C-7433 Transcription Eban, Abba. Lecture at George...

C-7433 Transcription

Eban, Abba. Lecture at George Washington University.

[Washington D.C.]. 1996.

F1: Good afternoon, welcome to the Welling Lectureship. When a

pompous presenter says he needs no introduction, that hyperbole

is rarely true. By now, however, Abba Eban has become a friendly

face and an unmistakable voice at the George Washington

University. He joined us in 1993-94 as the first holder of the

JB and Morris C. Shapairo professorship in International

Affairs. During which his acumen and his wit held spellbound the

auditors of several lectures like this one and a sparkling wide

ranging dialogue with Walter Cronkite as well as classrooms full

of students, some budding diplomats of the Elliot School.

His yearlong residency was so successful that President

Trachtenberg invited him to become the first appointee to a

[1:00] James Clark Welling professorship, a new chair named for

a nineteenth century president of GW that signals our regard by

asking visitors to return at least once a year for four years.

Not least, last May 14th, Ambassador Eban became our alumnus,

awarded an honorary doctorate of humanities as recognition of

Rabbi Herbert A. Friedman Collection, C-7433. American Jewish Archives, Cincinnati, Ohio.

1

senntet r says he neededs nnon iintroduction, tthahat

rue. By now, however, Abbba Eban has become

unmiiistststakakakababablelele vvvoioioicecece aaattt theee GeGeGeorororgegege WWWasasashhingto

He joioioinen ddd uuus iiin 1999939393--94 as ttthhhe fffirii ststst holde

is C. Shaaapppaiririro oo prprprofessssssorshihihip ininin IIIntntn ernation

riiing whicicichhh hihihisss acacacumuu enenen aaanddd hhhisisis wwwititt hhheld sppel

sseeveral leeecttturrresss lllikikikeee thththiiis onnne annnd a spaaark

logggue with WaWaWaltll ererr CCCrororonknknkitititeee asss wwweeell as cllal ss

, sommme bububudding dididiplplplomomattats ofofof the Ellllioioiottt Scho

arlong rrresee ididideene cy wasasas so successfss ul tthat Pre

g invited hhimimim ttto bebebecome thehehe firirirsts appointee

s Clark Welling prororofessss orororshship, a new chair

our respect and affection. But that is all parochial and Abba

Eban is the least parochiable man imaginable.

All the world knows he has been the most stunning diplomats

of our half century, present to the creation of the State of

Israel and its ambassador to the United States and the United

Nations from 1948 to 1959. Everyone alive in those and

subsequent perilous times for Israel can summon the memory of

his calm reasoned cadences, with commitment and courage and

astonishing eloquence, standing alone [2:00] in the UN well to

defend the existence of the world’s newest and most imperiled

nation. As foreign minister from 1966-1974, he demonstrated his

meddle in policy and negotiations as well as advocacy. Abba Eban

is a unique Israeli as well, born in Cape Town, South Africa,

graduated from Cambridge with a triple-first, and veteran of

World War II, he is scholar as well as statesmen, expert among

other things in Arabic literature. His eight books span his many

worlds, he has served as president of the Whiteman Institute of

Science in Israel and member of the Institute for Advanced Study

at Princeton. He is gracious and cosmopolitan in his every

gesture, truly a citizen of the world. This Welling lecture was

planned before we know what conditions in the Middle East would

be like today, it makes it all the more poignant for us to be


2

m 1948 to 1959. Everyyono e alive in those and

perillouo s times fofor IsIsIsraaaelee ccana summon ththe me

asoned cadenceses,,, with commiitmment and courag

eloquence, standing alonnneee [2:00] in the UN

existttenenenccec ooofff thththeee wooorlrlrldd’d ss newewewest aaandnn mmmooso t im

foreign mmmiiinisisisttterrr frommm 1966-6-6-19747474, hehehe demonst

olllicy anddd negggoootiiaiatitt onnnss asss wwwellll asss advocaccy.

IssIsraeli asasas welelell,l,l, bbbororornnn iiin CCCapapape ToToTown, Souttth

romm Cambridgegege wwwith aaa trtrtriiiple-f-f-firirirst, and vvvete

I, heee iiisss scss holar as wwwelelellll as statesmsmsmenenen,,, expe

s in Arabababiccc llliteratttuuure. His eigigight bbbooo ks spa

has served asasas pppresisisident offf thththeee WWWhiteman Ins

Israel and memberr ooofff thththe e e IInInstitute for Adva

here today at a time when his wisdom [3:00] has never been more

needed. Ambassador Eban will speak to us this afternoon on ‘Old

divisions and the new Israel: change in Israeli society.’

[audience applause]

Abba Eban: I’m very grateful to you, Professor Salamon, for the

warmth and sincerity of your welcome. And I’ll tell you that I’m

deeply moved to find that the, your opinion about me, is almost

precisely identical with my own opinion about myself. [audience

laughter] Chairman’s introductions are a unique experience

[4:00] in political literature, the object is to reconcile

courtesy with truth, and if possible, with some slight

exaggeration on the side of courtesy – in this you have most

elegantly accomplished today. I certainly emerge in much better

heart and spirit than after many occasions on which I was

presented to audiences of the United States, notably the

occasion when in New York, the, uh, chairman was the president

of one of that country’s, your country’s, great oil companies.

He was a man of few words, which were, however more than

adequate to cover the entire range of his thoughts, and he

presented me to the audience in the following words: “Abba Eban

is well known throughout the entire civilized world [5:00] and

also here in New York.” [audience laughter]


3

sini cerity of your welelcoomem . And I’ll tell yo

d to findd thahat t the, yyyouuur rr opinioion ababout me,

denticacacalll wiwiwiththth mmmy yy owowwnnn opopopinioioion nn abababououout t t mymymysself.

