The Prime Ministers: An Intimate Narrative of Israeli Leadership (67 page)

“So what are you proposing?” asked one.

“I am proposing that we apply the law of Israel to the Golan Heights.”

“Isn’t that tantamount to annexation?” asked another.

Either the prime minister did not catch the question, or he chose not to hear it. “The question I have to ask myself is whether we should wait indefinitely, in the hope that one day a Syrian ruler will display willingness to conduct peace negotiations. I, personally, have no illusions. Time and again I have called upon the Syrian president from the rostrum of the Knesset to come to Jerusalem or, alternatively, to invite me to Damascus, to negotiate peace. For almost fifteen years he has consistently refused the approaches of every Israeli government. But most significant is his most recent refusal which I heard last night. Unlike the previous ones, this time he actually specifies why.”

“In what sense?” asked the same minister, skeptically.

“The cabinet should know that we have all the information from an impeccably reliable source as to exactly what happened at the recent Fez conference.
[1]
There, the Syrian foreign minister declared,”
–
Begin picked up a paper stamped “Top Secret,” and adjusted his spectacles
–
“he declared, and I quote, ‘We Arabs must not put forth any peace proposal. We must be willing to wait a hundred years and more until Israel’s military prowess wanes, and then we shall act.’” He replaced the document on the small table beside his wheelchair, and picked up another. “Just yesterday, President Assad himself said much the same thing, publicly. I heard it with my own ears over the radio, and it appears here in today’s review of the Arab press.” His voice was firm as he quoted the Kuwaiti newspaper.

“So I ask you, after such words, should Israel wait in vain for the Syrians to talk peace, knowing that when they deign to do so, it will only be at a time when they feel they can dictate their terms either because they have grown so strong or we, God forbid, have grown so weak? Meanwhile, Syria is extending its domination over Lebanon, and the murderous PLO have taken over the south of the country. What do we have to wait for?”

One worrier, “How do you suppose the United Nations will react to your proposed Golan Law?”

“A fair question. Clearly, what I’m suggesting is a bold move, and I do not dismiss for one minute that the international repercussions will be harsh. For one, I anticipate a Security Council resolution roundly condemning us.”

“And the United States?” asked another. “How do you suppose Reagan will react?”

“In all likelihood, the U.S. will support such a
UN
resolution and will lodge its own direct protest. Our American friends will argue that the Golan Law is a unilateral step which they will not recognize. I would expect a letter in such a vein from Secretary of State Haig, or from President Reagan himself. We will answer them with what we genuinely believe
–
that justice is on our side, and that we deem our action fully valid under the circumstances we face.”

A number of faces in the chairs around him continued to display uneasiness, prompting Begin to say with some vehemence, “With all due respect to our great friend the United States of America, with whom we recently signed an agreement on strategic cooperation, Israel is a sovereign state and ours is an elected government. We are not talking here about some whim, some caprice; we are talking about our lives and our future as a nation. No one on earth has a moral right to dictate to us what to do after we have waited this long, fully fifteen years since the end of the Six-Day War, to negotiate peace with Syria, only to be rebuffed time and again by their rejectionism.” And then, with even greater conviction. “I am convinced that our people will back the government to the hilt on this matter. Therefore, I propose to submit the Golan Law to the Knesset for legislative approval this afternoon, subject to cabinet approval.”
88

The subsequent ministerial debate was not as straightforward as the prime minister would have wished, but by the end all were in agreement. That afternoon, they took their seats at the cabinet table in the well of the Knesset chamber, as the prime minister, immobile in his wheelchair, opened by beseeching the Speaker to allow him to remain seated where he was, and not mount the podium.

“Permit me, Mr. Speaker, for reasons beyond my control, to address the House today from my place at the government table,” he said, in grand parliamentary style. “And permit me, not withstanding custom, to deliver my remarks while seated.” He then launched into much the same rhetoric as he had used at the cabinet session, and before the day was done, the Golan Law was passed by a majority of sixty-three to twenty-one, creating an instant firestorm in Washington.

