In Conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu

[Music] welcome to Chatham House absolute delighted to have you here this morning and in particular I'd like to welcome obviously the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu his wife Sarah mark where you member was really a mess of mark Creager and obviously all of our members and guests sorry the number of excellencies those ladies and gentlemen and members this is also being live-streamed and sent out on I think is called Twitter 360 Twitter video as well apparently sorry it's definitely not a Chatham House rule event this is very much on the record as you can see from the back I think our view is the chatter materal events are probably usually maxed out at about 3540 and we're also going to be very informal and have a conversation rather than speeches which is you've been given quite a few on your visit here I don't want to load you up anymore but what we're going to do just you understand the format is speak for a good 35 minutes my drift of 40 we will then take questions from the floor please be patient there'll be plenty of time at the end I think we might we probably will squeeze this meeting over a few minutes past 10 o'clock so just be aware of that and I will ask you all to please stay in your seats at the end so that we can let the prime minister leave smoothly to his next appointments and I was just saying a minute ago I was looking through the record Prime Minister that we have been very fortunate to host a number of Israeli leaders before chime Weitzman and Shimon Paris when he was president Golda Meir as prime minister Shimon Peres also when he was Prime Minister and they heard all that although just before he was Prime Minister and obviously welcoming you here today is not just a coincidence you're here obviously to mark the hundredth anniversary of the Balfour Declaration we will get and have an opportunity to talk that topic but an absolutely seminal one not only for the State of Israel but think also for in social relations and certainly for the British relationship with Israel as well as I know from your meetings yesterday with Theresa May before we get going I just like to remind people you know politics is a difficult business and apprentice to Netanyahu was elected a very fourth term in March 2015 only person to win prime ministership three times in a row he's matched David being here his record at least on winning prime minister ships and if he stays in office through the end of his term which I'm sure it's going to happen then you will be the longest serving Prime Minister David ben-gurion so these are remarkable achievements to have done also served as foreign minister finance minister ambassador to the UN and as many as Raley's have done served with distinction in the IDF the Special Forces in particular between 69 68 and 72 including dealing with one of the hijackings I think it was a Sabena aircraft back in that time and broke his studies off from MIT to come back and fight in the Yom Kippur War and I think that maybe if I can segue straight over reminds us that Israel exists in a very dangerous part of the world one of the most conflict prone regions in the world my colleagues here at Chatham House who work in the Middle East North Africa program are always very busy and as much as they would like to work on all of the Middle East they seem to get caught up each time on conflicts rather than being able to think about the big opportunities I just wanted to start with one particular question many people thought that 2011 was going to be the beginning of a moment of real change in the Middle East here we are six or so years later and in a way it's sort of back to the future we've got a very strong leadership in Egypt under President Sisi Isis seems at least from a physical sense or military sense in terms of territory to being defeated in Syria in Iraq where do you think we're out of a moment are we have we passed in the Middle East that moment of optimal danger or are things as dangerous as they've always been they're dangerous as they've always been but in a different danger first of all I have to tell you I have to make a confession this is not the first time that I'm in a tank and not the first time that I I think but I think it's the first time I'm in this think tank that is truth and so I so I'd like to answer by telling you that I just read a book by a man called Amita it's yoni not exactly a good supporter and I'm Italian I wrote the book he titled the book security first and he argues there's a germane to your question he argues that democratization doesn't lead to increased security that's just the empirical evidence I suppose it does in societies and there not many that have Democratic traditions or the components that require democratization but other in other cases where they don't the democratization can lead to extreme instability the loss of security the loss of many lives and political turbulence I think he wrote this in 2013 something like that that's what's happened there were traditional structures authoritarian regimes basically dating back from that agreement by a great Zionist that we celebrated yesterday mark Sikes but you know it was converted to Zionism a few months after signing that agreement and he he was the one who ran out to climb Weitzman and said it's a boy with a bow for declaration but but they set a certain pattern sort of stuck with ups and downs it's stuck and then it got unglued and the idea was it was going to be taken over by the Google boys in Tahrir Square or in and the Suk's in tunisia and so on and it didn't turn out that way now this turbulence created several things that I can talk here this is not some byte land it's not television we can actually develop an idea okay I'm waiting for the God don't worry it's fine but we can't you know of asking the the pointed questions that don't really ask for real answers here's a real answer the real answer is that in the Middle East a structured with the cultural forces that are set there with the tribal loyalties and with the other difficulties that exist you cannot superimpose a Western structure it doesn't work okay we have afraid it and now there's a battle it's an important battle but not one that is easily achievable between what I would call the modernist and the medievalist early medieval Asst the medievalists come from basically through the cracks of the these wound regimes are coming the various strains of militant Islam which is the Shiite extremists reacts led by Iran extreme Sunnis led by initially by al-qaeda now by - it'll be - will be replaced by others and they compete for dominance who will inherit this who will be king of the hill they disagree among themselves will be a king of the hill but they agree it's an Islamist hill and so others are either subjugated or murdered first to conquer the Middle East and from there ideas about that's the barbarians okay the other side are not when I say modernist I don't necessarily mean Luxembourg Democrats that is not going to happen it's just not gonna happen not in the foreseeable future might have in the distant future but it will not happen now and I think the choice we have is what do we want do we want these rampant theological well dictatorial saga courses really based on Islam or do we have a choice with more moderate and more secular authoritarian regimes I think the choice is clear so this is I think what we have this is where we are today now I'll give you the good news the bad news is that as the barbarians so to speak fight themselves among themselves the one potent force of militant Islam that has emerged is Iran and it is devouring one nation after the other it is doing so either by direct conquest but more usually by using proxies Hezbollah they took over Lebanon in Yemen for the hoodoos the taking over again they're trying to do the same thing with Shiite militias