Mark Regev

• Israeli Embassy in Washington • World Section • Talk: World news message boards • Live Online Transcripts • Subscribe to washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters

Sharon in Washington
With Mark Regev
Spokesman, Israeli Embassy in Washington D.C.
Wednesday, March 21, 2001, 11 a.m. EST

In this discussion, Israeli Embassy spokesman Mark Regev said the Prime Minister Sharon came away from his meeting with President Bush convinced that "we have a very similar way of seeing how to proceed with the peace talks and how we see the larger regional issues."

He also defended the Israeli government's withholding of revenues from the Palestinian Authority saying, "Israel is not going to pass on money that is going to pay the salaries of gunmen who shoot at our civilians."

The complete transcript follows.

washingtonpost.com: Welcome Mark Regev. Can you tell us about Prime Minister Sharon's reaction to his visit to Washington? Have he and the Israeli government learned anything about the Bush administration's approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that they did not know before?

Mark Regev: Sharon left Washington positive about his meetings here with the administration. He feels that there is a strong common ground in the way both sides see the strategic realities in the region. We have a very similar way of seeing how to proceed with the peace talks and how we see the larger regional issues.

Bethesda, Md.: In his public statements, Prime Minister Sharon has indicated his willingness to move forward in the peace process if Chairman Arafat does more to quell Palestinian violence. At the same time, Mr. Sharon has provoked Palestinians by acts such as his visit to the Temple Mount in September and his recent decision to expand the Har Homa settlement in East Jerusalem. How can you reconcile his public statements with his actions that seem to speak louder than his words?

Mark Regev: Sharon's position is clear. Jerusalem will remain the undivided capital of Israel. Because we are no longer seeking a perfect solution like a final status agreement that was tried and failed at Camp David, the Jerusalem issue should not be a reason we cannot move forward today.

Bethesda, MD: How does Prime Minister Sharon plan to stop the recent uprising of terrorism and violence? Specifically with respect to the fact that the violence has shifted from the Palestinian territory into Israel.

Mark Regev: Sharon holds the Palestinian leadership responsible for the terror. No one doubts that Arafat has full control over his own security services, both Force 17 (the presidential bodyguard) and the internal security. These two groups have been responsible for the majority of the violence that has occurred over the last weeks.

Washington, DC: Does Prime Minister Sharon plan to continue peace talks with PLO leader Yasser Arafat? If so, does he plan to seek Arafat's assistance in fighting the Palestinian terrorism?

Mark Regev: Prime Minister Sharon wants to continue peace talks with the Palestinians. Such talks can only occur when the Palestinians take tangible steps to reduce the level of terror. You can't say you want peace and send people to kill Israeli civilians at the same time.

Scottsdale, Ariz.: After the total failure of the Barak's extreme left policies, why not come back to the Jordan option that would create a confederation between Jordan and the Palestinians in exchange for some land.

After all, Jordan IS at the center of the problem as it is a Palestinian state. In exchange for their cooperation, Israel, the EU and U.S. could help develop this country and help it out of its current economic woes.

Mark Regev: The relationship between Jordanians and Palestinians has to be worked out between those two peoples.

Oberlin, Ohio: Don't you feel that by tightening the belt around the Palestinian economy, this action will only fuel anti-Israel sentiments that could easily manifest themselves into violent outbursts such as bombings or violent clashes with the IDF? ...

Mark Regev: Israel has no intention of harming the larger Palestinian civilian population. Sharon has made it very clear that we must distinguish between those who support and instigate terror and the majority of the Arab population who want to lead a normal life. We need to enable them to do so.

Toronto, Ontario: Hi Mark,

Why does the Israeli government feel it necessary to withhold money from the Palestinian Authorities? How does withholding these monies affect positively for your country the security situation on the ground?

Mark Regev: Israel is not going to pass on money that is going to pay the salaries of gunmen who shoot at our civilians. That is the overriding moral argument. From a legal point of view I don't' think Israel has an obligation to fulfil its part of the interim agreements when the Palestinians are flagrantly violating their agreements on security cooperation and the fight against terrorism.

Washington, DC: Recently, the Palestinian Authority has lobbied the UN to send international troops into the West Bank and Gaza Strip, much as it has done in South Lebanon and elsewhere; Israel has opposed such a move. Could you explain why Israel opposes the presence of such forces?

Mark Regev: International troops are not a magic solution. We see, in Lebanon, that the presence of International forces has not done anything concrete to lower the level of violence.

