|
Friday, October 20, 2000
President Hosni Mubarak dismissed speculations that the two-day Sharm el-Sheikh meeting will have a negative effect on the Arab Summit, which is scheduled to be held in Cairo next Saturday-Sunday. These statements were made yesterday by the President in an interview carried by the Orbit 2 Channel. Following is the text of the question-and-answer interview: Question: How, why and under what conditions was the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit held? President Mubarak: Sharm el-Sheikh Summit began 10 days ago when the struggle and fighting between the Palestinians and Israelis were at their height. I was surprised to find U.S. President Clinton contact me by phone in the evening. He told me that he was considering holding a Summit at Sharm el-Sheikh to put an end to the explosive situation between (Israeli prime minister Ehud) Barak and (Palestinian President Yasser) Arafat and that the meeting be attended by king Abdullah of Jordan. The situation had not then reached the intensity it had reached immediately before the Summit was held. I told him: give me some time to think it over. And to think the matter over means that I hold consultations. May be I have an idea but I should explore all aspects of the issue. I met with a large number of officials to listen to their views in order to take a decision. I found that it was in our interest in such circumstances -- the situation had not escalated yet. I contacted him (President Clinton) the following day and told him that the Summit could be held if Israeli troops withdrew and returned to their (original) positions and fighting stopped. Then we can consider holding a Summit. He spoke to me on the phone and said that Barak will not agree. I said: then in such circumstances I cannot hold a Summit. President Mubarak added that five days later I found that the situation was escalating and the number of Palestinians killed increasing very quickly. (Israeli) tanks began to besiege (Palestinian) villages and cities. The (Palestinian) people were suffering. I heard Uraikat make an appeal on television saying: save the Palestinians. I spoke with (Abu Ammar) over the phone more than once to the extent that on that day I contacted him more than 6 times. I enquired about the situation. He said shooting was everywhere and the situation was very bad. I felt that the situation was very serious. I began thinking. That was last Thursday. I was receiving British foreign secretary (Robin Cook) and then I met king Abdullah. After we had lunch we began to discuss the matter. After king Abdullah left, telephone calls began to the extent that I made 64 telephone calls on that day from noon until I went to bed. They included 6 calls to Abu Ammar and 5 to Clinton. I said that an (Arab) Summit would be held in a week's time and it was not an "Emergency Summit" as was being said. I pointed out that we have been trying for two years to hold an Arab Summit. I was always in favor of holding a periodical Summit to solve our problems as they came up. No Arab Summit was held since 1996. I thought: Shall we leave the Palestinians to be killed. They had no food or medicines. Abu Ammar told me that had it not been for the fact that they had some reserve food, they would have died of hunger. In addition, planes could not land except at al-Arish. And there were other serious aspects. Question: Two points could be deduced from this. First, the Summit was principally held because the Palestinian President asked your help to find a political solution to stop military operations carried out against the Palestinians. But some say that the U.S. President telephoned President Mubarak and asked him to hold a Summit at Sharm el-Sheikh in order to abort the Arab Summit, as he feared its consequences and the Egyptian President agreed at once. President Mubarak: We still live under the illusion that the United States gives us orders. We should know that the world has changed. They said it was the United States, which had ordered that the Arab Summit be held or that it had postponed the Summit. This is totally untrue. The evidence is that when I was asked to hold a Summit I said no. I have a (copy) of the message I sent to him (Clinton) and in which I said it cannot be held for such and such reason. Question: Egypt, then, did not hold the Summit at a request from the United States but because it was necessary and because it was a Palestinian request? President Mubarak: At the beginning there was an American request. But I apologized. I told him (Clinton) that I can hold a Summit but under such and such conditions. He said these would be pre-conditions and Barak would not agree. I told him: and I cannot at all call for a Summit under these circumstances. But when matters developed and conditions deteriorated and Abu Ammar told me over the phone that medicines and food were not available because of the (Israeli) siege. And when I spoke to him 7 times on that day over the phone, he spoke in a weaker tone every time. Then I felt that there was a big danger threatening the Palestinian people. I said that in this case we couldn't wait for a week until the Arab Summit is held. Question: You acted, then, motivated by a sense of responsibility towards the situation? President Mubarak: For your knowledge also I consulted some of our brothers in Arab countries. Some told me to go ahead and hold the (Sharm el-Sheikh) Summit. Others had fears that Sharm el-Sheikh would have an effect on the Arab Summit. But I explained that it would not have any effect on the Arab Summit. Question: It was said that the aim was to expedite holding the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit before the Arab Summit to take decisions in order to make decisions to be taken by the Arabs later less harsh when the Arabs meet to adopt an Arab attitude on October 21-22. Meaning, that this Summit (at Sharm el-Sheikh) was held to abort the Arab Summit? President Mubarak: How