in Iraq same thing now in Syria they want to import tens and tens of thousands of Shias it's serious so this is the bad news the bad news is that the in the battle between the medievalists and the modernist the medievalists are moving forward specifically with iran the good news is that the other guys are getting together with Israel as never before and there is something I wouldn't have expected in my lifetime but we're working very hard to establish and that is an effective alliance between Israel and the moderate Sunni states to counter the aggression of Iran to roll it back as far as possible I think that actually has a great promise of peace it won't substitute for us achieving a formal peace with the Palestinian Arabs but it used to be said if you make peace with the Palestinians you'll make peace with the rest of the Arab world it may equally be the other way around I think you actually have to bootstrap both but the upshot of the this long answer to a short question is it's the the collapse of the sykes-picot it's the emergence of a battle between the Islamists and the modernists it's created essentially it's moving right now in the heart of the Middle East and in many parts of it into an open battle between a resurgent Iran and in the new alliance between Israel and the Sunni States that's what's happening yeah what will happen is we put Iran in the medievalist group one could argue that Iran actually is incredibly realist and they are building a circle of influence or at least a stream of influence potentially all the way over to the Mediterranean why do you put them in that medievalist basket when in fact they seem to be playing to me at least pure realpolitik doesn't make it more threatening but it's what why do you put them in that kind of extremist camp let's say alongside Isis ideologically driven regimes can also be play out politics one doesn't exclude the other I bet on Kissinger's description of iran which i think is apt you said iran is a cause it's not a country as opposed to say another regime well you got the map yeah that one that's a family business this is not a family business this is a cause and the cause is you have to really get into it because you don't get it if you're talking to uh sorry for these guys whatever don't want to name me I'm talking about if you actually get into the heart of the that gang that cult would say that runs Iran their Politburo the Council wise man okay they believe it's hard to believe this I mean they have actually a conception of world domination okay that should have gone out the window were the last religious wars I don't know somewhere in Belgium in the nineteenth century I don't know it's rekindled with full force and they talk openly contrary to what you say and we hear it and you can hear it too by the way you don't have to have special means but they talk about their quest their goal their cause of global domination and also the domination of Islam not limited to Shiites not limited to Shiites they wish to now import yachts and are doing so in countries in the Middle East with the Sunni majorities but they also say our purview witness Gaza is also for the Sunnis and for the millions and millions hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world they want to bring them into their Iranian fold as they say so I think they are cause I think there's something to me irrational and dangerous in such a cause because it doesn't if it obeyed merely the rules of realpolitik end of story we'd be in a different we would be in nan Huntington territory disconnect then to your position on Iran is a nuclear power or Sydney's nucleon in other words the the ability to live with the risk that Iran could become a nuclear power is so unacceptable precisely because of this reason that this is in essence a revolutionary human your eyes rather than one that one can kind of negotiate with in a real politic sense is that what drove it and you played a very public role in the u.s. debate over the jcpoa to a comprehensive program of action was that because of this connectivity would you sing Iran in this particular light or just you know don't want to run to him you klappas cuz they're opposed is it because of that expansion stuff the answer is the former it's because well the answer is because of their unique danger of having a militant Islamic regime acquire nuclear weapons it's very different from having Costa Rica achieved the whole it's a huge difference I think the greatest there is a great danger in the world from rogue regimes as we call them having nuclear weapons but by far the greatest danger to the peace of the world is when a militant Islamic regime meets nuclear weapons or conversely nuclear weapons meet a militant Islamic regime that these are the two greatest dangers for our world now there are others I mean there are big questions the rise of Asia and the rise of the natural competition is shifting down economic and therefore political and military powers but that's within I would say prescribe rules because of the nature of these regimes not because they are democratic but because they may be autocratic but in certain calculation of cost and benefit that may invade and often does evade those with this cause that knows no bounds certain beliefs that then the most important thing is to try and prevent that nuclear capacity from emerging don't you think the jcpoa is the best route at the moment to stop Iran from getting closer to nuclear weapon at least in a 12 year time frame would not then the logic have been right we need to absolutely stop that program from progressing the way it was jcpoa has least bought 1213 years to be able to experiment with other routes why were you so opposed to that agreement at that time to go out the way that you did to try and block it because I think that the the main problem is not everybody focuses on well will by a few years but Iran is also buys the few years and what get is the ability to essentially go on a highway when the agreements constraints are removed to have unlimited nuclear enrichment of uranium and this means the signatories to IAEA safeguards set of a they've claimed they do not want to become the power they would well you know so they're at least in a position to be able to not necessarily take that route twelve years time you have to assume they won't too much boy no empirical fact there were four regimes that had signed the NPT which supposedly says they won't develop a nuclear weapons one of them was Iraq's Saddam Hussein didn't go very well the other one was Syria under Assad didn't go very well the other was Iran itself which lied and was caught by all of us by the way caught breaking they're trying to these underground bunkers and so on that were meant only for nuclear weapons and the fourth was was there Libya Gaddafi well you know what happened to him so but he lied they're all lied so signing the NPT including Iran's signature and the NPT doesn't cover anything as these examples proved to work out yeah oh yeah what was the option well we broke a cardinal rule of - I never talk policy I'm actually a new rail policy wonk turned politician normally I would have here black board a white board whatever then I would show you how it is that you make nuclear bombs okay the most important component of making nuclear weapons there are three components it's very important to take a minute to understand this so you understand our concerns with the agreement and how we can fix it I didn't say necessarily nix it I said fix it or next say and why I think it's in the interest of Israel Britain of the United States of Russia Germany France I think even China to have a nuclear infective nuclear weapon you need three things you need a gun to fire okay that's a ballistic missile which is something wrong then you need you need a bullet canister it's like a bullet that's called the weapon and the third thing that you