hairmananan’s iiintnn rororoduduductttioioionns aareee aaa unininiqqqueee eeexperi

olitical liteeeratuuure, thtt e obobobjectcc isss to recon

th h h tttr ttuth,h,h, a ddnd iiifff possibibibllle,,, iiwiththth some llsligiight

n on the sisisideee ooof cooourrrttessys – iiinnn thththiisi you hhhav

ccooomplishededd tttodddayaa . I ccertrtrtaiaiainnnlyyy emememerge innn mu

piriiit than afteteterr mmmanynyny occccasasasioioions on whww iccchh I

o audieieiencncnceseses of the Unnniited States,,, nnnotototably t

en in Newww YYYororork,k,k, thehhe,, uh,, chchhaiaiairmrmrmananan was the p

hat country’ss,, yoooururur cccououounntn ryyy’sss, great oil co

n of few words, whiichchch wwere, however more th

It’s a moving experience to come back to George Washington

University, I certainly hope and pray that the weather will

permit you next time to have your commencement exercise in the

duly appointed season and it is that hope that accompanies me as

I try to involve you now in a discussion of Israel’s divided

society and yet its united destiny, which figures in the title

that I’ve been asked to address. I’d like to begin by plunging

straight into the affairs of which preoccupy mankind at the

present time and with your permission, I will ask myself some

questions. [6:00]

The first question: was it really rational for the Israeli

leaders in 1993 to, uh, proclaim and inaugurate a program for

peace? Should Israel renounce any effort to bring that to

fruition in the light of the desperate situations which have

intervened since then? Can terrorism realistically be expected

ever to cease? And is the current international initiative now

taking place leading to the conclave between thirty countries

for the purpose of outlawing and internationally rebuking

terrorism, is that a positive development? I should like to

explain that the reason why I have the habit of asking myself

questions, it is because it is the only certain method [7:00] of

obtaining intelligent answers. And let me therefore begin.


4

eenn asked to addresess. I’d’d like to begin bby

to the affairs of whihiichcch preoccupy mankind a

e anddd wwwititithhh yoyoyoururur pppererermimimissssssion,n,n, III wwwililillll asasaskk myse

[6:00]]]

rst questititionnn::: waaasss it rrreallllyy y rararatttionononal for th

199993 to, uuhu , ppproococlall immm anddd iiinaaaugggurrraaate a prrog

ld d Israell rrrene ououounnnce ananany yy effooortrtrt tooo bbbring thhhat

thhee e light ofofof ttthe dddesesespepeperate sssititituations wwhw ic

sinceee ttthehehen?nn Can ttterrorororirirism realisticicicalalalllly be

se? Andd iiis thththe currrreeent inii ternatattionaaalll initia

e leading ttooo thhhe cococonclave bbbetetetweweweene thirty co

pose of outlawingg aaand iiintntnteeernationally rebuk

Was it rational, reasonable, in 1993 on that

unforgettable day when I was on the White House lawn,

preparatory to deliver a letter to the assembled audience, was

it rational to believe and to state and to proclaim that, uh, a

reconciliation had taken place between the Israeli nation and

the neighboring people, the Palestinian people? I believe it was

not only rational, but it was in a sense, inevitable. And to

understand that conviction, it’s necessary to comprehend that

many currents of history had to converge in order [8:00] to make

the peace process feasible. Many of these events lay outside the

range of Israeli judgement and decision, together they created

what I believe was an overwhelming case for taking the State of

Israel on a new course, both of policy and of action.

Undoubtedly, the major element which made the peace process

feasible and indeed inevitable, was the downfall of the Soviet

system.

All of a sudden, almost overnight, the vast weight and bulk

of the Soviet Union and of Eastern Europe was transferred from

the negative scale to the positive scale of the international

balance. No longer the Soviet Union the spoiler, [9:00] as the

saboteur of peace, no longer the Soviet Union organizing and

financing the campaign, the campaign of Arab hostility against


5

tioonan l, but it wass ininn a ssense, inevitablele.

that conviction, itt’s’ss necessary to comprehe

ts offf hhhisisistototoryryry hhhadadad tttooo cococonvererergegege iiinnn ororordedederr [8:0

rocessss feasasasiiiblelele. Maaanynyny offf thheseseseee evevevenee tststs lay o

raeli judddgegg memementnn aaand dddeeecisioioion, tttogggetee her they

evvve was aaannn oooverererwhwhwhelee mimimingngng cccasasaseee fofoorrr tatataking tthe

nnnew courrrseee, booothhh oofff popopolililicccy anndn off f actionnn.

, ttthe majorrr eeelell memementntnt wwwhihihichchch mmmadddeee ttthe peaceee pr

d indnddeed d d inevitttababablelele, wawawass thththe downfaaallllll ooof th

a sudden, aaalmll osoo t ovoo ernighhht,t,t, ttthehehe vast weigh

et Union and of EEEasasastet rnrnrn EEEuuurope was transfer

Israel. No longer the Soviet Union closing Israeli access to

international agencies. No longer the Soviet Union as the

generating power behind the far-flung campaign of defamation

which attended Israel in its onward journey. It’s impossible to

exaggerate the effect of the Soviet collapse on Israel’s destiny

from that time onward.

Today, the Soviet Union is not playing that saboteur role,

the Soviet Union is today, theoretically at least, [clears

throat] the partner of the United States [10:00] in their

sponsorship [clears throat] of the peace process. I must point

out that the presence of the Soviet foreign minister on the

celebratory occasion had a certain parody effect, because in

fact, the Soviet Union has removed itself and removed itself

with our blessing and without any nostalgic longings from the

center of the Middle Eastern discourse. But there were other

elements which converged at that time to make it rational for

people to believe that, um, that the Middle East was on the

threshold of a new epoch. Not only was the Soviet Union rapidly

changing its policies and its posture towards Israel, but events

were moving [11:00] also in the Arab world in a similar sense.

Pragmatism had suddenly become one of the major elements in

the approach of the Arab world to Israel. It was not in any


6

the SSoviet Unioonn isss nototot pplalayiy ng thatt ssabot

Union is today,y,y theoreticalllylyy at least, [cl

partner of the United Stttaates [10:00] in th

[cleeeararrsss thththrroroatatat]]] offf ttthheh pppeacecece prororocecc ssssss. I mu

e presenccceee ofofof thehehe Sovvviiiet fofoforeeeigigign mimiminister o

oooccasionnn haddd a ceree taaaiin pppararrodddyy effffffect, beeca

oviviiet Uniiiononon hhhasasas removovovededed itssselelelfff anananddd removeeed

esssinii g and wiwiwithththout ananany yy nostalalalgigigic longingggs f

he Miiiddddddlelele Eastern dddisisiscococourse. But thththererereee were

ich convevevergggededed at thhhaaat timii e to mmmake iiit ratio

elieve thatt,, ummm, thththat the MMMidididdldldlee East was o

f a new epoch. NoNottt onlylyly wwwaaas the Soviet Unio

sense a matter of virtue or conscience, I think we can willingly

liberate our neighbors from any such accusation, it was a fact

that, um, men and nations often behave wisely once they have

exhausted all the other alternatives. And the Arab world had

exhausted all the other alternatives. It had tried everything.

