fragmentation is dangerous for the Arab Nation. Q: Mr. President. We would like to start with Sharm El-Sheikh Summit which was held recently among certain circumstances. We heard that the summit was to be held on Egyptian conditions then it was held unconditionally. The Egyptian and Arab public opinions want to get acquainted with the realities abort this summit. A: This summit was considered ten days ago upon a proposal presented by the American President who called me and asked my opinion about holding a summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, attended by me to discuss the explosive situation. I answered him, expressing my surprise and asked to give me time till tomorrow. The situation was still tense but not too deteriorated as happened last week. So the next day I met the top officials and we reviewed the proposal. We concluded by not refusing to hold the summit but it should be on the condition of the pullout of forces in order not to be under any pressure. If the situation remained as it was, Barak would attend while his forces were overpowering the Palestinians, meanwhile Arafat would attend in low spirits under siege. So Barak should pull out. I faxed this request to Barak who called me later on, and told me that the Israelis would refuse, so I replied that the summit cannot be held under such circumstances. After that the situation deteriorated rapidly as Israeli tanks and gunships began to bombard everywhere. I watched the Palestinians on the Egyptian TV screaming for help, so I called Arafat on Thursday afternoon when I was meeting the British Minister of Foreign Affairs and then King Abdullah of Jordan. My thoughts were not crystalised at that time but in the evening I found the situation too dangerous and the public opinion was waiting; so I called the American President and informed him of the complications of the situation and the extreme necessity of finding a solution. I suggested that a four-way summit be held to stop fighting. He appreciated the idea and asked me to make some contacts. I called Arafat and found him hesitant; so I asked him to think about it. Some claimed that this summit will be harmful to the Arab Summit, but this was totally unreasonable. We were only doing our best to save the Palestinian people. I also contacted many Arab leaders and they all expressed their confidence in whatever measure I would take for the interset of the Palestinians. I contacted the Algerian President who was visiting China, and the Tunisian President as well. I contacted any Arab leader I could reach. After that we decided to hold the summit on Monday. Q: Mr. President. We were informed that till last Sunday consultations and discussions were being held between you and the rest of the parties, leaders and the Palestinian partner. There was a focus on the importance of having a clear agenda for the summit, supported naturally by Egypt, to express the demands of the Palestinians in clear-cut terms. We would like to know from Your Excellency what were the fundamental points which in dispute between Palestinians and Israelis. A: I called the American Secretary of State who informed me, after ensuring her that Araft will attend the meeting, that they have composed an agenda for the summit which all partners will abide by. I told her that I do not know anything about it and so I will let our Foreign Minister contact her. She told me that the agenda includes the formation of a fact-finding committee. I asked her if the American President will declare the names of the members of the comnmittee or it is still under discussion. She answered that it is under discussion. When our Foreign Minister talked to her, she said that the names will be declared by the President, so we asked her to send the agenda written. She sent it on Saturday night. After that we summoned a Palestinian representative to see it and make amendments. We also gave him a second agenda. The representative read both and drew up a Palestinian one. Among the top priorities which we insisted to be included in the agenda were lifting the seige, withdrawing the forces, forming the fact-finding committee and resuming the negotiations. So the final version was made and sent to the Americans on Sunday. I was still doubtful of holding the summit. Q: Mr. President, all these Egyptian-Palestinian moves were run through an Arab support and consultation- and that means that the Arab side was fully aware of what was going on and in detail?. A: I got in contact with a great number of heads of state, those whom I could find.. the Algerian President was in Yemen; I spoke with king Fahd, and so many others. They all welcomed taking any action to save the Palestinian stance, and they were acquainted with everything. And when we started, they were also aware of everything through the Media; but as for the evolutions of Sunday, they were not declared. Q: Mr. President, by the end of the summit you were subject to a series of criticisms that it did not realize its relevant objectives. How do you see such speedy judgments directly at the end of the Summit without waiting for a while to see the implementation on the ground? A: For the first Summit we put conditions, but the situation was deteriorating; casualties reached 120, no provisions, no medicines, and it might have ended by the elimination of the Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority, and thus we could have returned to square one. It was imperative to move in order to save the lives of the people, and that was the aim of the Summit, otherwise they could have criticized us, too. Criticism would have been made, whether we move or not. Q: Mr. President, may be some of the criticism is that there was no signed agreement pledging the parties to what was agreed upon, and that there was no direct meeting between Arafat and Barak. So, when can we say that the summit was a success or a failure? A: The Summit as such was a success, because it was agreed upon lifting the siege and the withdrawal of forces, besides other points such as the Committee and the like. As for the practical success, it depends on the will of Palestinians and Israelis. It is not a matter of papers and signatures. In fact they had signed papers before here in Sharm El-Sheikh in the time of Netanyahu and nothing has been implemented; it is a matter of intentions and whether the two parties want to go on the course of peace for their peoples to survive. As for the Summit, it has succeeded in reaching these results through the consent of the two parties. Q- Mr. President, the Summit has actually succeeded in defusing the crisis. But President Arafat and the Israeli Prime Minister did not meet directly and alone during the Summit. Does this represent an indication that the peace process, the return to the normal situation and the talk on the rights of Palestinians have become out of reach now? A: No, Arafat and Barak saluted one another several times. They stood side by side during the lunch and dinner. They talked together. But May be there was no chance for them to sit together alone. I think they understand each other quite well, more than we do. I do not see any problem. Q: Mr. President, going back to the criticisms against the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit. You have just said that among these is that the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit would abort the Arab Summit due to convene on October 21. There are some who think that if the latter would not adopt tough stances, then there is no place for it to be convened? A: How could the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit abort the Arab Summit. If the former was not convened, the number of casualties could have reached 200 to 300. and God knows what could have happened to the Palestinian Authority? In fact the Arab Summit still has the peace issue to consider. And remember that the 1996 Arab Summit had unanimously adopted the peace strategy, and it has to consider whether the peace process is on the track or not. So what is this tough stance they want?