Yakov Amitai, Israel’s Ambassador to Ethiopia

US President George Bush recently paid a visit to the Middle East. Once again negotiations aimed at solving the longstanding conflict in the Middle East have become the center of attraction as a US led mediation is in the process.

On the backdrop of the mediation, however, the conflict persists and there are reports of a humanitarian crisis in Palestine following Israel’s decision to reduce the supply of fuel and power to Gaza.

The international media gave coverage to the situation as thousands of Palestinians were seen flocking across borders into Egypt.

The issue was also raised here during the African Heads of State Summit.

Israel’s Ambassador to Ethiopia, Yakov Amitai, spoke to Namrud Berhane of The Reporter on  Israel’s position  regarding the current situation and the peace process in general. Excerpts:

There seems to be more Israeli interest to invest in Ethiopia. Can you brief us on this, particularly during your term as an ambassador of Israel here?

I would not like to relate it to my being here, but there is an ongoing movement of Israelis who are interested in investing in Ethiopia. This is mainly in the agriculture sector. Israelis are very active in horticulture, vegetables, and recently they have started to express more interest in bio-fuel. These are mainly the fields of interest. They are also engaged in construction, food processing and others. We are doing our utmost to encourage more investors and experts to come here.

What feedback do you get from these Israeli individuals about the investment environment here?

At first people were complaining about the bureaucracy. But the situation is improving. Naturally, there are these kinds of problems related to the effects of people acting in a new environment - be it related to procedures or to the climate. For example, Israeli farmers had realized that the regime of precipitation is different to that in Israel. Even if one had studied it before and tried to cover all the fields that one could, still, on the ground, one might face a different experience.

We have a term in Yiddish; it is what we call “rebe gelt,” the money one pays for getting experience. So this is very natural and we are very optimistic.

Recently the AU held its 10th Summit of African Heads of State. The Palestinian Liberation Organization had attended, Israel not. And yet the issue of the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis was raised and resolutions passed?  

You have put your finger on one of the issues which is unfair. It is not only in our interest as Israelis to attend those meetings because we are partners of Africa. We are involved in various development activities in the continent. We have very good bilateral relationships with many African countries.

So, it just does not make sense, not only in relationship with the fact that the Palestinians have been represented there for many years.

Based on the relationship between Israel and Africa, and certainly, when it comes to the situation in the Middle East, it was one of the topics, as you said, covered by this summit.

So, it just does not make sense and just does not serve the credibility of the organization to cover such an important and complicated issue in a one-sided and biased manner. It is not only a question that we are not represented but that the resolutions which come out time and again consistently reflect one side of the conflict, which is, of course, the Arab side.

Yet again the other side also accuses Israel of enjoying a biased and one-sided favor due to the strong lobby it has in Washington and the US by using its veto power in the UN to reverse resolutions that are in favor of Palestinians. Palestinians in particular believe that if agreements are to be lasting, the international community should arbitrate and also guarantee that the agreements are respected by Israel….

You know that the Palestinians have been benefiting for years from what one might define as an “automatic majority” composed of the Arab countries, the Islamic group and the Non-Aligned Members of the international organization. So if you look at many of the UN resolutions they are one-sided and, as I said before, they benefit from this because they enjoy an “automatic majority.” It has nothing to do with the lobby in Washington.
 
With regard to the Palestinians call for arbitration, this is obsolete.

On the ground, direct negotiations are under way between us and the Palestinians.

Such statements are completely disconnected from the actual reality. It bears in mind the traditional approach taken by the PLO for a very long time. On the ground, we are trying to solve it directly, and that is the way to solve the conflict.

Let me tell you something. Reaching an agreement is not only in the interest of the Palestinian Authority; it is also in the interest of Israel. Both of us, down the road would like to live in peace and in two different states.

We share interest in a lasting and reliable agreement. We do not have to be forced into it; we are initiating it.

What is your opinion on the latest US-driven mediation attempts between Palestinians and Israelis?

I think it is an important activity. Both sides have started to engage in negotiating what we call the core issues of the conflict, namely borders, refugees and Jerusalem, aiming at achieving a two-state solution, solving the conflict based on the establishment of a peaceful independent Palestinian state.

