|
|
 | REOPENING WOUNDS
SEPTEMBER 27, 1996TRANSCRIPT |
|---|
As Palestinian protesters and Israeli soldiers continue to battle and shed blood for a third day, many ask if the peace process will ever recover from the unrest caused by the opening of a tunnel enterance near two of Islam's most holiest sites. After a background report on the latest struggles, Charlayne Hunter-Gault discusses the situation with former Secretary of State James Baker and former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Digging on the tunnel has been going on for years but previous Israeli governments had declined to go ahead with the second opening until now. And now we go to two former U.S. officials who helped broker negotiations between the Arabs and Likud governments in Israel. Zbigniew Brzezinski was national security adviser at the time of Camp David Accords in 1978-79, between Egypt and the Likud government of Menachim Begin in Israel. James Baker was secretary of state when the Madrid peace process began with several Arab states and the Likud government of Yitzhak Shamir. Gentlemen, thank you both for joining us. Sec. Baker, starting with you, are we on the verge of war here in the Middle East?
JAMES BAKER, Former Secretary of State: (Houston) Well, let's hope not, Charlayne. The opening of the tunnel I think was, was probably simply a match that lit the tinder. It's really regrettable, very sad. I think this is a very serious incident, serious problem, but it's representative, I think, of something larger, and that is whether or not this--there's going to be any follow-on to Oslo and any follow-on to the peace process, or whether, in fact, the new government of Israel has decided they want to take a different route, a different course.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Well, I want to see what you think about that in a minute, but let me just get Mr. Brzezinski's reaction. How serious is this, in your view?
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, Former National Security Adviser: Oh, I think it's extremely serious. I think at stake is the peace process. And at stake is the American position in the Middle East because we have been deeply involved in the peace process. And we cannot overlook the fact that there's bound to be enormous resentment over what has happened not only on the part of the Palestinians and a significant portion of the Israeli population but also in a number of Arab countries in which we have major interests. I think what this suggests to me, at least, is that we have a situation in which the current Likud government is unable or unwilling to pursue the peace process. I have to tell you very frankly that when I first heard this news I said to myself how stupid. Now--
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: To open the tunnel?
MR. BRZEZINSKI: Exactly. Now I increasingly feel that this is a deliberate provocation. It was done at night and under great security. Obviously the people who did it anticipated that there would be a negative reaction, therefore, they knew what they were doing, and I cannot help but wonder whether one of its purposes was not to destabilize the Arafat authority, undermine the Palestinian authority to the extent that it exists, and then create an altogether different situation than that envisaged by the Oslo agreements.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: What do you think about that, Sec. Baker?
SEC. BAKER: Well, I'm not so sure I'm willing to ascribe yet those motives to the new Israeli government, but as I said in my opening comment, Charlayne, I think we're going to have to see here very quickly whether or not this government is really committed to pursuing the peace process or not. I happen to think this tragedy we're witnessing now could have been avoided. I think it could have been avoided if that new government over the course of the past 100 plus days had shown any real tendency at all to meet the commitments of the prior Israeli government, something they said they were going to do but something that they've been very, very slow about following through on.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Well, you heard the U.S. State Department spokesman today call for stepping back from the violence. How do you do that at this point, Mr. Brzezinski?
MR. BRZEZINSKI: Well, first of all, I hope the U.S. Government persists in its view that the decision regarding the tunnel has to be reversed because that, after all, set the situation on fire. If it is not reversed, then we'll simply have another case of the so-called accomplished facts. One of the tactics of the Likud is to create what they call accomplished facts, in spite of agreements, for example, enlargement of the settlements. They anticipate that there will be clashes over it, but then the facts remain. And in that sense, the situation is altered deliberately. The United States has made it clear that it would like to see that decision reversed, and, I think, therefore, it's a test of American determination.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: But didn't the United States say it wanted to see it temporarily closed until they could work out--
MR. BRZEZINSKI: Temporarily can be a long time. Exactly. It should be temporarily closed until, let's say, a commission or theologians and archaeologists jointly decides whether it's a bad or a good idea.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: But how do you--if Sec. Baker, assuming you agree with that, how do you--how do you do that--how do you step back from that? Because Benjamin Netanyahu said today that the tunnel was going to be reopened on Sunday.
SEC. BAKER: Well, I think that a temporary closing, as the United States government has suggested and asked for as far as the Israeli government is concerned, would be a very symbolic thing to do, but, you know, there are a lot of other things that, that the Israeli government has committed itself to do that it really hasn't followed through on that would make a big difference. If you look--just look at the lead editorial today in the "New York Times," Charlayne. You'll see where the New York Times is even suggesting that they halt new settlement activity, uh, that they take actions to pull out or pull back from Hebron, as the prior government had agreed and as this current government has been very reluctant to do. So I'm not so sure that the whole thing hinges on whether or not the tunnel is now closed temporarily or permanently. I agree with Zbig, though, any time you start creating facts on the ground, you prejudice negotiations, you prejudice the possibility of making progress. That's why settlements are so inimical to the peace process, and anything having to do with Jerusalem. Oslo really, really called for the freezing of the status quo with respect to Jerusalem as of September 1993, and that that matter was to be reserved for the very last item to be negotiated, and that's really the way it should be and should have been.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Well, you see the atmospherics now on both sides, or maybe that's not the best way to describe it, but both sides seem to have now dug in their heels.
