About Us

IMRA
IMRA
IMRA

 

Subscribe

Search


...................................................................................................................................................


Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Joint press conference with FM Liberman and Norwegian FM Store Since this administration came into office, we have made endless gestures to the Palestinians. At the moment, we are waiting for a gesture from the Palestinian side.

We [AL: different elements in coalition] may have different approaches
regarding the tactics and how to respond; this was the issue. But we agreed
about what I mentioned at the Bar-Ilan speech: a two-state solution
immediately, direct talks between both sides. And we think that the biggest
threat to the Middle East and to the world is Iran and the leadership of
Iran

Joint press conference with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign
Affairs Avigdor Liberman and Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem
17 Jan 2010

Transcript:

MODERATOR: Hello. Welcome to the press conference at the Israeli Foreign
Ministry. We will hear statements from the two ministers and then we will
take questions, two from the Israeli press, two from the Norwegian press. We
will start with the statements. First statement from the Norwegian Foreign
Minister.
Minister, please, the floor is yours.

FM GAHR STORE: Minister Liberman, I appreciate your reception here at the
Foreign Ministry today. We have had two good hours of talks in private and
then with our delegations, and I'm happy that Norway and Israel, through
these meetings, are able to take our bilateral relations further and
forward.

Norway and Israel have a deep-rooted friendship between our populations,
between our governments. We have a number of issues of mutual interests that
we need to discuss and tackle. And I think we are also able, in an open and
transparent fashion, to deal with differences. There are differences, but
they have been dealt with today, I think, in a professional and adequate
way.

Let me say that it is the ambition of my government to maintain and further
develop relations with Israel, with its civil society. And I'm happy that we
now are able, in addition to the political dialogue we have, to support the
way our civil societies also interact. I wish to see more cooperation in the
field of culture, exchange of people who are engaged in culture, and also to
move forward with more cooperation in the field of research and development,
where we know that Israel has excellent experience, so that our companies
can develop further trade together.

I've always believed that this, as a foundation, gives us a more solid
platform to deal with the political issues, and I appreciate your readiness
today to exchange openly and frankly about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,
about the questions of the region, and to listen to my views as I have had
the opportunity to listen to your views.

So thank you, Mr. Minister. For me this has been a good meeting and a
fruitful one.

FM LIBERMAN: Thank you very much. We had a very nice discussion about the
Middle East, regarding the Palestinian issues, and of course regarding our
bilateral relations.

We appreciate the Norwegian investments in the Palestinian economy. We
appreciate their efforts to promote peace among different states and nations
around the world. And we think that we have some disputes, we have some
misunderstandings, but it's a dialogue between two friends.

I think that for us today, for me, there's much, much importance in our
bilateral relations. I think that for us the central issue in our bilateral
relations is this agreement on research and development, and I think we can
strengthen and upgrade our bilateral relations and we can understand each
other much better regarding the Palestinian issues and the peace process in
the Middle East. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We will take the first question from the Norwegian
press, from NRK Norwegian Television.

NRK NORWEGIAN TELEVISION: You have been very critical of the Norwegian
government before. You also you said that the last meeting you had with
Minister Gahr Store in New York was not a very good one. After the lunch
today, have you agreed on more issues, or do you still think that Norway is
a country that is very critical of Israel?

FM LIBERMAN: Thank you. You know, maybe this is proof that discussion is
very important between two sides. We had a previous meeting in New York; I
think it was a complicated meeting. And we spoke, I think, since that
meeting, on the phone and we clarified our positions. And we had more
understanding in this meeting today.

Also, we have differences, we have different approaches, different views,
but at the end of the day we are speaking about two democracies, we share
the same values. And I think that, from my point of view, I want to put more
effort and be more active in our bilateral relations. I don't think that we
can completely agree about Middle East problems, but I think that we can do
much more on a bilateral track and also at least better understand each
other regarding the Middle East. And, of course, we have many issues with
some different approaches, different views, and we are speaking frankly.

MODERATOR: Question from the Israeli press, from Channel 10.