It had tried war, it had tried boycotts, it had tried

ceasefires, it had tried armistices. It had tried the

organizations [12:00] of international condemnations; it had

tried five power talks, four power talks, three power talks. It

had tried to involve the United States and the Soviet Union and

the whole of the European community in a condemnatory and

defamatory attitude towards the State of Israel. It had also

tried a national rebellion, the intifada, which had certainly

straightened the backs on many young Palestinians, but which had

dissolved into a total vacuum with no lasting or permanent

effects. And having tried everything, it then went to the

alternative of examining its own situation, and reaching a

different appraisal from that which had governed [inaudible]

[13:00] of its hostility until that time. And these currents of

opinion, in favor of a realistic approach, not to ask to their

own condition began to predominate; it had its effects in Syria.

We must remember that Syria has never made war against Israel


7

itt had tried armisistitiicecc s.s. It had tried ththe

ns [12:00] of internaaatittional condemnations;

powerrr tttalalalksksks,,, fofofoururur pppowowowererer talalalksksks,,, thththrerereeee pppower

o invvolololvev ttthhhe UUUniteeed d d SStataates aaannnd ttthehh SSSovoo iet

f the Eurrropoo eaeaan nn cococommunnnitii y ininin aa ccconnndedd mnatory

attttitudeee tototowwwardrdrdsss thtt eee StStStattteee ofofof IIIsrrraeeel. It ha

iooonal rebbbelllliiionnn, thththeee ininintititifffaddda,,, whwhwhiiich had ce

d ttthe backsss ooon nn mamamanynyny yyyouououngngng PPPalllesesestttinians, but

nto aaa totototal vacuuuuuum m wiwiwiththth noo lllasting ororor ppperma

d havininng g g trtrtrieii d everytytythihihing, it theeen wewewent to

of examinininingngng iiitstt own sititituaaatititiononon,,, and reachi

ppraisal from ttthahahattt whwhwhicicich haaaddd governed [inau

its hostility until that time And these cu

except on conditions which no longer exist. The first condition

was that Egypt should be making war against Israel at the same

time. Say what you like about Hafez al-Assad, he is a realist.

He understands the valor of which discretion is the better part,

he had tried war against Israel without any feasible result. He

knew that in, uh, his diminished status as a virtually third-

world country, [14:00] unable to finance the electric light in

Damascus, certainly unable to approach strategic equality with

Israel, he had few courses except to adjust himself to a totally

new reality.

In Jordan, we- the impulses for peace were even deeper. I

cannot forget that shortly after the Six Day War, the Israeli

government of that time appointed me to begin a negotiation or

at least a dialogue with the Jordanian leaders. We met in what

was fondly but rather unrealistically believed to be conditions

of secrecy. The, uh, procedure was eccentric. The king in London

[15:00] as he very often was, would tell his Scotland Yard

accompanier that he didn’t feel well, he must see a doctor at

once. It appears to be a law of history that every Arab king has

a Jewish doctor, and uh, to that address he would repair. I

would have been there for one hour, we would converse for two

hours –


8

ry, [14:00] unablee totoo fininance the electriric

ertainly unable to apppppproach strategic equal

had fffewewew cccououoursrsrseseses eeexcxcxcepepepttt to aaadjdjdjusususttt hihihimsmsmseelf to

.

dan, we- tttheee iiimpppuuulsesss for ppep acacaceee wewewere even d

ettt that ssshhoh rtttllly aftff errr theee SSSixxx DDDayyy War, thhe

off that ttimimimee apapappopopointeteted dd me tttoo bbbegigigin a negoooti

diaaloll gue withthth ttthe JJJororordadada inian llleaeaeaders. We met

but rrratatatheheherrr unrealllistititicacacalllllly believededed tttooo be c

The, uh,h,h, ppprororocedureee was eccentrrric. TThe king

he very ofttenenen wwwas,,, would tetetellllll hhhiiis Scotland

that he didn’t fffeeeeeelll wewewellllll, he must see a do

[break in recording from 15:25 to 15:32, restarts at beginning]

F1: Good afternoon, welcome to the Welling Lectureship. When a

pompous presenter says he needs no introduction, that hyperbole

is rarely true. By now, however, Abba Eban has become a friendly

face and an unmistakable voice at the George Washington

University. He joined us in 1993-94 as the first holder of the

JB and Morris C. Shapairo [16:00] professorship in International

Affairs. During which his acumen and his wit held spellbound the

auditors of several lectures like this one and a sparkling wide

ranging dialogue with Walter Cronkite as well as classrooms full

of students, some budding diplomats of the Elliot School.

His yearlong residency was so successful that President

Trachtenberg invited him to become the first appointee to a

James Clark Welling professorship, a new chair named for a

nineteenth century president of GW that signals our regard by

asking visitors to return at least once a year for four years.

Not least, last May 14th, Ambassador Eban became our alumnus,

awarded an honorary doctorate of humanities as recognition of

our respect and affection. But that is all parochial and Abba

Eban is the least parochiable [17:00] man imaginable.


9

He joined us in 19933-9- 4 as the first holde

is C.C Shapairo [1[16:6 000000] ppprofofese sorshipp inin Int

ring which hiss acumen and hhiss wit held spel

several lectures like thhhiiis one and a spark

logueee wwwiiithhh WWaWaltltltererer CCCrororonnkn ititte asasas welelellll asasas class

, some buuuddddinininggg dididiplommmaaats ofofof ttthehehe EEElllllliot Scho

arrrlong reesesidi enenencycc waaas sso suuuccccesesessffululul that PPPre

g iiinvited hhhimimim tttooo bebebecooomme ttthehehe firrrststst appoinntntee

Welllling profesesessosoorrrshiiipp, aaa nnnewewew chairrr nammmed f

centuryryry ppprereresident of GGW that signnnalalalsss our re

tors to rrreteteturururn n n at llleast oncncnceee aaa yeyeyeaarar for fou

last May 14thhh, Ambababassssssadadadororor Ebababannn became our al

honorary doctorate ofofof hhhumanities as recogni

All the world knows he has been the most stunning diplomats

of our half century, present to the creation of the State of

Israel and its ambassador to the United States and the United

Nations from 1948 to 1959. Everyone alive in those and

subsequent perilous times for Israel can summon the memory of

his calm reasoned cadences, with commitment and courage and

astonishing eloquence, standing alone in the UN well to defend

the existence of the world’s newest and most imperiled nation.

