A CONVERSATION WITH EHUD OLMERT Interim Israeli Prime Minister

Sunday, April 9, 2006

In the recent Israeli elections, Interim Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took a calculated risk and told voters that, if elected, he and his new Kadima party would lead Israel out of most of the West Bank.

The move paid off -- Kadima won more votes than any other party, and Olmert is now putting together a government. In his first foreign interview, Olmert sketched out his plans last week for Newsweek-Washington Post's Lally Weymouth.

Interview by LALLY WEYMOUTH

TEL AVIV

How much time will you give the new Palestinian government?

I'm not expressing any ultimatum. If we reach the conclusion that the Palestinians are not prepared to meet the requirements that lead to negotiations, we will then move forward without a negotiating process. We are ready to change. We are not prepared to wait forever.

You are forming your governing coalition .

I have about 42 days to form a new government. The Labor Party is going to be a senior partner in this coalition, but we will have a few more parties. I think it would be good to try and form a national consensus reflected by the composition of the government. [But] I declared before the elections what my plans are [for withdrawing from the territories] in a most explicit manner.

I heard that your advisers warned you not to do this .

I was aware of the possibility that it would cost me some votes, but I also knew that once I made this statement and managed to win, I would have a greater mandate to act. And I certainly intend now to go ahead and not waste time.

What do you mean by "convergence"?

The idea is that most of the settlements that would have to be removed from where they are now will be converged into the blocs of settlements that will remain under Israeli control. . . . The rest of the territories will not have any Israeli presence and will allow territorial contiguity for a future Palestinian state.

When you say that in much of the West Bank there won't be any Israeli presence, will the army stay behind?

I will keep all military options to be able to combat terrorism effectively everywhere.

Is there is a difference between "convergence" and withdrawal?

I think it more accurately represents the strategy for the West Bank as distinct from the one that was carried out in Gaza. In Gaza, we pulled out of all the territories and dismantled all the settlements. Here, I'm talking about relocating many of the settlements into blocs that will be maintained by Israel.

Is the fence the basis of the future border that you're thinking about?

The fence will have to be adjusted to the makeup of these blocs of settlements. No Israeli will live outside the fence, first for the sake of security and secondly to provide territorial congruity for the Palestinians to form their independent state.

The time has come for a change, and I am absolutely determined to accomplish it. I think the time is right, and I think the Israeli electorate is ready. The fact that, after having said in the most explicit way what my ideas are, we came out of these elections as the largest party is, I think, a testament to the determination of the Israeli electorate to move forward.

I think there is an opportunity now that never existed before. This is due to a combination of public opinion in Israel, my commitment and the understanding and hopefully future support of President George W. Bush.

What would you like the Americans to do to help Israel with these moves ?

If we [come to] share the conviction that the Palestinians are not ready for genuine and meaningful negotiations, then I will try to reach an understanding with the administration as to what steps Israel should take -- what should be the border of Israel in order to reduce the level of confrontation between us and the Palestinians to a minimum.

Would you want some kind of U.S. recognition of the borders you set?

I will seek such recognition, yes. But it's important to understand that if we reach the conclusion that the Palestinians -- led by a Hamas government, which is a terrorist organization -- are not prepared to meet the preliminary requirements of the roadmap, then we don't have to wait forever. We don't need to waste our energies and our resources. We can move forward to create a new reality on the ground congruent with the understanding that there should be two states existing alongside each other and that the Palestinians must have a contiguous territory where they can hopefully establish a credible state.

But if you move all the settlers you're talking about and evacuate large parts of the West Bank in a unilateral move, wouldn't you expect some kind of new alliance or new defensive pact from the United States ?

If this move is accepted as a contribution to a Middle East with less violence and terror, we will be able to reach an understanding with the American government about some measures of support that can be essential to its success.

Financial, military or both ?

Everything that could be of assistance to the completion of such a huge challenge will be on the agenda. It's not just a financial issue.

Down the road, are you thinking strategically of a framework for a new Israel-U.S. alliance?

There is an alliance between Israel and the United States, and it has never been stronger than at the time of George W. Bush. So within that framework, we will probably discuss many issues.

You said you will give bilateral talks with the Palestinians a chance. Does that mean bilateral talks with Palestinian President Abu Mazen?

Bilateral talks with the official representatives of the Palestinian Authority. Abu Mazen has deprived himself of all the practical authorities of government. It will have to be those in government, on the condition that they meet the requirements of the roadmap and the Quartet: no violence; recognition of the state of Israel; acceptance of all the former agreements that were signed by the Palestinian Authority.

How much time will you give the new Palestinian government?

I'm not expressing any ultimatum. If we reach the conclusion that the Palestinians are not prepared to meet the requirements that lead to negotiations, we will then move forward without a negotiating process. We are ready to change. We are not prepared to wait forever.

I understand that you're trying to draw a distinction between the Palestinian government and the Palestinian people regarding international aid .

We will not tolerate any attempt to torture the Palestinian population for their government's lack of responsibility and decency. We will certainly not punish the population and create a humanitarian disaster in any of the territories.

Will Israel turn over money to the Hamas government, as it did to the PA?

When we dealt with a responsible Palestinian government, we transferred all the monies. [Now] we will keep them and look for ways to allocate them directly to the population for humanitarian needs. We will not give a check to a Palestinian minister of finance, because how can we be certain that it will not be used for terror?

Could Iran give Hamas enough money to support its government?

I hope they will not do it and I hope that if they try, we, together with our friends in America and Europe, will find ways to prevent this. Iran is an anti-Semitic, terrorist government.

Regarding the Iranian nuclear program, is there a military option?

There is only one thing I can say: Israel will not tolerate a situation in which Iran has effective control of non-conventional weapons that can be used directly against the state of Israel.

That would mean that Israel would have to attack Iran .

I hope we will not have to face this choice and they will be stopped by diplomatic measures.

Do you believe the international community will continue to boycott Hamas?

I believe that if there is a united international front, there may be a chance to change the basic attitudes of the Hamas government. Why should they take steps to change their policies if they can get away with not doing it?

What did you learn from Ariel Sharon?

I learned many things. Perhaps the most important is the importance of remaining cool at a time of crisis. I also learned the merits of changing your opinion and your mind. Sharon had the courage, at a certain junction in his very rich and extraordinary political career, to adopt new positions because, as he said, "What you see from here [as prime minister] is not what you see from there [not being prime minister]."

I think what he meant is that when the ultimate responsibility was on his shoulders, he had to be somewhat less idealistic about his grand schemes for the Land of Israel and more realistic.

Do you think you had some influence on Sharon ?

I'm sure I did. I was the first to talk about disengagement in the year 2000. I had many discussions with Sharon, and he told me the first time I talked to him about disengagement, "I'm 100 percent with you and I will deliver." That was in November 2003.

I said that if the Palestinians are not ready for a meaningful political dialogue, then we will have to act unilaterally. And after that I tried to convince him to start laying the foundations for the creation of a new party that would be better able to deal with the political ramifications of a disengagement strategy.

He was absolutely determined to carry on with the implementation of a plan to the very end, as he did.