CHANNEL 10: First of all, a question to the Israeli Foreign Minister; I will
ask it in Hebrew. If you can answer in Hebrew for the Israeli audience,
please.
[Translation] Would you please address two issues - one came up today and
was publicized both in the newspaper Haaretz and on Galei Zahal radio. About
the request, meaning the attempt by the international community, primarily
European entities, to pressure Israel, or to ask for additional gestures
from Israel vis-à-vis the Palestinians, primarily pertaining to Jerusalem,
the re-opening of Orient House, and opening a Palestinian chamber of
commerce in East Jerusalem. What is your position on the matter? Do you
think it is right to act in that direction?

And also, in connection, perhaps, with the conclusion of the issue with
Turkey. Are you satisfied with the way in which the matter concluded, with a
letter of apology of your deputy? And, the bottom line - until now we have
not had the opportunity to ask you about it - do you think that he acted
properly, in doing what he did?

And to the Norwegian guest, it's the first opportunity for us to have your
specific comment about what the Israeli Foreign Minister said, and I'm
quoting from Haaretz newspaper that he was amazed at the Norwegian
government's decision to celebrate the 150th birthday of Knut Hamsun who
admired the Nazis, as Mr. Liberman said, and the fact that Norway's
representatives were among the few who did not walk out of the Durban II
Conference. And Mr. Liberman said it's not a coincidence as far as he
understands and how low can they get? I would appreciate your comment about
that. Thank you.

FM LIBERMAN: It's a long question and a long answer. Okay. I am sorry, I
will speak in Hebrew.

FM GAHR STORE: Please, please.

FM LIBERMAN: [Translation] First of all, with regard to your first question,
about the approach of the European community to additional gestures and to
the opening of Orient House or other gestures and, in general, with regard
to everything that is happening with the perception, the approach and the
ability to attain a peace agreement.

First of all, since this administration came into office, we have made
endless gestures. We have given the Palestinians the option of coming to
direct negotiations.
First, of course was the prime minister’s speech, the Bar-Ilan speech,
during which, for the first time, he recognized the two-state solution. Of
course, I can also mention the matter of the checkpoints - we have succeed
in dramatically reducing the number of checkpoints - and everything called
access and movement no longer exists now. Movement through Judea and Samaria
is free.

We have given Fatah the possibility of holding the conference in optimal
conditions in Bethlehem. We have undertaken a moratorium, i.e., we have
frozen the building in settlements in Judea and Samaria. If we look today,
the cooperation with Tony Blair and General Dayton has brought results. I
would just like to remind you that economic growth in Judea and Samaria is
8%.

So, from our standpoint, we’ve finished our entire arsenal of gestures -
there will be no more gestures. There is simply no room to talk about
opening Orient House, freezing the construction in Jerusalem or any
additional gestures. Now is the time for a gesture from the Palestinians. We
have exhausted our entire arsenal of gestures. We have said from the first
moment that this administration took office that we are prepared to open
direct negotiations without preconditions. But each time they try to make
new stipulations for the negotiations, which did not happen with any
previous administration. I don’t remember these stipulations with the
Olmert administration, with the Sharon administration or with the Barak
administration.

When we see that the Palestinians are inciting against Israel in every
possible international forum, calling for a boycott of Israeli products,
filing lawsuits in the international court at the Hague, establishing a fund
to persuade others to impose a boycott on Israeli products - I don’t see any
reason for a gesture. To the contrary. So at the moment, we are waiting for
a gesture from the Palestinian side.

Also, with regard to the second question, there’s no doubt that, in essence,
the protest was correct. There is no doubt that the way in which it was done
was a mistake. I would like to remind you that, for years, we maintained a
good relationship with Turkey and with the Turkish people, and we are not
seeking any friction or any confrontation with anyone. But we will not give
in to anyone either.