As foreign minister from 1966-1974, he demonstrated his meddle

in policy and negotiations as well as advocacy. Abba Eban is a

unique Israeli as well, born in Cape Town, South Africa,

graduated from Cambridge with a triple-first, and veteran of

World War II, he is scholar as well as statesmen, expert among

other things [18:00] in Arabic literature. His eight books span

his many worlds, he has served as president of the Whiteman

Institute of Science in Israel and member of the Institute for

Advanced Study at Princeton. He is gracious and cosmopolitan in

his every gesture, truly a citizen of the world. This Welling

lecture was planned before we know what conditions in the Middle

East would be like today, it makes it all the more poignant for

us to be here today at a time when his wisdom has never been


10

elloqo uence, standining alaa onone in the UN wellll t

ce of the world’s newwweeestt t and most imperiled

minisssteteter r r frfrfromomom 1119696966-6-6-191919747474, hehehe dddemememonononstststrararatted hi

nd neegogogotit atatatiiionsnsns as wewewelll aas adadadvvvocacacacycc . AbAA ba E

eli as weeellll , bobb rnrnrn in CCCape TTTowwwn,n,n, SSSouoo th Afric

rooom Cambrbrbridididggge wwwititith hh aaa trtrtrippplelele-fffirirrsttt, and veete

I, he is sccchooolaaar asasas wwwelelellll aaas sttat tetetesssmen, exxxpe

s [[[18:00] iiinnn ArAA abababicicic lllitititerereratataturrreee. His eighhtht b

rlds,,, heee has servrvr ededed aaasss prprpresesesiiident offf ttthehehe Whi

f Sciennncecece iiinnn Israel aaandndnd member offf ttthehehe Insti

udy at Prininincececetototonn.n HHe iiis graaaciciciououousss and cosmop

esture, truly aaa cccitititizizizenenen of thththe world. This

planned before we know what conditions in

more needed. Ambassador Eban will speak to us this afternoon on

‘Old divisions and the new Israel: change in Israeli society.’

[audience applause]

Abba Eban: [19:00] I’m very grateful to you, Professor Salamon,

for the warmth and sincerity of your welcome. And I’ll tell you

that I’m deeply moved to find that the, your opinion about me,

is almost precisely identical with my own opinion about myself.

[audience laughter] Chairman’s introductions are a unique

experience in political literature, the object is to reconcile

courtesy with truth, and if possible, with some slight

exaggeration on the side of courtesy – in this you have most

elegantly accomplished today. I certainly emerge in much better

heart and spirit than after many occasions on which I was

presented to audiences of the United States, notably the

occasion when in New York, [20:00] the, uh, chairman was the

president of one of that country’s, your country’s, great oil

companies. He was a man of few words, which were, however more

than adequate to cover th entire range of his thoughts, and he

presented me to the audience in the following words: “Abba Eban


11

mthh and sincerityy oof yoyoyourr welcome. And I’I’ll

eply moved to find thhhaaat the, your opinion a

recissselelely yy idididenenentititicacacalll wiwiwiththh mmy yy owowownnn opopopinininioioionn abou

aughtttererer]]] ChChChaaia rmrmrman’sss iiinntrorroductctctionsnsns arerere a uni

in politiiiccac lll lill teteteratuuurrre, thththe obobobjeeectctct is to r

thhh truth,h,h, aaannnd iiifff popp ssssssibibibleee,,, wiwiwithhh sssomomme sligght

n on the sisisideee ooof cococourtett sysysy – innn thththiiis you hhhav

ccooompmm lisheddd ttooodayayay. II certrtrtaiaiainllly eemerge innn mu

pirittt thahahan afterrr mamamanyyy occccccasasasions on n whwhwhicicich I

o audieeencncncesss of the UnUnUnititited States, noototably t

en in New YYYoroo k,kk [20:00] thehehe,,, uhuhuh,,, chairman w

f one of that ccououountntntryryry’s’s’s, yoyoyouru country’s, gr

H f f d hi h h

is well known throughout the entire civilized world and also

here in New York.” [audience laughter]

It’s a moving experience to come back to George Washington

University, I certainly hope and pray that the weather will

permit you next time to have your commencement exercise in the

duly appointed season and it is that hope that accompanies me as

I try to involve you now in a discussion of Israel’s divided

society [21:00] and yet its united destiny, which figures in the

title that I’ve been asked to address. I’d like to begin by

plunging straight into the affairs of which preoccupy mankind at

the present time and with your permission, I will ask myself

some questions.

The first question: was it really rational for the Israeli

leaders in 1993 to, uh, proclaim and inaugurate a program for

peace? Should Israel renounce any effort to bring that to

fruition in the light of the desperate situations which have

intervened since then? Can terrorism realistically be expected

ever to cease? And is the current international initiative now

taking place [22:00] leading to the conclave between thirty

countries for the purpose of outlawing and internationally

rebuking terrorism, is that a positive development? I should

like to explain that the reason I have the habit of asking


12

ted season and it is tht at hope that accompa

volvee yyou now inn a dididiscccuuussisiono of Israaelel’s d

:00] and yeyy t itits united desstiinyyy,,, which figu

I’ve been asked to addresss. I’d like to beg

raighhhttt iiintototo thehehe aaaffffaiaiairrsr ooof whwhwhich hh prpp eoeoeocccc upy

time anddd wititithhh yoyoyour pppeeermissssssiooonnn, III will ask

onnns.

rsttt questiononon: wawawas itii rreaalllllly y y ratititioonal forrr th

199333 to, uh, prprprocococlall immm anddd iiinananaugurattteee a prog

ld Israraraelelel rrrenounce annnyy effort to brbrbrinining that

the lighghhttt ofofof ttthe dddespep ratetee sssititituauauattitions whic

since then? CCCananan ttterererrorororiririsssm rrreaaallilistically be

se? And is the currenennttt ini ternational initia

myself questions, it is because it is the only certain method of

obtaining intelligent answers. And let me therefore begin.