SEC. BAKER: Right.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: If this kind of thing is going to go forward that you're describing, Zbigniew Brzezinski, where does this start? I mean, how do you get a decision even taking place, given that both sides have now kind of dug in their heels? Where's the first step?
MR. BRZEZINSKI: Well, I think the first step is to face the fact that the United States is not just a helpless spectator, but is deeply involved. We are very much involved in the Middle East, we're very much involved in the security of Israel. So we are a party to the process. And I think experience teaches us that progress is made only when the United States is involved--
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Now involved--
MR. BRZEZINSKI: --when the first--
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Sorry.
MR. BRZEZINSKI:--engagement occurred, the United States had to be involved, when Camp David occurred, the United States had to be engaged, when there was progress again when Jim [Baker] was in office, the United States had to be engaged, and the United States is not serious. It's not credible in making its views known and insisting upon them. Then I think the peace process is going to be stalemated because the parties concerned at this stage cannot move to its peace on their own.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Well, [Secretary of State] Christopher has been talking with both sides over the last few hours. What else should the United States be doing?
SEC. BAKER: It's really a question of what we're saying.
MR. BRZEZINSKI: --talking and thinking--there are always ways of talking and talking. The United States has to reasonably insist, be clear on what it expects the parties to do. We have a lot of leverage, and we shouldn't be afraid of using it.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Sec. Baker, what leverage is that? How should we be using it?
SEC. BAKER: I agree, I agree with Zbig. I think that the role of the United States in a situation like this is to encourage the parties to follow through on their commitments, and I think that there really is a lot that we can do. This tragedy simply proves the accuracy of the common wisdom about the Middle East. When hope for the peace process begins to fade, there's going to be violence on the ground. That's exactly what has happened. I think there are some things that can be done that don't necessarily involve the United States, although I agree with Zbig that we need to be a forceful player, but it would be important, I think, for Prime Minister Netanyahu to get together with with Chairman Arafat as soon as he can, sit down, and show a real tendency to want to follow through on the commitments of Oslo.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: So the--
SEC. BAKER: Instead of a hands-off resistant attitude that has been demonstrated so far. And he's asked for a meeting with Arafat, and I think that, that in and of itself is a step in the right direction. That doesn't mean the United States shouldn't be heavily involved in, in a hands-on way in order to make things happen.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: You think that some U.S. official or high level delegation or the secretary of state, himself, should go there. If you were secretary of state, would you be on your way there now?
SEC. BAKER: I don't, I don't know that that's necessarily the key. I think, you know, we can say what we, what we have to say and what we ought to say on the telephone just as well as we can in face to face and in person. The real issue here is: Does this new government want to pursue the peace process that the former government had put in place, want to follow through with the commitments the former government had made, and if not, what is this government's solution for peace? What is its idea about how you get to peace, about how Israel ceases to be a nation perpetually at war.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Mr Brzezinski, what are the problems that Benjamin Netanyahu faces, and how does he get around those in his own country so that he can do the things that the secretary just outlined?
MR. BRZEZINSKI: Well, first of all, there's the question what kind of a leader is he. Is he really a leader committed to the peace process, or is he simply a maneuverer who is trying to undermine the peace process, and a pesterer who engages in very effective PR but has no strategic concept? Secondly, there is the problem that his members of his cabinet, who are more extreme than he is. So he does have a problem there. But the fact also is that a very significant portion of Israeli public opinion is for the peace process, and if he was willing to move forward on the peace process, they would support it. So he could isolate the extremists. What concerns me, especially after his performance today, is the possibility, perhaps even the probability, that he has been deliberately maneuvering to undermine Oslo peace agreements, and he's taking advantage of the American elections counting on the likelihood that American reaction will be very tepid, very weak, very indecisive, taking advantage of this to set in motion a process which progressively undermines the peace process and creates a situation in which, in effect, he accomplishes that which his party has always proclaimed to be subjective, namely the absorption of the West Bank and determination of any Palestinian authority whatsoever.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: And Sec. Baker, you think the U.S. can get in the way of that, if that's the case? I'm not saying that's the case, but the U.S. can do something about that?
SEC. BAKER: Well, I don't know whether the United States can do something about that or not. I used to say frequently when I was in office that we, the United States, cannot deliver Israel and people who think that we can are sadly mistaken, but we do have extraordinary influence with Israel. And there are ways in which we can use that influence constructively. What I really hope happens is that Prime Minister Netanyahu, one of these days, will start thinking about his legacy, his historical legacy, and what the history books are going to say about him. Are they going to say that this is a prime minister who came in and subverted a peace process that was making substantial progress and turned Israel back into a nation perpetually at war, with an ever escalating cycle of violence there year after year, or are they going to say here is the man who, who brought us finally a full, comprehensive, lasting peace with full security for the state of Israel?
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: All right.
SEC. BAKER: He can have that legacy, but he needs to start focusing on that.
CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Well, gentlemen, thank you both.
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