need and actually that's the hardest thing to make is the Gunpowder that's called the enriched uranium could be plutonium but typically here we're talking about in rich uranium okay to produce uranium enriched uranium is very very hard it requires these big facilities with thousands and thousands of centrifuges that are aligned and so on these are essentially industrial plants Iran has not been able because of the pressures that we applied then I had something to do with it by moving forward sanctions that then became crippling sanctions and also the threat of military action the combined these combined pressures prevented Iran from developing that industrial capacity to produce tens or hundreds of fissile cores fuel or gunpowder if you will for many many bullets and without that they will not have a nuclear program what the jcpoa does is basically says within X years of time not much not much is left and temples food you know it goes quickly you will have unlimited unlimited capacity to enrich uranium and then the breakout time the time it takes you to take that powder put it in this canister and a bullet while you're simultaneously developing ballistic missiles which they are contrary to UN Security Council resolution you have the whole program not for a single bomb but for a hundred bombs they could break away in weeks to multiple bombs many many multiples of bombs now you say okay well they're not doing it now I've always said that the greater danger in the jcpoa is not that iran will violate the agreement but they're here on we'll keep the agreement why should they they'll get to this highway of enrichment a mass enrichment by doing nothing so that's been my concern I said okay we cannot afford to have you can't okay why well we had an agreement 1994 that was supposed to stop North Korea from producing nuclear weapons it was universally celebrated it was clear that this would bring north community world a good chance of bringing in the community of nations they wouldn't develop nuclear weapons they've caught their neighbors like Korea and Japan South Korea and Japan would be safe didn't turn out that way that was a bad agreement okay this unfortunately is a bad reason how would you fix it who said fix it you can fix it in the following ways first you can definitely address one of the three components of the bomb system that I described by taking away the gun which means apply massive sanctions on the ballistic missiles it's not covered in the imminent you shouldn't you're not holding yourself back within the agreement I think there are two kind of components that you can deal with one inspection since it's always raised Iran says now if you read the deal I mean it says you can respect anywhere okay iran says anywhere does not include military sites Wow right what do you think there okay so you can you could do that okay tighten that's it then there is a sunset clause there are ways again of interpretation of putting red lines on there break up things like their breakout capacity and other things that could be done which do not require a change in the agreement it requires an agreement at least by some of the the p5 plus one so you could do that if you do you do all that I think you're you're good to make it very difficult for Iran to continue unfettered which they're doing right now towards a an arsenal of nuclear the counter-argument got one from discussions it's sort of argues itself yeah the counter-argument already well if you start putting pressure on Iran they'll go to a bomb right now actually yes this is the threat I don't think it'll happen but the threat is they'll go to a bomb one you know ever you remember I drew that line in the UN redline it was for a bomb one bomb 300 kilos roughly of uranium enriched above 20% okay it gets nonlinear after 20 so they haven't done that yeah so today if they were to do it that's as far as they could go now I have reason to believe every word but that's the risk you take that's a risk fine and there are ways to mitigate that risk but if you don't do it and you just leave this agreement okay and all those constraints are lifted not by a change of Iran's behavior but a change in the calendar then you guaranteed within about a decade could be less to have Iran walk you know into the enrichment that enables this very fast conversion to a nuclear arsenal with a as I say there's a kosher seal of international approval not a good idea so that certainty as opposed to what I think is a manageable risk well so it would require other countries to to back in on this as well not just United Kingdom you say the p5 let me just bring Russia up quickly and then I'll turn a little bit more closer to home but on Russia here's a country you've invested a fair amount of diplomatic effort into I think I've read the papers today they're just silent a 30 billion energy deal present Putin's visiting Tehran currently so what makes you think that the Russians for example pick one country would get in behind this kind of an approach such that a deal like this could be changed Russia is playing a very clever role it strikes me right now across the Middle East play each side as it often does not necessarily looking for a big solution been looking for tactical Vantage for Russia in particular what makes you think the country like Russia I think you know present podium reasonably well would circle in behind this kind of an idea the fact that Russia has economic interests with Iran doesn't mean that it doesn't have an interest to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons I don't think it makes sense for Iran to have this empire Iran wants to have now an empire I can't write on it right okay so so here's Iran Iran wants this language right to the sea from tar tooth from Tehran really to tattoos in the Mediterranean that's what they want a language they already here in Yemen and so they are expanding this trying to expand this Empire will will block them in Syria and we'll talk about that but is it in Russia's interest to have this resurgent Persian Shiite Empire that wants to mobilize Muslim populations around the world Russia has quite a few of those including millions in Moscow itself to have that regime with an arsenal of a hundred or two hundred nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is that in the interest of Russia I'm not sure so there could be conflicting interests and I think we should talk and I do talk to mr. Putin about that and I think there's also tension right now between Russia and her and Iran after the job of dismantling Isis in Syria and Iraq has completed I think there's a natural competition on economic the resources are known on military presence and the upshot of is is this you may or may not be able to secure for the position that I say that is not I don't particularly care about the agreement whether it stays or not it's if it's preventing preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them is what I look at if you can do it within the agreement by tightening the bolts fine if you have to do it without the agreement fine too yeah but I think we must do it because if not within a few short years we'll have not a North Korean situation but something infinitely more dangerous a cause a global cause of domination of irrational ideology armed with an arsenal of nuclear weapons by a country that has the GDP 30 times the GDP of North Korea not good for the Peace of the world okay point made and let me all sort of connections one control North Korea but let me we've got a limited time and I want to come out to the guests here in 5-10 minutes let me just turn around as you hear on the Balfour Declaration centenary let me just cut straight straight to the chase do you think that Israel has a responsibility as well for meeting the full declaration in its full entirety in other words including making sure that Palestinians have a future with in Palestine