Was it rational, reasonable, in 1993 on that

unforgettable day when I was on the White House lawn,

preparatory to deliver a letter to the assembled audience, was

it rational to believe and to state and to proclaim that, uh, a

reconciliation [23:00] had taken place between the Israeli

nation and the neighboring people, the Palestinian people? I

believe it was not only rational, but it was in a sense,

inevitable. And to understand that conviction, it’s necessary to

comprehend that many currents of history had to converge in

order to make the peace process feasible. Many of these events

lay outside the range of Israeli judgement and decision,

together they created what I believe was an overwhelming case

for taking the State of Israel on a new course, both of policy

and of action. Undoubtedly, the major element which made the

peace process feasible and indeed inevitable, [24:00] was the

downfall of the Soviet system.

All of a sudden, almost overnight, the vast weight and bulk

of the Soviet Union and of Eastern Europe was transferred from

the negative scale to the positive scale of the international

balance. No longer the Soviet Union is the spoiler, as the


13

to believe and to sttata e and to proclaim th

ion [[232 :00] had ttakakkenee ppplall cece between tthehe Isr

the neighgg boringngg pppeoplpp e, thee PPalestinian peo

was not only rational, buuuttt it was in a sens

And tototo undndndeererstststananand thththaata ccconvivivictioioion,nn iiittt’s ne

that manyyy curururrrrentntnts offf histototoryyy hhhaddd to conver

keee the peeeaaace ppproococesee s ffeasssibibibleee. Maaannyn of thhes

thhthe rangeee ofofof IIssrs aelilili jjjudgegegememement aaand decisssio

ey ccrc eated whwhwhatatat I bbbelelelieieieve wasasas aaan overwheele mi

the SSStatatatetete of Israelll ooonnn a new coursesese,,, bbboth o

on. Unddouououbtttedededly, thhheee majojj r elemmment wwhich ma

ss feasiblee aaanddd indndndeed inevevevitititabababllle, [24:00]

the Soviet systeem.m.m.

saboteur of peace, no longer the Soviet Union organizing and

financing the campaign, the campaign of Arab hostility against

Israel. No longer the Soviet Union closing Israeli access to

international agencies. No longer the Soviet Union as the

generating power behind the far-flung campaign of [25:00]

defamation which attended Israel in its onward journey. It’s

impossible to exaggerate the effect of the Soviet collapse on

Israel’s destiny from that time onward.

Today, the Soviet Union is not playing that saboteur role,

the Soviet Union is today, theoretically at least, [clears

throat] the partner of the United States in their sponsorship

[clears throat] of the peace process. I must point out that the

presence of the Soviet foreign minister on the celebratory

occasion had a certain parody effect, because in fact, the

Soviet Union has removed itself and removed itself with our

blessing and without any nostalgic longings from the center of

the Middle Eastern discourse. But there were other elements

[26:00] which converged at that time to make it rational for

people to believe that, um, that the Middle East was on the

threshold of a new epoch. Not only was the Soviet Union rapidly

changing its policies and its posture towards Israel, but events

were moving also in the Arab world in a similar sense.


14

to exe aggerate the eeffffecee t t of the Soviet cocoll

stiny from that time ooonward.

the Soviet Union is not ppplaying that sabot

Unionnn iiisss tototoddaday,y,y, tttheeeorororeete iciccallylyly attt lell asasasttt, [cl

partner ooof ttthhhe UUUniteeeddd Statatates iiin thththeir spon

oaaat] of ttthheh pppeeeaccece pproooccessss. I muuusttt point oout

thhthe Soviiietetet ffforororeiee gn mmminininiiisteeerr on ttthhhe celebbbra

d aa certain ppparararody efefeffefefe tct, bebebecacacause in faaact,

n hasss rrremememovoo ed itst elllfff anananddd removed itititseseselllf wit

d withoututut aaanynyny nostaaalllgic longingngngs frrromo the c

Eastern disscococourrrse. But thererereee wewewerer other ele

ch converged at ttthahahatt tititimememe tto make it ration

Pragmatism had suddenly become one of the major elements in

the approach of the Arab world to Israel. It was not in any

sense a matter of virtue or conscience, I think we can willingly

liberate our neighbors from any such accusation, it was a fact

that, um, men and nations [27:00] often behave wisely once they

have exhausted all the other alternatives. And the Arab world

had exhausted all the other alternatives. It had tried

everything. It had tried war, it had tried boycotts, it had

tried ceasefires, it had tried armistices. It had tried the

organizations of international condemnations; it had tried five

power talks, four power talks, three power talks. It had tried

to involve the United States and the Soviet Union and the whole

of the European community in a condemnatory and defamatory

attitude towards the State of Israel. It had also tried a

national rebellion, the intifada, which had certainly

straightened the backs on many young Palestinians, [28:00] but

which had dissolved into a total vacuum with no lasting or

permanent effects.

And having tried everything, it then went to the

alternative of examining its own situation, and reaching a

different appraisal from that which had governed [inaudible] of

its hostility until that time. And these currents of opinion, in


15

ed ala l the other alalteteernrr atatives. It had triried

It had tried war, ititt hhad tried boycotts, i

firesss,,, ititit hhhadadad tttriririededed aaarmrmrmistititicececes.s.s. IIItt t hahahadd trie

ns offf iiintererernnnatititionalll cccoondeddemnatatatiiionsnsns;;; ititit had t

, four poooweww rr tatt lklklks, ttthrhh ee pppowwwererer tttalaa ks. It h

thhhe Unitetetedd d StStStatatateseses andndnd tttheee SSSovovovieieettt UnUnUnion annd

peean commmmunnnittty innn aa cccononondededemmmnaaatoooryyy aaand defaaama

warrrds the SSStatatatett ooof f f IsIsIsrararaelelel... Ittt hhhaaad also ttrtrie

belliliion,,, the intititifafafadadada, hwhwhicicichhh had ceeertrtrtaiaiainly

d the bbbacacacksksks on many yyyouououng Palestiiiniiiananans, [28

issolved ininintototo aaa tott llal vacuuuum m m wiwiwiththth no lastin

ffects.

favor of a realistic approach, not to ask to their own condition

began to predominate; it had its effects in Syria. We must

remember that Syria has never made war against Israel except on

conditions which no longer exist. The first condition was that

Egypt should be making war against Israel [29:00] at the same

time. Say what you like about Hafez al-Assad, he is a realist.