“You know, Al,” said President Reagan to his secretary of state, Alexander Haig, who for once was in agreement with Caspar Weinberger, “I’m madder about this Golan Law thing than I was about the Iraqi reactor business. I would think Israel’s unilateral action has complicated Middle East peacemaking tremendously.”

“Frankly, I feel quite double-crossed,” agreed an angry Haig. “I didn’t expect this. I favored the memorandum of understanding which you tasked Weinberger to negotiate, because I assumed a formal strategic relationship, however vague, would put paid to their penchant for taking us by surprise, like they did with the bombing of Osirak. I simply took it for granted the Israelis would, from now on, consult with us fully before taking such drastic unilateral action.”

“Does the memorandum oblige them to consult with us?” asked the president.

Haig shrugged, and his sharp eyes narrowed when he answered, “Well, nowhere does it say so specifically. The Israelis never actually promised to consult us, but we had every reason to understand that as strategic allies we could expect not to be taken by surprise again by an act as far-reaching as this, which clearly affects our interest as well as theirs.”

Photograph credit: Chanania Herman & Israel Government Press Office

Prime Minister Begin at the Knesset, 14 December 1981

“So what do you propose?” The president popped a few jelly beans into his mouth.

Haig took his time answering, and when he did, his voice was pensive and measured. “Well, Mr. President, I don’t think we should risk weakening Israel’s defensive capabilities by suspending aircraft deliveries like we did the last time, in the case of the Iraqi affair. But we have to convey a message to Mr. Begin that is sharp enough that he’ll sit up and take note, and not surprise us again.”

“Such as what?”

“I think the first thing we’ve got to do is to straighten out the ground rules between us, so that we’ll know in future how to deal with one another. No more surprises! I therefore recommend that we suspend the strategic cooperation agreement which Begin wanted so much, until we have conducted a joint review of our interpretations of the agreement and the implications of Israel’s action.”

The president mulled this over and said, “You’re right, Al. That’s the way to go. Let’s do it.”

“I’ll instruct our ambassador, Mr. President,” said the secretary of state.
89

The next day, Ambassador Sam Lewis phoned Yechiel Kadishai. “Yechiel, I need an appointment with the prime minister. It’s quite pressing.”

“What’s so urgent, Sam? Has somebody in Jerusalem given somebody in Washington a headache?”

The ever-irreverent Yechiel enjoyed ribbing the American ambassador, and the ambassador, knowing him well enough, took it in the best of spirits.

“Something like that,” he answered. “I have a message from my boss.”

“Well, I think the prime minister has a message for your boss, too,” said Yechiel, as if relishing what Mr. Begin had in mind for Mr. Lewis.

The prime minister received the ambassador the following morning in his residence. He was sitting in a chair, with one foot propped on a stool and, by him, a table covered with papers.

The men had come to like each other a great deal. Begin respected Lewis’s urbane and well-honed diplomatic skills, which made him and his charming wife, Sallie, regulars in the social calendars of Israel’s elite. In fact, during Lewis’s eight years in Israel, which spanned the Carter and Reagan administrations, he became so well connected, and was so well trusted, that frustrated politicians of whatever political hue would occasionally unburden their souls to him.

“Come on in, Sam,” called Begin, when Lewis appeared at the door, accompanied by a note-taker.

“How are you feeling, Mr. Prime Minister?” asked the ambassador solicitously, shaking him by the hand. He noted that the premier’s cheekbones and chin were more pronounced than ever, and there was pain in his eyes.

“Much better, thank you,” answered the prime minister, vainly trying to pump a bit of cheer into his voice. “The trouble is, I can’t bend my leg. But you know me by now, Sam
–
a Jew bends his knee to no one but to God.”

Whether this was a bit of banter or a declaration of defiance was hard to tell.