which the Balfour Declaration referred to talked about the creation of Israeli state or a Jewish state in Palestine so you're part of the context for Israel's ability to be able to you know get allies behind it is a sense that this internal conflict is also in a stage of resolution to what extent do you think Israel has a responsibility itself for helping Palestinians achieve progress within the territories and having a two-state solution not what's the responsibility of the Palestinians what do you think Israel also as a beneficiary as declaration sees part of that future as its responsibility of course it's it's our responsibility and our desire because we live there and having been in a couple of wars I can tell you wars are bad they're very tragic you lose friends you lose loved ones and peace is better than war non war but a warm piece is better than a cold one so is it achievable as a desireable yes how do you achieve it you'd need what we always say you need two to tango in the Middle East I think you need three or four to get it going but of course you need you can't you can't do it unilaterally you can have a non war unilaterally because we can exert the power of deterrence but to have peace for warmer peace beyond non belligerence requires neutral efforts now the Balfour Declaration and by the way I think I think there's promise because of what I told you about the reaction to Iran everything I say about Iran you will hear either whispered or spoken softly but in the same vehement in most of the capitals of the Middle East virtually all they always say you tell them well I did I just did this I did this in the Congress but they always tell me you tell me what did you tell them to but we tell you okay and you know when Arabs and Israelis are saying the same thing it's worth paying attention to it because it didn't happen that often in the last 100 years but it's happening now with greater force and I think there's a lot of Hope in that these are either Palestinians there's been there's been movement in the Arab world not only the capitals you might want to do this it's an interesting study it'll save us some money you might want to scour the internet and admittedly you're only looking at the Internet in the Arab world and look at the attitudes towards Israel and I think you'll find something interesting happening that as you move towards the Persian Gulf whether the call of the Arab goal you'll find that attitudes to Israel's are mellowing considerably they're still very hardened you know in the Palestinians in our immediate vicinity but they sort of mellow out because one thing is to have the regime's understand that Israel is their not their enemy but their indispensable ally in the battle against Iran and militant Islam let me understand that but it's another to have that begin to percolate to other societies well what about the Palestinians okay why don't we have peace I mean it's a good question Palestinians said well you because you issued the Balfour Declaration and you took our land away from us now we'll get into a long historical debate on who was there first and who kicked out whom okay that's an interesting question but I will say that our attachment to this land only goes back thirty eight hundred years to the time of a breath not four thousand thirty eight hundred years it's been continuous and important but the argument of course is that we came in in the 19th century and drove out the Palestinians from the thriving verdant Palestine okay that's the narrative and people actually believe it okay I don't say that the one Palestinians there I'm saying that there weren't many and it wasn't a national dose it's a fact Yasser Arafat says that the Zionist invasion began in 1881 but Mark Twain visited Palestine in 1869 wrote his most successful book in his lifetime innocents abroad and described Palestine you said empty sad sits in sackcloth and ashes we passed through the Galilee for a whole day we didn't see a single human being so in the same time is was said by a few years later before the purported invasion by Arthur Penryn Stanley you know Arthur Penguins down there today you don't soon they forget he's buried right next to Queen Elizabeth in Westminster Abbey it was that important he was the great English cartographer of the 19th century so great that he deserved this point of Honor you know you go there and says remember Churchill right well they remember Arthur they don't remember Arthur Penryn Stanley he describes he says I stand in Judea this is maybe two years before the one year before they purported invasion he says I stand in Judea Judea Manya and I look north and I look south and I almost echoing Mark Twain I don't see a single human being so where did where is that Verdun in fact what happened is this there were Arabs there the Zionists return and be preceded proceeded about the declaration by about thirty forty years began Jerusalem had a Jewish majority by 1850 but the Jews came back including my great-grandfather in the late 19th century the only Jew who came from North America to Palestine he was a little arc but they called him the americano I wonder what his accent was ok but Jews came and began to build farms they began to build hospitals they began to new orchards dustry alot of ABS were added to the population they came from Egypt they call them Suzanne Massie Egyptian color become Hobbit and so on and they became to be known as what are called now Palestinians I don't want them thrown out ok but there was a question what to do what to do with this country this is ancient land the old land of Israel that was going to facilitate the rebirth of modern a modern state and the same time their Arab inhabitants their bow first suggestion was interesting Balfour said ok you can have a home which looks like a prelude to a state but you have to take care of the civic and religious rights of the local inhabitants meaning the implication wasn't that it was all there for me just because we spent on the Istrian word on time this really gets now the cases where you start to Lance the boil and you're stopping me no no he'll be after Lance it very quickly boils my last with one prick Oh actually not well boils and then I had a boil when I when I was when I entered the army of this serious this is a worthier side I mean I five the time you should have I I joined the army in 1967 right after the six-day war my brother had been had already been released he was wounded and the Golan Heights a few hours before the end of the war he went to Harvard and he wrote me letters from Harvard telling me what I should do and the most important advice it gave me is how to Lance a boil contrary to what you said he said you're gonna have because we walked a lot he said what you doing an evening is you take a needle and a thread you put the needle you thread you puncture the boil and leave the thread and it'll take all night but in the morning the boil will be lanced I'm not gonna stare until next morning but if we can come back to this that's a metaphor okay but my key last point I want to make here those you talked about this this empty land you now have four and a half million Palestinians in the Palestinian territories including Gaza you have 1.8 1.9 million Arab citizens in Israel none of them either the Arab citizens living in Israel or those living in positive territories have the same rights as Israeli citizens you know you know whether it's whether it's those in Israel who numerous reports have pointed out will find certain elements in social rights economic rights more difficult to be able to access and certainly those on the other side don't so this is a very full land now yeah full land with almost equal parity in terms of population so the status quo strikes me as unsustainable potentially the most dangerous issue to the future of Israel more so than Iran ultimately you know country goes from inside rather