He understands the valor of which discretion is the better part,

he had tried war against Israel without any feasible result. He

knew that in, uh, his diminished status as a virtually third-

world country, unable to finance the electric light in Damascus,

certainly unable to approach strategic equality with Israel, he

had few courses except to adjust himself to a totally new

reality.

In Jordan, we- the impulses for peace were even deeper. I

cannot forget that shortly after the Six Day War, [30:00] the

Israeli government of that time appointed me to begin a

negotiation or at least a dialogue with the Jordanian leaders.

We met in what was fondly but rather unrealistically believed to

be conditions of secrecy. The, uh, procedure was eccentric. The

king in London as he very often was, would tell his Scotland

Yard accompanier that he didn’t feel well, he must see a doctor

at once. It appears to be a law of history that every Arab king


16

ndss the valor of whwhicicch hh didiscretion is thee be

d war against Israell wiwwittht out any feasible r

n, uhhh,,, hihihisss dididimimiminininishshshededed ssstatututusss asasas aaa vvviririrttually

ry, uuunananablbb eee ttot fffinannncecece thehhe elelelectririric cc lililighgg t in

nable to apaa prprproaoo chchch strrraaategicicic eequququalllitii y with I

rssses excececeptptpt tttoo o adadadjujj ststst hhhimmmseseselflflf tttooo a totallly

dan,n,, we- theee iiimpmpmpulseeesss fofofor pepeeacacaceee were eveveen d

et thhhatatat ssshohh rtly aftttererer ttthhhe SSSix Day WWWararar,,, [30:

ernmentt oof thththat timmmeee appopp inted dd me tttoo begin

or at leasttt a dddialalalogue wititith h h thththee Jordanian

hat was fondly buuttt rathththererer unrealistically b

has a Jewish doctor, and uh, to that address he would repair. I

would have been there for one hour, we would converse for two

hours after which he would depart, I would depart an hour later,

and [31:00] we would deceive ourselves into believing that

neither our British hosts nor anybody else knew about our

encounter. It was, in fact, widely known throughout the Arab

world that these encounters were taking place, but in the Middle

East and perhaps in other parts of the international system,

whatever is not published is deemed not to exist. I remember,

for example, the um, the presser of the Shah of Iran, who at a

time when Israel’s mission in Tehran was the largest of all

Israeli missions, apart from that in the United States, was

exalted by the ambassador of the Saudi Arabian government, who

said to him in a tone of virtuous rebuke, “you have this Jewish,

this Israeli air force, coming into [32:00] airline, coming into

Tehran.” The Shah said, “nothing of the sort happens,” whereupon

the Saudi ambassador says, “yes, but I’ve been to the airport

and it said, ‘El Al international airlines,’ [clears throat]

arrivals, departures, [inaudible] delays, how could you possibly

deny this?” To which the Shah responded, “your excellency did

not see it.” Now this dichotomy between what is reported and

what is said is a very familiar part of the diplomatic


17

theeses encounters wewereee takaking place, but iin

rhaps in other partts ofoof the international s

not pupupublblblisisishehehed d d isisis dddeeeeeemememed nononottt tototo eeexixixiststst. I re

, thee uuum,mm ttthhhe pppressssererer offf theee SSShahahah offf IrII an,

srael’s mmmisii siiionoo iiin Teeehrhh an wwwas tttheee largest o

siiions, apapaparararttt frfrfromomom thahahattt innn ttthehehe UUUnininiteteted Stattes

thheh ambassssaaadooor offf ttthehehe SSSauuudddi Arrrabibibiaaan goverrrnm

innn a tone ofofof viririrtututuououousss rererebububukeee, “““you haveee th

i airirr forororce, comimm ngngng iiintntntoo [3[3[3222:00] aiiirlrlrlininne, c

e Shahh sasasaididid,,, “nothingngng ooof the sorttt hhhapapappens,”

mbassador sssayayays,s,s, “yes, bbb tut III’v’v’veee bebebeen to the

, ‘El Al internnnatatatioioionananalll airlllininines,’ [clears t

epartures [inaudible] delays how could yo

enterprise with special relationship to the Middle East. But the

negotiations that we conducted, although they did not lead

immediately to a peace agreement, were not without effect. I

believe that the foundations of a Jordanian-Israeli [33:00]

understanding that were laid in those days, it became evident

that less than any other Arab country, could Jordan – which had

then lost the West Bank – possibly believe in the feasibility of

victory over the [inaudible] the Jordan, the embattled power of

the state of Israel. Therefore, when the time came for Jordan to

adjust itself to the new reality, it was no surprise to anybody

that they responded with an ardor and enthusiasm which now

characterizes the Jordanian-Israeli treaty of peace. The, um,

truth is that although Jordan is by no means the major Arab

country, [clears throat] and has no such pretensions, no such

claims, the truth is that there are more opportunities for

Jordanian-Israeli [34:00] regional cooperation than is the case

with any other Israeli neighbors. Is it not ridiculous [clears

throat] that there should be two ports, one at Elat and one at

Aqaba? Within about five miles from each other, why should there

not be a joint port authority, enabling both countries to

exploit their access to the countries of East Africa and the

prosperous Pacific rim. Is it not illogical [clears throat] that


18

he WeW st Bank – possssibibblylyl bbelieve in the fefeas

r the [inaudible] ththheee JJordan, the embattled

f Isrrraeaeael.l.l. TTTheheherererefofoforerere,,, whwhwhen ttthehehe tttimimimee e cacacammme for

lf too ttthe nnneeew rrrealiiitytyty,, itit wasasas nooo suss rprprprirr se t

esponded wiww ththth annn ardooorrr and d d ennthththusssiaii sm which

esss the JoJoJordrdrdaaaniaiaian-n-n-IsII rararaeleleli trtrtreaeaeatytyty oooff f peace.. T

attt althouuughhh JJJorrrdaaann n isisis bbby yy nnno meeeannns the majjjor

leaaars throaaat]t]t] andndnd hhhasasas nnnooo sususuchhh ppprrretensionnns,

trututth isisis that thththererereee arararee momomore opporrrtututunininities

sraelii [3[3[34:4:4:0000 ] regionononalalal cooperatiiionnn ttthan is

her Israelilili nnneieieighgg bobb rs. IIs iiittt nononottt ridiculous

t there should d bebebe tttwowowo ppportsss,, one at Elat an

in about five miles from each other why sh

the Dead Sea should be completely dead, that is to say, that

Israel should be able to prevent its exploitation by Jordan? And

Jordan, to prevent its exploitation by Israel? Why not a Dead

Sea authority that would enable both countries to exploit what

is still, today, one of the major concentrations of [35:00]

pharmaceutical raw materials. Is it logical that there should

not be pilgrimage and movement and tourism in a great wave

across the Middle East? Let us suppose that someone interested

in the roots of Western civilization could go from Israel’s

[inaudible] of Jerusalem across the river to Petra, amidst the

relics of the great Nabataean civilization? And from there,

southward to the pharaonic [inaudible] of previous ages? Now all

these things are now realities. There is a Dead Sea authority,

there is a joint port authority for Israel and Jordan, and the

impulses that have led to all of this were apparent during our

original dialogue.