Lewis shook the hands of two of the other men in the room, Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir, each of whom grunted a gruff ‘Shalom,’ and gave him only glares. The prime minister invited him to take a seat, reached for the stack of papers by his side, and with a stony face and a steely voice, began a speech that would last for almost an hour. He never once paused to look at his notes. He gave a thunderous recitation of the perfidies perpetrated by Syria over the decades; its endless attacks on the residents of the Hula Valley from the Golan Heights, the almost-successful Syrian seizure of the Heights during the Yom Kippur War, the Israeli sacrifices in pushing them back, and, finally, “Mr. Ambassador, I therefore have a very personal and urgent message for President Reagan, which I want you to transmit immediately.”

“Of course,” said Lewis, having been through this sort of ritual before. Everybody knew their roles and recited their lines.

“Mr. Ambassador, during the last six months, the U.S. Government punished Israel thrice. On June seventh we destroyed the atomic reactor near Baghdad. We did not have any doubt whatsoever about when that reactor would go ‘hot.’ Therefore, our act was one of
salvation
in the highest sense of the term. Nevertheless, you announced you were punishing us by breaching a written and signed contract for the delivery of
F
-16 aircraft.”

“Not punishing you, Mr. Prime Minister, merely suspending
–
”

Begin galloped on, in a tone that told Lewis this was no fleeting squall. “Not long after, we bombed the headquarters of the
PLO
in Beirut
–
in self-defense, after a
PLO
massacre of our people, one of them an Auschwitz survivor. Regretfully, there were civilian casualties, and again you punished us. You suspended delivery of F-15 aircraft.”

“Excuse me, Mr. Prime Minister, it was not
–
”

“By what right do you lecture us on civilian casualties, Mr. Ambassador? We wrack our brains to avoid civilian casualties. We sometimes risk the lives of our soldiers to avoid civilian casualties. We’ve read the history of the Second World War, Mr. Ambassador. We know what happened to civilians when you carried out your military operations against the enemy. We’ve also read the history of the Vietnam War, and we know all about what you called the ‘body counts.’”

“Mr. Prime Minister, I must correct you
–
”

“A week ago, on the recommendation of the government, the Knesset adopted the Golan Law by a two-thirds overwhelming majority, and again you declare you are punishing us. What kind of language is this
–
punishing Israel? Are we a vassal state? Are we a banana republic? Are we fourteen-year-old boys that have to have our knuckles slapped if we misbehave?”

“This is not a punishment, Mr. Prime Minister; it’s merely a suspension until
–
”

“Let me tell you, Mr. Ambassador, what kind of people this government is composed of. It is composed of men who fought, who risked their lives, and who suffered. You cannot and will not frighten us with punishments. Threats will fall on deaf ears. We are always willing to listen to reasoning. But you have no right to punish Israel, and I protest the very use of the term.”

“But we’ve not used the term. The intention is to
–
”

“Excuse me, Mr. Ambassador, you announced that you are suspending the memorandum of understanding on strategic cooperation, and that its resumption is now contingent on progress in the autonomy talks concerning the Palestinian Arabs, and on the situation in Lebanon.”

“That’s not correct at all
–
”

“In other words you are making Israel a hostage to the memorandum of understanding. I regard your announcement as a renunciation of the agreement on the part of the American government of the memorandum of understanding. We shall not allow a sword of Damocles to hang over our heads. The people of Israel have lived for three thousand seven hundred years without a memorandum of understanding with America, and it will continue to live without it for another three thousand seven hundred years!”

“Please allow me to explain
–
”

“Moreover, in imposing upon us pecuniary sanctions, you have broken the word of the president. When Secretary of State Haig was here, he read to us the words of the president of the United States, that the United States would purchase from Israel military and other hardware to an amount of two hundred thousand dollars. Now you are saying this commitment will not be honored. That is breaking the word of the president. Is this proper, Mr. Ambassador? Is it done? What are you trying to do, hit us in our pockets?”