Silver Spring MD: Mr. Regev, yesterday this forum treated its readers to a barrage of accusations against Israel while painting the Palestinians as innocent angels. ... So many things were said that were offensive, but I will focus on two. The guest said that since 1972 the Palestinians have accepted a two-state solution. I follow the news closely, but I have never heard the Palestinians accept this scenario. Am I right? Second, when confronted with the continued barrage against Israel and the Jews in the Arab press and school curricula, the guest pointed to some anti-Arab statements by Israelis but ducked the question of the culpability on the Arab side. Is there a concerted effort by Israelis to disparage the Palestinians in the press and schools? [edited]

Mark Regev: Unfortunately, I think that even today, there are still large segments of Palestinian opinion who seek the destruction of Israel. I think the failure of the Palestinian leadership to pick up the diplomatic ball passed to them in the previous Israeli and American governments raises very serious questions as to the commitment of that leadership to a peace based on a fair compromise. I think the continued incitement to hatred and the racial stereotypes that appear in official Palestinian media are strengthening that hatred.

Atlanta, GA: Mr. Regev, Why does Israel blame the Palestinian Authority for any attack initiated by Palestinian civilians or policemen against Israelis while, Israel never arrests or punishes its own military and civilians (settlers) when they attack and kill Palestinians? [edited]

Mark Regev: Israel disciplines and, when justified, tries its servicemen if they break the law. I am very proud to say that we are a strong democracy and that the actions of the military and the police are subject to the criticism of a very active judiciary as well as a free and probing press. This unfortunately cannot be said of the PA or of any one of Israel's neighbors.

Oklahoma City, OK: What does the state of Israel see as the future of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories? How can one ignore the plea for the right to return?

Mark Regev: I am the son of a refugee. My father was liberated from the Nazis in 1945 by the tanks of General Patton, and sent to a displaced persons facility run by the US military. My wife's parents were also refugees. They left Syria in the early 1940's in fear of their lives because of the violence and terror against the Jewish population there. Both families have been successfully resettled and integrated. The only reason that Palestinian refugees have not been resettled and reintegrated into society is because their suffering has been exploited by Arab leaderships. The Arab refugee problem could have been solved decades ago had the approach been humanitarian and not used as a political motive to try to score political points.

Huntsville, AL: Mr. Regev,

I am a Black man from South Alabama, therefore, I do not have an axe to grind either way. Therefore, I'm neither pro-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian. I'm for what is right!

The United Nations has ruled that the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza is illegal! It also ruled that the Israeli settlements are illegal and against international law! It has also ruled time and again that displaced refugees must be repatriated to their original homeland! Every American administration has also said the Israeli settlements are illegal, because any reasonable person understands, you simply can't take people's like through the barrel of a gun, and then say after the fact that "We want to live in peace."!!!

Therefore, I would like to ask you, in light of the aforementioned facts, why is it that Israel refuses to let the Palestinian refugees return to their homes? [edited]

Mark Regev: Unfortunately, many decisions of the UN have been very one-sided in the extreme. This is because during the period of the Cold War the Arab countries, together with the Soviet Bloc could count on automatic majorities. This is more to the discredit to the UN than it is to Israel and her policies. TO say that Jews have no right to live in their homeland is surely an absurdity.

New York City, NY: Isn't one of the reasons for withholding funds to the PNA, so that Arafat's authority is undermined? If it is, it's working. The Palestinian TV station was shut down today for showing Arafat under a foot and the abrupt muzzling of free speech shows a growing discontent within Palestine regarding Arafat's leadership. How can Sharon's government hold Arafat responsible for violence when he hasn't the funding to maintain an orderly government?

Mark Regev: It wasn't the Palestinian TV that was closed down today. It was Al-Jizera- an independent Arab satellite station. That station had the "audacity" to broadcast something unflattering about Chairman Arafat. The Palestinian television stations would never do such a thing. They know the 'rules of the game' and like in the former Soviet Union, know very well, that when you speak about the leadership you must do so only positively.

washingtonpost.com: The questions are certainly coming fast and furious and we will return to them momentarily. But first, is there something you would like to say to our readers Mark?

Mark Regev: It must be clear that peace on one hand and violence on the other are totally inconsistent. That is why Sharon has placed, as a pre-condition, on the resumption of peace talks the termination of the current orchestrated wave of terror. He will not negotiate under fire. The ball is in Arafat's court. He can choose to move forward in the Peace negotiations, improve the standard of living of his people, and create a better quality of life for his citizens, or he can choose to continue the violence and the terror. Unfortunately, the last couple of months show us that he is more interested in continuing to have a grievance than he is to solving problems. Maybe it was on that fundamental understanding that the overwhelming majority of Israelis elected Ariel Sharon.

washingtonpost.com: Mark: several questioners have criticized Israel's policies of road closures and military checkpoints, as collective punishment. What is the Israeli government's response to such criticism?