Iraq [36:00] had collapsed into the status of the hunted

pariah country, no longer able to, um, offer Israel that

virulent hostility which it has, which it did before, and has

since displayed. The Gulf War had created a violent upheaval in

the Middle Eastern balance of power. It was a congenial war for

the West, in a sense, because it was clearly in the logistics,


19

rimmaga e and movementnt aaandndn ttourism in a greaeat

Middle East? Let us sssuuuppose that someone in

s of WeWeWestststererernnn cicicivivivilililizazazatitition cccouououldldld gggoo o frfrfroom Isr

of JJJerererusalalaleeem aaacrossssss ttheee rivevever tototo Petetetrarr , am

he great NaNN bababatatt eaeaean ciiivivv lizazazationonon? AnAA d from t

o the phahaharararaonononicicic [[[inii auauaudididibllleee]]] ofofof ppprererevivv ous aage

s are nowww rrreaaaliiitiiieseses. ThThTherrreee iiis a Deeead Sea au

joiiint port auauauthtt orororititityyy fofoforrr IsIsIsraaaelelel and Jorddadan,

at hahaave llled to alalallll ofofof ttthihihiss were apppparararenenent du

alogue..

36:00] had cccoloo lalalapsssedee into thththe ee stststatus of the

try, no longer abbblelele to,oo uuummm, offer Israel th

in the logistic and legal sense, an act of aggression. Kuwait

was a member of the United Nations in good standing, and

therefore the collapse of Iraq had transformed Israel’s

strategic situation beyond any previous memory. [37:00]

Moreover, the leader of Iraq had the virtue, from the viewpoint

of his assailants, of a, a character so totally disagreeable

that it was quite possible for him to furnish the hatred without

war seems to be feasible. In fact, a, uh, historian wrote about

him as follows: “If there was any vice from which he was exempt,

it is only because nature does not permit perfection. Even in

evil.” And, uh, he as the [inaudible] and the uh, receptacle of

international condemnation had not passed into a position where

he was not able, as a result of international intrusion, to

carry out his plans for the creation of large deposits of, of

uh, non-conventional weapons. But above all, the major change

[38:00] was in the Palestinian community itself. There is no

reason to be surprised of the mutation that has taken place in

the attitude of the PLO, it presented itself long before 1993 as

a lost cause, a totally impotent country in any military terms,

scattered, dispersed, nothing but the memories – sometimes the

valiant memories – of its previous ordeals. But nevertheless, in

no condition whatever to come to terms of encounter and conflict


20

quuiti e possible foror hhhimimi tto furnish the hahatr

o be feasible. In fffaccct,tt, a, uh, historian wr

ows: “I“I“If f f thththererere e e wawawasss ananany y y vicecece fffrororommm whwhwhicicichh he w

becauuusesese natatatuuuree e doesss nnnoot ppermimimittt pepeperfrr ececectitt on.

uh, he aaasss thththe ee [[[inii audididible]]] annddd thhhe ee uh, rece

alll condemememnananatittiononon hhhadaa nnnototot pppasasassesesedd ininntototo a possit

abblb e, as a reeesuuulttt oofff inininteteterrrnaaatiiionnnalll intrusssio

is plans fooorrr thtt ee crcrcreaeaeatititiononon ooof lalalarrrge depossisits

ventitiionalalal weaponsnsns. BuBuButtt abababovovove all, ttthehehe mmmajor

in thehee PPPalalalesee tinian cccomomommunity itssselllf.f.f. There

e surprisededed oooff f thtt e muttatititionnn ttthahahattt hah s taken

e of the PLO, iiittt prprpresesesenenented itititself long befo

e a totally impotent country in any milita

with the State of Israel. And it is then [clears throat] the

Palestinian community divided between those who still wanted to

conserve [39:00] the concepts of hostility, belligerence,

fundamentalistic thinking about religion which now characterizes

the attitudes of the Hamas movement and it was then, however,

that the central mainstream of the Palestinian organizations

[clears throat] took a different course, a course which led them

to the memorable handshake and meeting of September 1993.

[clears throat] In other words, the realism and pragmatism had

seized hold of the mainstream of the Palestinian movement. But

there were other such movements also, across the Arab world.

Morocco, Tunisia, some of the Gulf states [40:00], Qatar, Oman,

[inaudible] Bahrain, Kuwait had all seen Israel as a market of

consequence and as a possible collaborator [clears throat] in

the development of the regional resources. The, um [clears

throat], in other words, an Arab consensus in favor of

recognizing Israel was no longer beyond imagination or

feasibility. At the same time, [clears throat] Israel was

becoming more and more the kind of military power that was

usually associated with the great imperial and continental

countries. [41:00] The United States was the author and is the

author of Israel’s military might and the word ‘might’ is not an


21

oatt]] took a differerentntt couourse, a course whwhic

rable handshake anddd mmmeeeettting of September 19

oat] InInIn ooothththererer wwwororordsdsds,,, thththe rererealalalisisismmm ananand dd pppragma

of thehehe maiaiainnnstrtrtream ofofof thehhe Palalaleeestititininn ananan movem

other succchhh momomovevv memements aala so,,, accrororossss the Arab

niiisia, sososomememe of f f thththeee GuGuGulflflf ssstatatatetetes [4440:0::00], QQat

BBaB hrain,,, KKKuwwwaiiit hahahaddd alalallll ssseeeen Isssraaael as aaa m

annnd as a pppososossiss blblbleee cococollllllabababorororatttororor [clears thr

ment t of ttthe regioioionananalll rereresososourururces. Theee,,, umumum [cl

other wowowordrdrds,ss an Arababab ccconsensus iiin fafafavor of

Israel wasasas nnno oo loll nger bbbeyonnnd d d imimimagagagini ation or

. At the same tttimimime,e,e, [[[clclclearsss tthroat] Israel

re and more the kind of military power that

exaggeration: Israel is deemed by the Arab countries to possess

every technological resource for self-preservation, self-

defense, and if need be, for reprisal. And the concept of

joining Israel in a kind of a regional harmony was no longer

beyond the thoughts and the imagination of Arab leaders,

including King Hussein himself, his crown prince [inaudible],

also King Hassan of Morocco, and, um, many of the heads of the

Gulf states. Now what should Israel have done about all this?