I would like to remind you that the recent events have occurred on the
backdrop of a long series of measures which are not consistent with
neighborliness and with good, normative relations. We can start with the
episode involving Shimon Peres at the Davos conference, and the movie on
Turkish television in which Israeli soldiers kill a Palestinian baby or
Palestinian children, and the statement that the Turkish prime minister is
prepared to meet with the president of Sudan, who is accused of genocide,
but not with the prime minister of Israel. We can talk about the movie last
week in which Israeli Mossad agents kidnap Turkish children in order to
convert them to Judaism, or to the calls from Tehran during the visit of the
Turkish prime minister to Iran and his declaration at the press conference
with the prime minister of Lebanon, that Israel is a threat to the peace and
stability of the world.

The protest came on the backdrop of all these things and, in essence, the
protest was correct. But, as I said, the manner in which it was done was
not, and we hope that with this, we have ended the clarification about our
relations with Turkey. Just as we treat them with respect and esteem, we
expect the same treatment. As I said, we are not seeking either
confrontation or friction with anyone, but we will not just accept these
things either. Thank you.

FM GAHR STORE: Is it possible to commemorate literature without combining
the one who wrote the literature with his political views? That was the
question facing Norway as we were approaching 150 years of the birth of Knut
Hamsun. And I can tell you that, in pondering that question, we consulted
very broadly, knowing that this was, in my words, a great author and a
hopeless politician. So could we mark the greatness of his works and put the
hopelessness of his politics into perspective? And having also consulted
broadly with circles in this country, knowing the sensitivity in Israel, we
came to the conclusion that, yes, this combination is possible.

So we've had a year of marking the literature of Knut Hamsun, but also using
that year to put into its right perspective the hopelessness of his
political views; also, especially with the younger generation, illustrating
that a man who won the Nobel Prize for Literature was able, during the '30s
and into the '40s, to end up in this dead-end in politics.

So this is the position. I think that if you look at the events that have
been organized and the way it has been handled, it has duly taken these
perspectives into account.

On Durban, I will tell you that it was Norway's position during those
negotiations to actively work against any new document on the fight against
racism and discrimination that included any reference which could be
interpreted as anti-Semitic or prejudicial to any other religion, ethnic
group or value-based system. So our negotiators fought hard for that. And I
believe that the Durban II document is a good document; there is no
reference [to anti-Semitism or prejudice]. And had there been anti-Semitic
references in that document, Norway would not have signed it. Point one.

Point two: I know that there are concerns in Israel that Norway was present
in Geneva when we debated the declaration. And I was the man who was
present; I was Minister of Norway. And I was the first to have the
opportunity to firmly denounce from the rostrum of the United Nations, the
hate speech of the Iranian president, to say that we would not surrender the
chair of the United Nations, the rostrum of the United Nations, to those who
promote hate, anti-Semitism and the like.

I have taken note of reactions from the Israeli side, but let me also quote
letters that I have received from the World Jewish Congress thanking me for
being so clear and outspoken, also from European Jewish organizations taking
that view.

So I think, here, Norway's position is very clear. I appreciate that there
are different views on the strategy of communicating those positions, but
for Norway it is really a fundamental principle that the rostrum of the
United Nations is there for its member states, which means that we will have
to accept that the representatives
of states with whom we profoundly disagree and who may be on another planet
on politics, still have access to that rostrum. But then we must not
surrender, and we have to come back and set the record straight. That was my
objective when it came to that conference in Geneva.

MODERATOR: Next question from the Norwegian Press, NTB Norwegian News
Agency.

NTB NORWEGIAN NEWS AGENCY: Yes, hello. I have to admit that Israeli politics
at times can be a bit confusing for a Norwegian journalist.

FM LIBERMAN: Not only for Norwegian journalists.

NTB NORWEGIAN NEWS AGENCY: Probably not. My question is, who is conducting
foreign policy in Israel today? Is it you or is it Ehud Barak and Shimon
Peres?

FM LIBERMAN: First of all, with your permission, if I may make some remarks
regarding Knut Hamsun, I cannot accept the fact that a man who gave away his
Nobel Prize in Literature to Goebbels and delivered a eulogy for Hitler
should be legitimized in any sort of way, not as a man and not as a writer.
Any attempt to separate his personality from his literature, I think, is an
artificial attempt and another try at changing and disregarding history.
This is my point of view and I must clarify my position.