Mark Regev: Prime Minister Sharon stated a number of times during his visit that he is against collective punishment. He is deliberately distinguishing between those who support or instigate terror and the majority of Arabs in the territories. Unfortunately people are suffering because of the closures of the checkpoints into Israel. Obviously Palestinians who make their livelihood in Israel suffer from that. But Israel has closed the checkpoints not because we want them to suffer but because we have a duty to protect the lives of innocent Israelis. Since the beginning of this wave of violence there have been numerous attempts to enter Israel and attack and kill Israelis. In some cases we have been successful in preventing these attacks. In others innocent people have been killed. Before the recent violence Palestinians came to Israel and worked. If the Palestinian leadership did something tangible to stop the violence the economic situation would once again fall into place. In many ways the Palestinian population is paying the price of its own terrorist elements. And this is really unfortunate. Like the Iraqis, the Palestinians suffer because their leadership seems interested in that suffering so as to promote international political support.

Cairo, Egypt: Israel's most generous offer to the Palestinians is this: Israel will have 85 percent of historical Palestine, will have control of the water supplies, the borders, Jerusalem including El-harem El-shareif, and will not permit the Palestinians refugees to return to their lands and homes. Do you honestly think that this is a fair deal?

Mark Regev: Happy to have someone online from Cairo.

The offer that was on the table under the previous administration talked about giving the overwhelming majority of the West Bank and Gaza to full Palestinian control. President Clinton's proposals talked about sharing Jerusalem. This was very difficult for the Israelis but Barak agreed to it out of desire to make the Peace Process work. It was the Palestinians that torpedoed that historic compromise.

We were very happy to allow Palestinians to have the right of return to the proposed Palestinian state. We are, and will continue to oppose, attempts for the wholesale return of refugees to Israel, which would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state. Ultimately, those who support the right of return to Israel reject our right to live as a free and democratic Jewish society. I would never ask the Palestinians to give up their right of national self-determination. Why would it be legitimate for them to ask me, as a Jew, to give up my right to national self-determination?

Washington, DC: Shalom, Mr. Regev. As much as I understand the bond between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel, I just don't understand the stubbornness of some of the settlers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In spite of all the animosity of the Palestinians around them, they are not willing to leave and (possibly) clear the way for some kind of "peace" agreement. Why is the Israeli government spending precious resources (money, IDF support...) on those settlements and thus also inviting criticism from other countries?

Mark Regev: The policy of the new Sharon government is not to build new settlements on the West Bank. This is a difficult decision for many Israelis. But it is done out of a desire to leave open options for peace. It's a pity that the Palestinians are not similarly taking steps that could help the process move forward.

New Haven, CT: Why does the United States pressure Israel to give tax money to the Palestinian Authority when it realizes that that money would go directly to Fatah and Force 17 terrorists? Don't they realize that by doing so, they only encourage Arafat?

Mark Regev: The Americans understand, like we do, that groups from Arafat's inner circle have been involved in the terror campaign against Israel. They have specifically said to Arafat that he must do more to combat terrorism.

Toronto, ON: Would it not be appropriate for the Israeli government to discontinue building and expanding Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem until final agreements are reached on the future of this land?

Mark Regev: We have. Jerusalem is not a settlement. It is the historic capital of the Jewish people and will remain the united capital of the State of Israel.

washingtonpost.com: You say it is not the government's policy to expand settlements on the West Bank, the Jerusalem city government has given the go-ahead for the expansion of Jewish housing in Har-Homa, a decision that the U.S. State Department criticized yesterday. What is the Israeli government's reaction to the State Department's comment that such actions did not contribute toward peace?

Mark Regev: Once again, Jerusalem is not a settlement but the capital of the State of Israel. Peace must be based on respect for our capital.

Washington, D.C.: How does digging a ditch around Bir Zeit University increase Israel's security?

Mark Regev: I am not aware of any digging around Bir Zeit. I know that in the suburb that I live in between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, some digging was done to establish reinforce the community due to the threats of Palestinian gunmen and terrorists.

washingtonpost.com: Thank you Mark Regev. Thank you for everyone who sent in questions. Due to the large volume of reader inquiries, we regret that everybody could not participate in the discussion.

Mark Regev: Thank you. It was my pleasure to sit with you. Though we can have a legitimate difference of opinion on political issues, I would hope that we can all agree that these differences should be dealt with through discussion and at the negotiating table and not through violence and terror. I call on all people who have the Palestinian peoples true interests at heart to recommend to the Palestinian leadership to renounce the path of violence and to live up to the commitment to the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on the White House lawn. I hope we can return to the negotiating table, and pray that the Palestinian Authority has enough vision and foresight to not let the chance for Peace slip away. Thank you.