yeah now that is very dangerous but you obviously raise an important point not your assessment of the status of civic rights for non-jews in Israel because that's absurd I mean the only place if I can speak openly the only place in the Middle East and it in many areas beyond the Middle East where haves enjoy full Civic rights is in Israel I mean we have a Supreme Court judge who's an arab arab Knesset members abs in government rules in my government minister and so they have the freedom of speech and they have other things since of course they've got see a thing of course there's no property recovery on the contrary I mean there are gaps doesn't mean that if you have the civic equality that you don't have gaps and you do take I mean the only place where you know we take affirmative action for because I believe in my government the government that took the greatest about invested the greatest amount in reducing those gaps in communities was a previous government and invested 1 billion shekels that was my government but it's been superseded by my present government because we just announced a multi-year plan for 50 billion shekels so I believe actually money doesn't always help well and it's a help but in the end sense of nationhood the emotional connection to to belonging to a nation is remarkably powerful as you know correct now what answer your question okay and I think it's a good one I think that the we I want to see the Arabs of Israel enter Israeli society enter it in the professions in high-tech they're already in politics and in government enter it in academia enter it and in this remarkable success story that the Israeli Tigers looking forward they should be part of it so I want to see that and naturally this larger battle between modernists and medievalists you know where you know where we are and where we want all our citizens to be no question about that and that require does require investment you know if it our mother wants to go to work they have to be roads inside and public transport with inside our villages we're investing in that if you know if you want those children I open the school year in an Arab school last year I went to an app store first time and just really Prime Minister did that and there was a beautiful little girl and she said I said what do you do it there are many doctors and women Arab doctors in Israel I said do I have to request you know I have one thing that I want you to do I want you to study Hebrew and I'm making the study of Arabic a requirement for Jewish children in Israel so you know images aside this is the reality this is where we put our efforts in our money now aside from the question of Israel's Arab citizens okay which I think I'm the best route towards seizing the future of any say there was no other Arab population within the Middle East that is seizing the future as hopefully and it successfully is our Arab cinema aside from that you asked the question well what about the Palestinian errors what about them and I say this I think that the problem is exactly the rejection the continuous rejection of balford okay the Balfour Declaration talked about a Jewish National Home they won't even accept that so they certainly don't accept a Jewish National State now if they did I think that the conflict would be finished because I think the real reason this conflict persists is the persistent refusal of the Palestinian leadership to recognize a Jewish state in any bound and any boundary think it's the settlements and so on it's an issue to be solved but I don't think it's I think it's actually a solvable but but but in the end they are not going to get a state for the simple reason as you yourself said and even yet circular being said there will be a Palestinian entity next to the Israeli state the definition of a state is to control borders to control airspace you know there will be certain settlements left behind the land will be fully contiguous there as you pointed out deeply personal cultural religious sites in Palestinian territories which an Israeli government will want to be able to have you know connection to indirection to their citizens get into so isn't the reality the Palestinians will never have a state as maybe they think of a state as others think of a state it'll be somehow a continuation or an extension of Israel I think it's time to think before I answer you specifically about that and I will by the way if I fudge I'll tell you on budget but I'm not gonna I'm gonna canactually goodness hereafter I'm gonna hit your question head on I think it's time that we reassess whether the model that we have of sovereignty and unfettered sovereignty is applicable everywhere around the world the globe in fact you don't really apply it but don't owe it to British people you don't really apply because you just had a referendum challenging that and you say you know we don't want outside controls on our economy I'm not gonna argue that by the way I don't want to get into there Ted okay but you know you can ask Alexis tsipras my friend really I'm saying that my friend my good friend in Greece whether Greece has complete economic sovereignty I won't answer that one but I'll raise the question so there are constraints on what we are traditionally concerned or considered sovereign powers right okay in the model of the complex world where we are okay but when we get to the question of the Middle East with failed States with territories that in which Western powers leave including Israeli Israeli power leaves and immediately it's taken over by militant Islam which is what happened to us in Gaza we gave Gaza to the Palestinians we gave the key to Abu Mazen the head of the Palestinian Authority and within seconds literally didn't take it took a little more but not much more militant Islam came in Iran came in Hamas rules it in Islamic Jihad and Iran's direct proxy was they're firing thousands of rockets into Israel we left southern Lebanon same thing happened because Baba came in they fired thousands of rockets in it we could do the same in the West Bank it'll happen again it's a choice between a green flag or a black flag will be Hamas or the ISIS or Isis's successor and Iran on our doorstep that is not peace and by the way it's not gonna be freedom for the Palestinian either because I don't think the Palestinians in Gaza are free they're basically held hostage by these killers who periodically execute them they don't chop their heads off they just shoot them in the back of the neck in the public square periodically they do that so I don't think that's peace and freedom and I don't think you'll have to rethink the notion of sovereignty so I mean I say that the what we have to rethink is one principle power the Palestinians ought to have all the powers to govern themselves but none of the powers to threaten us the most important that has to be reserved in the hands of Israel is the overriding security responsibility in the tiny area west of the Jordan from the Jordan River through the West Bank to the sea is all of about 50 kilometers which is more or less Greater London in diameter okay you don't have to space there I I prepared this for mr. Crump when it came to visit so I showed him a map and I showed him the distance from the edge of the West Bank to the sea and I told him you know this is the distance from Trump Tower to the George Washington Bridge it's just too small Israel can go from a position of great strength to extreme vulnerability if we do another Gaza the West Bank is 20 times the size of Gaza so I don't want to govern the Arabs in the West Bank and I want to cover the Arabs in Gaza either but I want to make sure that that territory is not used against Israel and therefore for us the critical thing is to have the overriding security responsibilities when we talk about demilitarizing the West Bank there'll be demilitarized by us we don't threaten the Palestinians with