Regarding your question, we have foreign policy in this ministry and, as the
minister, I am responsible for our foreign policy. It's clear that we have a
coalition government, and we have a coalition that is a combination of the
right wing and the left wing and people in the center, and we also have
differences. We don't conceal that fact. And it's clear that my approach and
Ehud Barak's approach, or my views and Shimon Peres' views, are also
different. But we have the government and we have the Cabinet, and we voted
for this policy, and I think that we have a clear policy. We may have
different approaches regarding the tactics and how to respond; this was the
issue. But we agreed about what I mentioned at the Bar-Ilan speech: a
two-state solution immediately, direct talks between both sides. And we
think that the biggest threat to the Middle East and to the world is Iran
and the leadership of Iran, and I think that we have a consensus on many
issues. And of course, Ehud Barak and I come from different worlds,
different political worlds, from different wings, and of course there are
differences.

MODERATOR: Last question from the Israeli press, Channel 2 Television.

CHANNEL 2 REPORTER: Shalom Mr. Foreign Minister. With your permission, the
first question will be in Hebrew.

[Translation] Do you think that the visit of Minister Barak to Turkey, which
has not stopped its attacks on Israel - the Turkish prime minister continues
to call Israel
a war criminal - do you think it was groveling? Do you think that there are
other measures that should be taken against Turkey? And do you think that
your approach, which ended at the end of last week with an apology, requires
rethinking in view of the result of the last exchange with Turkey? With your
permission, I’ll be happy to ask the guest.

If I may, Mr. Foreign Minister, we know that you had differences that also
appear here in the press conference. Can you share with us how this meeting
and your visit here came to be? Did you exchange messages, papers, any other
diplomatic means that paved the way for the meeting today in Jerusalem?

FM LIBERMAN: [Translation] First of all, with regard to the issue with
Turkey, I think, as I said, that, in essence, it was the right response. The
things connected
with the manner of the response were a mistake. You don’t kill the messenger
and anyone who is sensitive about his personal honor and his national honor
must also be sensitive about the honor of others. And therefore Danny Ayalon
apologized, because the way it was done was wrong. Substantively, there’s no
doubt that it was right. You know, we all make mistakes. The only people who
don’t make mistakes are the ones who never do anything. We make mistakes
along the way, but it’s important that there is a way, and our way is very
clear.

And on the subject of the visit by the Minister of Defense, we hope that we
have ended it and clarified our position. Contrary to what you said, I haven’t
heard any comments since that Thursday. No comments from Turkey, no attacks,
and I hope that that’s the way it will continue. And I hope that we’ll find
a way to turn back the clock. We have no interest in quarreling with anyone.
And I repeat that we will also not just give in to anyone either. We are
seeking to be at peace with everyone and we hope that others will act in a
similar manner, with peace and respect for Israel and the Jewish people. In
view of the lessons we have learned from history, we cannot allow ourselves
to act otherwise. Thank you.

FM GAHR STORE: You know, as a foreign minister since 2005, I come frequently
to Israel. And I can only say that this visit follows on the line of a
reception which has been friendly and cordial. And as the minister said, I
think we both have self-esteem on behalf of our governments and nations, and
I know that Mr. Liberman is speaking in that spirit. And I think with that
respect as a basis, we can open up and debate the issues where we disagree.

But I will also add that, against those areas where there are
disagreements - and there are - there is also a pretty solid foundation of
friendship and Norwegian support for Israel’s right to live in security and
peace, and longstanding cultural and political relations between our people.

So I think the procedure of arranging this visit followed the excellent
services of my embassy here and the Israeli embassy in Oslo. And there was
no magic formula, I think, but I appreciated the invitation by the minister
to meet for lunch and, again, I think that was a useful exercise.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much.

Search For An Article

....................................................................................................

Contact Us

POB 982 Kfar Sava
Tel 972-9-7604719
Fax 972-3-7255730
email:imra@netvision.net.il IMRA is now also on Twitter
http://twitter.com/IMRA_UPDATES

image004.jpg (8687 bytes)