- declaring war? Anyone talking about declaring war should be aware of its dangers and impacts on his people, unless they want to declare war till the last Egyptian soldier; we have experienced these stands and we are not ready for them. The logic of war has become quite out-dated, and all issues should be solved only through negotiations and international pressures. Q: What is your evaluation of the public opinion whether Egyptian or Arab concerning decision-making? A: Public opinion is very important as we cannot ignore it. We put it into consideration when we take any decision concerning any issue. Demonstrations are a very good thing for people to express themselves. As for us, the officials, we behave wisely according to the concerns of the people. I have for example,to consider the opinion of the 65 million of Egyptians when taking any decision. I believe most Arab leaders do the same. Q: Despite all that Mr. President, as an Egyptian and Arab citizen, we saw that you were moved by the events. We saw you also speaking of the killing of the child Mohamed El-Durrah which you watched yourself on all TV screens. However, leaders have another opinion when it comes to estimating the situation . A: No, of course I was completely moved by such events. I saw a nine-year Palestinian child with an open abdomin at our hospitals . This is something painful and discontenting. But when it comes to making a decision, one should be reasonable because such a decision will affect a whole people and even a whole nation. I cannot sacrifice the fate of a nation. Of course I am moved and discontented as well as sympathizing with them, but when making a decision I must think deeply about it and be reasonable. Q: Mr. President. I would like to go back once more to the peace process. Sharm El-Sheikh Summit did not tackle the peace process directly or strongly or getting it back to its normal course. The peace process came to a halt a long time ago and the American Administration is preoccupied with the elections. What is the future prospect of the peace process in the coming few weeks? A: The peace process came to a halt a little after Camp David and after the Paris and Sharm El-Sheikh meetings. The Israelis are so stubborn while the Palestinians are not well-prepared. Thus, there is something wrong. After the break-out of these events, people became tensed up and the killing increased. A hostile situation erupted between the two sides. If the peace process is to be resumed, people should calm down in order to think objectively. Now it is time for pulling out the forces first, then consultations within two weeks, and after that they will get back to the negotiating table. We cannot solve such an issue through war. The 1996 Arab Summit acknowledged unanimously the strategy of peace, so the peace process must be resumed. Q: Mr. President. Do you believe that the peace process will get back to its normal course especially with the loss of confidence between the two parties who are now accusing each other of not being the reliable or basic partner in the peace process? A: They do not trust each other because each one has its own demands. Barak wants Jerusalem and Arafat refuses, hence there is no trust. They keep issuing mock-heroic statements for local consumption. They should calm down to resume the negotiations. This will happen within two weeks when the forces pull out. You did not ask me about what the people say concerning the abortion of the Intifada by the Sharm El-Sheikh Summit. There is no abortion at all. We only attempt to lift the siege, send foods and drugs to the Palestinian people and make Israeli forces return to their previous positions. All these attempts have nothing to do with the Intifada. We are saving people from death, hunger and disease. Such talk about abortion is nonsense… like the mock-heroic statements. Q: Mr. President, the peace process will occupy a big part of the discussions of the Arab leaders in the Arab Summit. You asserted that although Sharm El-Sheikh Summit did not fulfill much of the expectations of the Arab peoples, it is a step to solve the crisis. Do you think that the Arab Summit, which has been absent from the Arab street for four consectutive years would realize some of the aspirations of this street? A: What we have reached in Sharm El-Sheikh Summit is the best we can do in such circumstances. We have exerted huge efforts to achieve that. The main aim for me was to salvage the situation, to save the people by lifting the siege, to alleviate the threat, to send foods and drugs and to let the people live. When we hold the Arab Summit, I will present a report on Sharm El-Sheikh Summit. I hope and trust that the Arab Summit will discuss the peace process in a positive way. Tomorrow, the Arab Foreign Ministers will start preparing for the summit by studying all topics in order to present them to the summit in order to reach an acceptable position. Even the Arab Summit will not be able to fulfill all the expectations of the Arab man in the street. The Arab Summit is very important and the proof is the impact of the announcement of its convening on the whole world. I received calls from all over the world asking about its agenda. This summit should prove the soldiarity of the Arabs. Q: Are there any pressures hindering the convening of this summit? A: What do you mean by pressures?. Q: We saw how President Arafat made shuttle visits to Arab countries urging them to convene the summit in support of the Palestinian stance, but he failed; so rumors spread that there were some American pressures not to convene the summit. A: We held a summit in 1996 without any pressures. We will never accept any foreign pressures to cancel or convene the summit. Some claimed that in 1990, the USA sent us the decisions of the summit.We cannot accept that. We have our will and we discuss everything with our fellow-Arabs. We cannot be affected by any pressures whether American or Russian. This is nonsense. We have our thinking mind and logic. Q: You stressed that what Iraq did in 1990 made a rift in the Arab world. Do you think that the coming Arab Summit, amidst all these variables, circumstances and pressures, will meet the expectations of the Arab peoples? A: I hope that everything will return to normal. What happened between Iraq and Kuwait created a division among the Arabs. But now the meetings of Arab Foreign Ministers at the Arab League include Iraqi and Kuwaiti counterparts. Thus, the situation is getting better as the Iraqis stopped their threats. Everything is returning back to normal. Q: Do you think then that the Iraqi attendance is a positive sign for the common Arab interest? A: To some extent .. because they mix up everything if they issue sensational statements. |
|
||||||||
Print this page 
Mail this page 