annihilation but unfortunately there are groups who were let me get people in right well I'm gonna take a few questions okay I'll take them together I'll keep a list and I'll do my best all right we'll start with the lady right at the back I'll take the gentleman here take gentlemen here I'll go to that side the room yeah and then we'll go just in front of you yeah please say who you are at least I would be help keep it short we've got little time gonna go to about ten past so I will give time yeah much was said at the start of the administration in the u.s. about potential more pro-israel stands there was talk of moving the embassy as you know where do you see the relationship now nine ten months into this new administration so this was the bomb with four years later Trump administration yes we was thinking for bombing we think you know the big fights right sorry it wasn't here yep oh okay take it to the front this is brilliant yeah Prime Minister you talked about Iran's ambition to dominate the area from Tehran to table tools you said we're not gonna allow them we're gonna block them can you tell us how we will poke them please okay well give us some some ramp it just please yup that first year yes you first you've got the microphone use the microphone yep you so first my name is michael burton i'm member of the institute and the time of the israeli accord of the Oslo accord Rada I was the director for Middle East affairs in the Foreign Office the Oslo accord was built a course on the principle of land for peace which is also the constant refrain of King Hussein Prime Minister whatever you thought about the Oslo accord at the time would you accept that in the long run LAN for peace is the only possible basis for a stable peace in the Middle East okay and just in front please let's take these four and then I'll get another group here Barnaby Phillips from houses era Prime Minister as you know there's a very active debate here in Britain over the recognition of Palestine the House of Commons voted overwhelmingly in favor of it three years ago the main opposition party is in favor of it a would British recognition of Palestine concern you in any ways is it something you worry about anyway because just take one more because in front of you here BBC News website when Hamas and Fatah find signed a unity pact in 2014 you froze peace talks and you bought your ministers from dealing with counterparts in the Palestinian Authority you haven't quite taken the same approach this time round I'd like to know why you've seemed to be a bit more ambiguous and are taking more of a wait-and-see approach right that's to those three sorry it's the other one you do that to bifocal which for if you try some horrible the relationship with the United States is a very powerful one I don't know if you know this but Israel has a flowering of the truth flourish really of international relations right now because of our dual prowess our prowess in intelligence which is saved countless lives in about 30 countries and prevented small attacks and some big attacks like Barcelona or Paris and so on that you don't hear about because we prevented them so countries all countries needed today all almost without exception and they all interests are interested so they approach us on this second reason that they approaches is because of the technology technology is the key component of alongside with free markets of free markets of building giving added value and seizing and giving competitive advantage to their economies so either for economic reasons they want our technology or for security reasons they want our Intel they're coming to Israel I've been in six continents if you divide North America to South America six continents in the last year I haven't gone yet to Antarctica but we're sending an advance mission there the reason there is a commonality of interest with many many of these countries I'm talking about the largest powers in the world China when we have new agreements special innovation partnership they have that with only one other countries Switzerland along those lines Japan with whom we've signed agreements that we didn't have for seven years we just signed these agreements protection of investments agreements our trade with India is going through the roof mr. Modi visited Israel recently I'm going in a few weeks my wife and I are going that is invitation for several days to India and the same thing is happening in Africa I've been to Africa twice I've been to I've been the first Israeli prime minister opinion magic the first Israeli Prime Minister in our history to visit a country south of the United States in the Western Hemisphere I went to Latin America I did the trek you know so there is an enormous change because of interest first interest now there's also values that some of many of these countries share they admire Israel but with the United States the United States is the quintessential example of a country with whom our relations is based before interest on commonality of values and I'm not sure people fully understand how deep and wide Israel's the affinity of the American people is to Israel so the number that number will tell you a bit doesn't mean that there isn't strong opposition campuses in certain quarters to Israel but here are the numbers every year the Gallup Organization does ask the same question what is your opinion of Israel what is your opinion of the Palestinians okay the opinion of the Palestinians a good opinion is a flat 18 percent it doesn't move it's the flat from 2007 till the present okay absolutely flat the EKG of a dead flat the support for Israel is goes up right now and went up from about 50 percent to 71 percent still as a way to go we're getting there okay but if you project that back to 1967 you'll find that the number was about 35% so just the curve that keeps going this one is flat and this one is rising rising rise there is an affinity of the American people the Jews Jews of America were very important very very very crucial part of the American public account for about 2% so the other 69% represents non-jews the support for Israel in America is astounding and growing because essentially Americans view Israel is an extension of their values you know in a world that attacks America and in the Middle East where Israel is seen as the the Islamists say where the little Satan America is the great set by the way they I don't want you to be offended but you're a middle-sized Satan but but what that means is that despite changes in administration's and there have been ups and downs you know I've had some arguments with mr. Obama but people didn't even notice that Obama and I signed an agreement memorandum of understanding that extended for another 10 years the 10 year agreement that we had signed with the President Bush to give Israel military support this was a bigger package almost 40 billion dollars and one that I deeply appreciate that's with he did a lot you know and felt he didn't get much in return Obama you know I know that I didn't I said because I think it's very important yeah it actually expresses this basic reality that I'm talking about because with there is a difference there is a difference and I want to hide that I won't sweep that under the rug either I had a very strong disagreement with mr. Obama on Iran very strong and and I said I think he's sorry wrong as the solution or an important part of the solution to the problem of the Middle East and I saw it as the main problem as do our Arab neighbors I think mr. Trump's view is now that Iran is not the solution but the problem the problem in the Middle East he said so many times and I obviously welcome that so in that sense strategically there's been a shift an important shift that I think we obviously appreciate it's important but I think the relationship with America is very strong that's very strong much stronger than meets the eye how do you