could they abort the Arab Summit. This Summit (Sharm el-Sheikh) was held to help the Arab Summit. Question: How? President Mubarak: How could I have waited for the Arab Summit to meet when the Palestinians were being killed. If I had waited, the number of those killed would have doubled and Abu Ammar would have been possibly expelled and his headquarters destroyed. I could not advance the date of the Arab Summit to meet before October 21.There were many difficulties, including the elections and many other problems. I could not hold the Arab Summit ahead of its scheduled date because some leaders, like Abu Ammar, would not have been able to come. Question: We know that your Excellency is the chairman of the Arab summit. Is there any Arab country ready that a possible solution, even a possibility of one in a million, is to use the military option and the head of that Arab country would be willing to send his army to war? Yes, or no? President Mubarak: High-sounding statements should be stopped. Declare war with what? War is a complicated word and has never solved any issue. War means troops, an army, soldiers killed and soldiers disabled, orphan children and very huge expenses. Then I may succeed and may not succeed. Armies are prepared to defend the country and not occupy countries. Palestine has Arabs and Israelis mixed together.who will I strike? There would be confusion and we would not know who is Palestinian and who is Jew. Let us be logical and stop using the word ``War`` so long as our country is not occupied. We fought in 1973 but war did not resolve any issue. There should be negotiations and a peaceful solution. Question: Your Excellency is of the opinion that when it is possible to use negotiations, then negotiations should be used. Why fight to reach negotiations? President Mubarak: If there is an opportunity for negotiations, this opportunity should be used. War should be the last resort because it has terrible consequences and its results are not guaranteed. Question: You are president of the republic, a man of state, but you have a military career and you know the difficulty and expenses of taking a decision of war. When you evaluate a situation, you know at once that the bill would be a big one and the operation would not be easy. Some imagine that a declaration of war is a kind of a promenade or war of words. Can you explain to us the meaning of war? President Mubarak: War, in general terms, means that you exhaust all your economic resources and turn your economy into a war economy. Then you should be ready with all your equipment, your savings, and all potentials compatible with the theater of operations. There should be tough training for military operations with a goal. All this costs the state huge expenses. In view of all this, I ask: Who will pay the bill and who will guarantee that you shall achieve what you want?. Question: We hear a tone in the Arab world saying that Arab leaders are not enthusiastic about taking big decisions because they submit to American will. There are two schools. One says this because it feels anger at what happened in occupied Palestinian territories. The second rides the wave and tries to capitalize on what is happening. What would you say to each side? President Mubarak: If we let ourselves be carried away by emotions and if our peoples let themselves be influenced by those moved by emotions, then I shall endanger 65 million people (Egypt's population) I should use wisdom and logic. I should know what are the potentials required by war. Decisions based on emotions are very dangerous to any country. Any ruler who has emotional individuals and others logical among his people (and he should listen to the emotional ones) but he should also make them understand that this operation is not easy and the situation should be considered with wisdom and patience. It is my nature to consult many advisers and officials and understand the situation in all its aspects. It is understood that any ruler should be aware of the public opinion in his country and what is its trend. If public opinion does not grasp the true situation, it should be made aware of it. Question: Even if your decision is not popular, at first glance, responsibility calls that you move with the wave? President Mubarak: No. Of course I do not move with the wave. I should seek the interests of the people first. The situation calls for logic, wisdom and patience. May be many people would be emotional. But this does not matter. Question: What would you say to mothers, fathers and children who felt greatly provoked by what they saw on television showing Israeli actions? President Mubarak: The situation calls for patience and wisdom. I was moved like them. But I control myself to avoid an emotional decision, which would affect mothers, children and youth. Question: President Mubarak, as a human being, when you sat and saw on television Mohamed al Durra, with his father trying to shield him from Israeli bullets, what would you do with your anger? President Mubarak: I think with wisdom what to do? This prompted me to call the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, the second one. Question: Did the call to Sharm el-Sheikh summit face difficulties? President Mubarak: I spoke first with the U.S. president. I told him I felt that the situation was deteriorating. I told him: You are the principal sponsor of the peace process and I propose calling a summit at Sharm el-Sheikh to find a solution to lift the suffering and the siege off the Palestinian people. He told me it was a good idea. I called Abu Ammar and conveyed the same proposal to him. He asked for some time to think. I did not contact anyone after that. Last Thursday, the United States began to contact Abu Ammar and others. I waited for their answers. Consultations continued all Friday. On Saturday, Abu Ammar contacted me by phone and said: I agree. The U.S. president said he agreed and so did the Israeli prime minister. I asked