Ignore it? Pretend that nothing had happened? [42:00] Not reach

out to meet and to encounter these new currents of Arab realism?

Israel even today admits the horrors of suicide bombings has no

regret the path that it took. And that path, although it did not

lead yet to a stable relationship with the Palestinians, it did

certainly revolutionize our position in the world community.

Israel now has relations with 148 countries and not the league

of forty that we knew of before. Israel, instead of being the

most isolated country in the Middle East has become perhaps the

least isolated country in the Middle East. The possibilities of

a regional order [43:00] in which trade and commerce and people

would flow across the boundaries has not been achieved, but it

has never become unfeasible. Realistic people could believe in

it. But what, what’s fertilized all of these currents of policy


22

asssana of Morocco, aandndd,,, umum, many of the hehead

. Now what should Isrrraaaelll have done about al

Preteeendndnd ttthahahattt nononothththinininggg hahahad hahahappppppenenenededed??? [4[4[422:00]

and tototo encncncooountntnter ttthehehesse nnew cccuuurrererentnn sss ofoo Ara

today adddmimm tststs thehehe horrrrrrors ooof sususuicccidii e bombin

paaath thatatat iiittt tototookokok... AnAnAndd d thhhatatat pppatatath,h,h, aaalthouggh

aaa stableee rrrelllatttiooonsnsnshihihippp wiwiwittth thheh Paala estiniiian

evooolutionizzzeee ouoo rrr popoposisisitititiononon iiin thththeee world cccomm

has rrrelatatations wititith hh 141414888 cococounununtttries annnd d d nononot th

at we kkknenenewww ofoo before.e.e. IIsrael, insssteeeadadad of be

ed countryyy ininin ttthehh MMidididdldldle EaEaEaststst hhhasasas become pe

ted country in thththeee MiMiMiddddddle EEEaasast. The possibi

order [43:00] in which trade and commerce a

and action? What’s the change in Israel? When in June 1993, the

Israeli electorate intervened to establish a government based on

the concepts of originality, innovation, and regional harmony.

Now, none of the other currents of opinion and thought which

I’ve given expression could have happened without that change.

If the Israeli position had continued to be as it was in the

days, for example, of the Shamir administration, [44:00]

everything- everything belongs to us. Nothing belongs to anybody

else. The Arab world has no- nothing to do in the area except to

subject itself to Israeli domination and occupation. So long as

that doctrine prevailed, even if it was based on certain streams

of piety in ancient Jewish thought, nothing could be achieved.

But when a secular realism in Israel converged with new currents

of pragmatism of the Arab world, impossible things suddenly

became possible and that was the basis of the spectacle which

has been celebrated so ardently on so many occasions in

Washington and in Cairo and elsewhere across our region. [45:00]

The, um, misconvergence has created the agreements, the

declaration of reconciliation of September nineteen hundred and

ninety three, the Cairo agreement, and the other agreements

including the peace treaty with Jordan, Israeli diplomatic

relations with Morocco and Tunisia, Israeli commercial contacts


23

xammplp e, of the Shamamirirr admdministration, [4444:0

everything belongs tttooo us. Nothing belongs

rab wwworororldldld hhhasasas nnno-o-o- nnnototothihihing tttooo dododo iiinn n thththee area

elf ttooo Israraraeeeliii domiiinananattionoon andndnd occccccupuu atatatioii n. S

ne prevaiiilell d,d,d, eveveven ifff it wawawas bababaseeed dd on certa

aaancienttt JeJeJewiwwishshsh ttthohh ugugughththt, nononothththininng g g cooould bee a

seecular rrreaaaliiismmm iiinn n IsIsIsrararaelelel cooonvvverrrgeede with ne

sm of the AAArararab bb wowoworlrlrlddd, iiimpmpmpososossiiiblblbleee things sud

ible and d d that wasasas ttthehehe bbbasasisisis of the spspspececectacl

lebrateeed dd sososo ardentlyyy ononon so many oooccccasasasions i

and in Cairirirooo ananand dd elllse hhwhere acacacrororossssss our regio

sconvergence hahaasss crcrcreaeaeateteted thhheee agreements, th

of reconciliation of September nineteen hu

of great importance in the oil-bearing Arab states, Qatar and

Oman and Kuwait and Bahrain, all of these possibilities

flourished in this new atmosphere and, uh, created what I will

not call the illusion because I still believe it is going to

prevail, created the feasibility of Arab-Israeli peace, which I

still think is the dominant theme of Middle Eastern life.

[46:00] But of course, the question is whether all of this can

survive against the virulent fundamentalist fury and rage shown

by the Hamas movement? And whether there is any chance this can

be withstood. First of all, there is an Israeli decision to

withstand it, there is no other course. What there is not in

Israel, and it is important that everybody here and that all

Americans should understand it, - [recording cuts off]

END OF AUDIO FILE [46:40]


24

off course, the queuestttioii n n is whether all of

inst the virulent fffunnndaddamentalist fury and r

s movvvemememenenent?t?t? AAAndndnd wwwhehehethththererer thehehererere iiiss anananyyy cchance

d. Firsrsrst ofofof allllll, thhherereree isis an n n IIsI rararaelee iii dedd cisi

t, there isii nnno oo ototother cccoursesese. WhWhWhattt there is

iiit is imimimpopoportrtrtanananttt thtt atatat eeeveeeryryrybobobodydyy hhherrre and th

hooould unddderrrstttannnd ititit, -- [r[r[reeecooordddinnng cuts offff]

END OFOFOF AAAUDUU IOIOIO FFFIIILE [46:404040]]]

Date post:	19-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuongnga
View:	220 times
Download:	5 times

C-7433 Transcription Eban, Abba. Lecture at George...

Documents