block Iran from making his move across what has happened in turn how is that we did not intervene in Syria I said we did actually I said look there's a terrible tragedy there and even though we won't intervene I put a field hospital right next to the defense our border at the Golan Heights and we took in thousands of wounded civilians and children horrible things I mean I mean I went to I went to talk to them they they were they were amazed they said they always heard that you were Devils but you're angels you are the only ones these Israeli doctors by the way Arab doctors to Arab and Jewish doctors and Druze doctors taking care of them speaking in their own language taking care and you take these amputated children we couldn't you know if they were photographed they couldn't be sent back to their villages because they'd be executed on the spot but we took them from there to our hospitals and our cost and if they one photograph they go back and if not they'd stand that's one thing we did second thing I said was that we will not let Syrian territory be used to transfer advanced weapons and advanced weapons that Iran was started bring to Hezbollah in Lebanon Hezbollah openly calls for destruction as does Iran and we've enforced those red lines wherever we could we'd all always see but when we see we act and his bowler in Syria he's really small enough Hizballah's Iran if you take away the scaffolding of Iran the whole thing collapses in two seconds but therefore would you be proactive in really preventing a serious sustained presence of his power in Syria I don't think that's our problem although one Hezbollah approached the border when they try to extend the terror front that they have in Lebanon to Syria we acted against it and and stopped it so that's near a border but what we're talking about now is something else his Isis contracts Isis moves out Iran comes in and Iran wants to Lebanon eyes Syria it wants to colonize Syria economically which is less troubling but also militarily they want to put their army they want to move their army then geography matters they want to move their army from here to here and this is Israel and they want to move their air bases have fighter aircraft within seconds of Israel they want to put Shiite divisions spinning distance from Israel they want to have use have a naval base here can you imagine any Iranian submarines this is our maritime connection that and they say that they do so a for the destruction of Israel but then also for their the goal the cause and cause which means everyone else which will be affected so we're not going to let that happen okay we don't issue statements like that like just as what we say that we will not let Iran acquiring nuclear weapons or a nuclear well we don't say that lightly we mean what we say and we back it up with action different is listener all 9th apiece and there was question about recognition of Palestine by yeah well I think there was a question of the land for speech that land for peace is good if it works land for terror and Rockets is not good and that's what we got we went with the notion of evacuating land including not merely a civil evacuation which I always questioned I mean why do you have to tear up Jews from from the Palestinian point of view okay why I mean so do I have to take out the Arab citizens in Israel because it can't be peace if there are abs who live in Israel I mean it's crazy the whole notion that the international community bought so thoughtlessly that goes against the whole and a notion of peace you don't apply then virtually anywhere else in the world but you apply to two Jews who live happy to live in a place where we live for four four three 3,800 years but I'm not making that article they argument now I'm making an argument for a parody you just don't do it you never say it about Northern Cyprus you never say it about you know I'll give you twenty other examples I'm saving your time ok it's never said it said thoughtlessly well of course we have to take out the Jews why okay why most people agree that and there any arrangement with the peace agreement the large settlement locks would be there and they account for anywhere from 80% to 90% of the Jews Bob well you don't have to rule them out because they're probably part of Israel according to every agreement that I've ever eportfolio degree so you're really talking about a handful of Jews outside and at the very least you'd expect the Palestinians not me but the Palestinians who say okay you can stay in the Palestinian state but they don't they insist on ethnic cleansing well they might also have to be protected which is but that's the but the Palestinians should offer that you're quite right there is an issue there and I you know I don't want to get into the intricacies of this but I think there are ways of actually solving a lot of problems I don't think this is the question I think it's the this this attitude that says no Jews ethnic cleansing no state no homeland I mean this is it this is it this is the problem and we have to you cannot solve a problem unless you diagnose it correctly and the persistent refusal to accept the Jewish state in any boundaries and not the boundary and not the territory and not the settlements is what is holding up peace these are issues that can be negotiated and can be resolved but you cannot resolve you cannot arrive at a peace agreement when somebody says I don't recognize your existence and never will and we'll use the territory that you give me not for peace I will use the land you've given me not for peace but not to build a state but to destroy your state my argument is that the Arab the palestinian-israeli conflict has always been about a state not a Palestinian state with which the Palestinians refused to accept time and again 1937 in the peel Commission 1947 partition it's always been about the Jewish state and once that obstacle has overcome you are in a different world in a world of peace if we go to the next question hasn't isn't Israel changing as well we had yesterday morning on the BBC Today program he probably noted scipio totally whose deputy foreign minister deputizes to you as foreign minister she's a member the Likud Party what she said the land is ours all of it this is Judea and Samaria you know it's not a case of two states or even somebody else being governed you know we need your towers and it was very clear now this is a young 38 year old cabinet member from your party so how does that square she's kept a really good and find out I think that the crucial question I was asking talk about the intricacies of our politics just other politics is the mood that you know I'll tell you where that most Israelis are I gave a speech the other day in the Knesset and there would be no Morial and I said I think that contrary to what people think I think there's actually a very broad area of consensus and if I had to sort of put you know put my finger on it it's really almost harkens back to Robin's last speech for weeks before he was assassinated in the Knesset his last speech in the Knesset and he said he said the Palestinians you know should have the ability to govern themselves and so on but he said less than a state and I don't want to get quibbling to these definitions of what it is or not but what is the state or not but I I think there's almost universal consensus about the principle that I enunciated here namely that the one power that Israel definitely keeps in the security part and he said the Jordan Valley will be Israel's eastern security border he's talked about the United Jerusalem he talked about other things that I think are are the basis of a broad consensus precisely because people have seen what happens when we just walk away when we just walked away we got Gaza we didn't hear we got thousands of rockets from Gaza walked away from Lebanon about so this question of land for peace it would be great but