them about the date of the summit would it be on Sunday or Monday. Israel suggested Sunday but the Americans chose Monday. Question: What is the aim of the U.S. President's agenda? What is the aim of the agenda of Barak? We know that the main goal of the Palestinian President is to lift the siege off his people. He is complaining, as if with pain, for what is happening to his people. Why did Barak come and why was Clinton enthusiastic about holding the summit? President Mubarak: The summit was held at my suggestion, as I have just said. I told them I want to find a solution to the deteriorating situation and put an end to killing, as the number of the dead was rising, and to ease the pressure on Palestinian citizens, lift the siege and re-open crossing point. Other points would follow this on the agenda, which include an investigation commission and the peace process and how it should proceed. The United States sent me an agenda. The only thing clear was to stop violence. I told them no. The agenda should include the lifting of siege, the re-opening of crossing points to Palestinians and then we move to other points. Question: your Excellency understood the meaning of stopping violence by counter violence. But you wanted to be precise and asked for lifting the siege? President Mubarak: lifting the siege and return of Israeli troops to previous positions. I contacted the U.S. President and told him that these were two basic requests. We continued to argue until Sunday evening. When the situation was "fluid" until Sunday, I sent a message to the U.S. President directly (I have a copy of the text) I said that I saw that the situation was not clear and the suffering (of Palestinians) was increasing. If we do not come out from this conference with, at least, a decision to lift the siege and the return of Israeli forces (to their previous positions) and enter into the other two points, then it is my opinion that we should postpone the conference until another date to give time to make a good preparation for the conference. Question: Then you would not accept to have on the land of Egypt a conference, to which you have invited, and this conference would fail? President Mubarak: Naturally, I would not call to a conference at Sharm el-sheikh and it fails. That was exactly the situation at 1800 (1600 gmt) Sunday. At about 2100 (1900 gmt) U.S. secretary of state Madeline Albright telephoned foreign minister Amr Moussa and told him, what in effect is this: we are not boarding a plane at the present time. But the U.S. President will talk to president Mubarak over the phone. President Clinton contacted me at about 2130 (1930 gmt) and asked me what was the situation. I told him the situation was very critical and if there was no basis for the two points, the summit would fail and this would lead to an explosion of the situation and to bigger violence and terrorism, not in the area alone. He said he would talk with the Israeli prime minister. He said he was coming at 0900 (0700 gmt) he was late for a full hour because he was talking to Barak. Negotiations began upon the arrival of the U.S. President and continued up to 1300 (1100 gmt) the following day. They were strenuous and difficult negotiations. I did not sleep on that day except for two hours, two on the previous day and two on the day before. Question: This means that you slept 6 hours only in three days? President Mubarak: Yes. Question: We go back to the atmosphere which has relevance to the conference, namely Barak`s agenda. Why did Barak come? President Mubarak: The situation, on his side, was difficult also. Nobody knew when the fighting would stop. It might lead to a flare-up of other situations. It might lead to terrorism. And this is a very serious matter. Question: Then the Intifada, which took place and what took place in the streets, had their impact on him and on the internal situation in Israel? President Mubarak: Definitely. He puts the blame on Arafat. Arafat puts the blame on Barak. One side has tanks and guns and the other has stones and some ammunition. Then the number of dead will rise. Because Barak was in a difficult position and Arafat was in a more difficult one, they responded at once. Question: On the eve of the conference, you faced a situation, which was not easy. There were two sides to peace and between them blood. The situation was tense. The U.S. president was trying to balance between the two. Was the U.S. president helpful to you to reach a solution or did he adopt the Israeli vision? President Mubarak: The U.S. President, personally, was excellent. We talked all night. We met with Arafat and Barak. I met Arafat and then Barak. I met Clinton about 9 times in 24 hours. In reality, the man was honest and sincere in seeking a solution to the issue. He wanted us to come out with a decision to stop bloodshed. Question: As an historic accomplishment, to be the man who worked for peace? President Mubarak: Yes. He did not take the Israeli side. For the first time, he took the just side. At the closing session, he changed more than one point to which Abu Ammar had objected and completely rejected some Israeli points. Question: Were not the Foreign Ministers of France and Russia and the Spanish Prime Minister invited? President Mubarak: The European group met and decided to have a presence at the SUMMIT. They had no demands. Solana telephoned me and said we give you our support. I asked him to convey my greetings and asked who would come. He said he would come personally. I said he was welcome. Question: Then Solana's participation was enough and there was no need for participation by any other party? Wasn't French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine in the picture or the Spanish Prime Minister or the Russian Foreign Minister? President Mubarak: On the eve of the conference, we were told that the Russian Foreign Minister wanted to attend the conference. But the situation was very complicated and Solana came with great difficulty. Question: Is it Israel or the United States, which did not want a European participation? President Mubarak: This was not clear. I invited Solana because Egypt is the host country. France did not ask to be invited and neither did Spain or any others. President Mubarak said that during this week’s Mideast crisis summit in Sharm el-Sheikh US President Bill Clinton made strenuous efforts and held a flurry of meetings with Barak and Arafat. ``I was sure that we will reach a solution, otherwise I would not have called the Summit, `` he told orbit TV. He disclosed that Israelis were firm against refusing a Palestinian demand to set up a fact-finding commission and objected to the withdrawal of troops before Palestinians stopped stone throwing. ``But we insisted on this (the pullback of Israeli troops) and talked to Clinton more than once. I told Barak that so long as you are besieging them, there will be violence and that the situation was very dangerous. `` After marathon talks, Israel agreed to lift its blockade of Palestinian towns and to withdraw its troops. Mubarak said he had expected talks at the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit to be tough and that some finishing touches had to be put five minutes before the conference at which the outcome of the gathering was announced. Asked if Israeli rightist Ariel Sharon deliberately sought to ignite the situation by visiting the Aqsa Mosque precincts on September 28, the Egyptian leader attributed the visit to ``differences and feuds`` inside Israel. He said he was outraged by Israel’s excessive use of force. ``Our statements have driven them (Israelis) mad. What I said at the opening session of the Sharm el-Sheikh summit was stronger than recalling the ambassador. It was very harsh talk. The same was expressed at the closing session. expressing anger is not through recalling the ambassador,`` said Mubarak. He said that the Sharm el-Sheikh summit defused tensions. ``And if it hadn’t, the situation would have been more dangerous. `` He reiterated that the situation could be better if ``intentions are good``. Mubarak said that his decisions are not governed by emotionalism. ``I must think and consider the situation very good so as not to take a decision which leads to grave consequences. `` He added that holding the Sharm el-Sheikh summit was of help for the coming Arab gathering in Cairo ``It was possible I kept silent, but the (Palestinian) death toll would have surged to 300, `` he said. `` He disclosed that he has been seeking to convene an Arab summit for the past two years. ``We have always run into problems. Some said why and others said let us postpone it. Eventually, we agreed that we cannot go on like this. `` The October 21-22 Arab summit is the first since the 1996 conference held in Cairo. Mubarak re-emphasised embracing peace as a strategic option. ``The peace process will not be resolved over night. The Arab common market has got off the ground but still slow. the Arab court of justice is in existence, but it lacks the approval of the summit.`` He was commenting on implementing recommendations of the 1996 summit. Mubarak said he was skeptical that an emergency government would be formed in Israel. ``However, this is an internal issue. What concerns me is the peace process, `` he remarked. Asked to comment on Libyan leader Mummar Gaddafi`s disclosure of a blueprint of the coming Arab summit, he said he had deeply regretted the act. ``The blueprint is mere outlines. When foreign ministers meet, they will decide whether to amend it or add to it.`` He added that Gaddafi was welcome to attend the summit and if he did not, it would be up to him. Some 16 Arab heads of state will attend the two-day summit. The Egyptian leader remarked that the deterioration of the situation between Palestinians and Israelis had accelerated the convocation of the Arab Summit, which was initially planned for late in December. While terming demonstrations as a sign of anger, he cautioned that they should not degenerate into sabotage. ``We are developing our economy, creating jobs and seeking to raise living standards. So, there is no need for subversive demonstrations, `` he added. President Mubarak said that Arab summiteers would start in their coming conference with debating the agenda. ``I cannot make demands for them until we look into the issue of peace, the Arab common market and all other issues of concern for us.`` He urged logic and rationality in handling issues. The President denied any US pressures to block the convocation of the Arab Summit. ``Sometimes the US makes some demands but I turn them down. I refuse when logic and my conscience dictate this. It is not rejection for the sake of rejection. They (the Americans) have never asked me to hold or not to hold an (Arab) Summit. I will not accept that someone dictate to me or to my people what to do.`` On the American reaction when he refuses a request, Mubarak said: ``Sometimes, the press there assaults me as happened during the Camp David talks (held in Jun) when they asked me to talk to Arafat. I knew that Arafat needed support and that Israel wanted to wield sovereignty over Al Haram (the Aqsa mosque precincts). I did not ask Arafat to do so.`` In the wake of that stand, the US press claimed that president Mubarak was not cooperative. ``I could not make this demand to Arafat. I could not impose on him a decision because he is responsible before his people.`` Mubarak saw a good sign that nobody had objected to inviting Iraq to the coming Arab Summit and hoped that the conference would mark gradual change. ``I think it (the Arab summit) will succeed if it meets the rational demands of the Arab peoples, not the emotional ones.`` He told Arab people not to except unviable decisions. ``(Arab) leaders are up to the situation. We will have free discussions, not dictated by the USA or any other country,`` he told Orbit TV. |
|
||||||||
Print this page 
Mail this page 