land for rockets the unity of the Palestinians I was asked about on this new approach or if you wanna call between Fatah and Hamas I mean it seems at least with the Americans involved there seems to be some movement and I think this is what you're asking is it different this time you you haven't jumped on saying right because you've teamed up you know we stopped talking is is there a moment for peace emerging now I suppose this is the key question you've got Trump in power saying I can do the deal of the century you got Mahmoud Abbas has met 20 times I believe with Trump officials and saying also good things including recently of the UN now you've got a Hamas Fatah at least potentially some type of coming together there is this a moment absol good short answers a good at this stage we're getting late so hope so and you guys will be working obviously towards that as strongly as you can yeah you know I have to say waiting are you waiting for something on the Palestinian side or is this enough now for his role to step forward no I think what is being discussed right now is an American initiative and obviously we make our interests and our concerns known to to mr. Trump's targets who wants to he's coming at it sort of refreshing can do thin and it were sort of stuck at the trough for 20 years we could be having this discussion 20 years ago in Chatham House you probably did and we didn't quite break out of it and his people are coming at it with a you know people sort of discounted but they're trying to think out of the box I would say first have to know the Box to think out of the box but but I think but I think that they I think that they know the box and they did a quick very quick and intensive study owners and though everyone should come out and something will see when they do but the reason I draw hope from from from the moment is because of the larger the larger ship in arab-israeli relations with the countries of the region I kind of emphasize how dramatic even though it doesn't break the crust of public exposure it's still very significant and could offer hope definitely very interesting movements steps taking this place we're really at the end and I think I'm gonna let that question sit on on you know with British Parliament votes again you know if it's what the other state is you know I think there's agreement I hope for the the right as Prime Minister may so I look on the expressive yesterday and the brilliant speech I have to say and marking the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration which she spoke I think moving and convincingly about Israel's right to exist and why that should never be in question anyone in Britain's right to exist in being questioned by those are questions British policies thoughts about on the other side of it okay what is the other state is it Costa Rica or is it North Korea is it is it Belgium or is it maybe I'll choose another kind is it Belgium or is it comma stock or Iran it depends what the other country is does it acquit agreed at the end for mutual recognition they want a national Palestinian national state fine you want that how can you ask you to have it without recognizing a Jewish nation state a nation state for the Jewish people sorry and the Arabs who live obviously thing about the state you know Jewish state doesn't mean that the Civic Raj it means that any Jew could come to that's the first thing that means any Jew can come to this land because the Jewish people never have say let me but it doesn't mean that you dis possess the civic rights exactly it's bad for said Civic or religious rights guaranteed for all in Israel Jews and non-jews alike I mean the only place where you have true religious freedom complete religious freedom guaranteed the only place where Christian communities are thriving not being destroyed is in Israel and not only Christian communities Muslim communities behind communities whatever I mean everybody so let me ask the last question we got to close I've started a lot of hands up and I know if I pick one now it would be impossible so I apologize and I think you've covered a lot of issues in your remarks and we've managed to weave things in you may you may be the longest-serving Prime Minister what's the legacy that you want to be seen kind of in a shorthand this is what I left parent the protector of Israel the one that created the the means to ensure the country's future by giving it three powers three great powers you'd think the first power because you know we discovered something the protector of Israel and the creator of Israel's brows okay so what is the first prowess that you need to survive because in our area you know one thing the weak don't survive doesn't you know that's not a tough one to get okay what is the first power that you need class the first part of that you need is military I mean that's we talked about soft power hard part I like the soft part is better you need to be able to protect yourself otherwise you overrun right and so you need f-35s and you need f-16s and you need tanks and you need that and you need that that's obvious what we're doing that okay but there is a problem with that it costs money a lot of money to get the money you have to have a very strong economy to get a strong economy you have to liberate it which is what I've done by the way if I did anything I liberated our economy and untethered the genius and our people the genius and enterprise of our people so as well as now about to overtake Japan I hope I'm in trouble with my friend Shinzo Bobby in per capita in the capital and the two of them create military and intelligence power an economic and technological power give us the third power which is international alliances you don't alliances are not made typically with the weak but with a strong Israel is becoming strong of these three powers we need to involve them with one-fourth power and that's are called spiritual or cultural power the the belief in our history the belief in our future our Democratic traditions our Jewish traditions that have to be safeguarded and nurtured that's an ongoing process it is not stable it is not that you make Montes fear made the division we three branches of government he wrote it in its action stone Kant said there is no straight line in The Crooked Timber of humanity are you kidding what do you think these debates happen that's what democracies do they debate the fact that Israel has such a robust debate there's not a sign of weakening democracy it is the substance of democracy of any democracy and Israel's democracy - we are a power a rising power precisely because we safeguard our values and we'll continue to do so what I want to do is safeguard and ensure the future of Israel and safeguarding those values I would posit right the end is going to require and it wasn't in your legacy some solution with your Palestinian neighbors regarding the perhaps values of Israel yes because I don't think we always stuff because I don't think we want them I don't want to buy now mr. okay look we could go on I'm sorry handle is that person had a hand up all the time but I'm not gonna go to you because I would have had to go to a lot of other people hopefully we covered enough points do you please stand your seats before I say thank you very much promising a ton Yahoo you took a lot of points you use the map very actively lucky you didn't put a felt tip on it thank you very much [Music]

Channel: Chatham House

Views: 92,153

Rating: 4.3438368 out of 5

Keywords: settlements, youtube, palestine, middle east, israel, iran, radical islam, middle east peace process, donald trump

Id: r0TaZUf4lj8

Length: 75min 35sec (4535 seconds)

Published: Fri Nov 03 2017

Reddit Comments

[u/orabram]

I don't agree with Bibi on almost everything, but that man is easily the most articulate and well spoken politician in Israel. No wonder he got so many terms.

[u/n_ullman176]

1.25 hour**