The implementation will be very much connected to the progress made in implementing the “Road Map.” I think that this connection makes it unique. From Israel’s point of view the most important thing is security - to finally enjoy what is already mentioned in Resolution 242 of the Security Council, living in peace within secure and recognized boundaries.

In the first phase of the Road Map, the Palestinians are asked to dismantle terrorist organizations. On the other hand, there is the point related to settlements. In this respect, we have evacuated Gaza to the last inch. We have dismantled the settlements located in the area but still there is an ongoing firing of rockets from Gaza. So, coming back to the question, the connection between the negotiations and implementation of the “Road Map” is crucial.

One of your predecessors, Ambassador Ariel Kerem, once attributed the problems in the negotiations to the leadership in the Palestinian Authority. How do you see this point and how do you see the negotiations with the administration of President Mahmoud Abbas?

The difference is huge mainly because Arafat never gave up on his idea of the “armed struggle.” That was the main problem because when the Oslo agreement was signed in 1993, what gave us the green light to sign it comfortably was the Palestinians’ denunciation of terrorism and recognizing Israel.

Well, throughout the 90s Arafat never gave up his terrorist approach and kept carrying out the “armed struggle” – which is originally defined in the Palestinian covenant as a strategy and not a tactic.

Not only that, after the Camp David Summit in 2000, where Israel put the most conciliatory positions on the table, he started with what he termed “Intifadat Al Aqsa.” This meant not only armed struggle but also gave the conflict a very heavy religious flavor.

So, there was this connection of coming back to the arms and putting the conflict in a religious context, which made the conflict very complicated and the negotiations very untrustworthy. Currently, however, there is a pragmatic Palestinian Authority located in Ramalla, with whom we negotiate. I think that the most important difference is that they are not involved in what they term “armed struggle” against Israel. That is the difference between them and Hamas at the moment.

Ironically, the demands put to Hamas by the International Quartet, namely to denounce terrorism and to recognize Israel and all the previous agreements, cut between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The last one is, of course, a new demand since it is a derivative of the developments in the past years. The first two, however – to denounce terrorism and recognize Israel – are actually the demands put to the PLO before Oslo. You see now we have come back to this point with Hamas.

What are the contentions regarding Jerusalem?

Jerusalem is a very complicated issue. Jerusalem has always been the capital of Israel. It was established three thousand years ago, and for one thousand years it was the capital of Israel until the majority of our people went on exile. Then we came back and again it became the capital of Israel. It has never been the capital of any other state Arab, Muslim or any other.

This is our point of view. The Palestinians would like also to make it their capital and this makes it a very difficult one. It has been on the negotiating table in Camp David in 2000; it is going to be there now as well.

What is currently happening in Gaza and how would you describe the humanitarian situation there?

After Israel evacuated Gaza, the Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups started to fire rockets into Israel aiming at the civilian population. This has been carried out on a daily basis. These rockets were also fired at the crossings which are located at the border. Israel’s decision to limit the supplies through these crossings came on the backdrop of this shelling.

However, a humanitarian crisis is not taking place in Gaza. There is an ongoing cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian Authorities in this respect. There is no starvation in Gaza. Of course the fuel supply to Gaza has been reduced but there is enough to run basic institutions.

Hamas tried to put an image of severe shortage, sometimes playing games like carrying out the meetings of the leadership by using candlelights… and so on.

They say there is no electricity in Gaza when 75 percent of the electricity went on running from Israel to Gaza.

There are also stories of Hamas operatives stealing fuel from hospitals and so on and so forth. All the time there was no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza as Hamas has been claiming.

Next to Gaza, on the Israeli side of the border, the civilian population in the city of Shderot has been suffering all along as rockets fell on kindergartens, schools and the streets. And these terrorist organizations deliberately target the civilian population.

Of course, Israel is doing its utmost to prevent such attacks from taking place by terrorist organizations. We are doing our utmost to pinpoint those terrorists and this is an ongoing activity next to our southern border. This is being done along the negotiations conducted with the Palestinian Authority as I mentioned before.

I don’t think that we have been in such a situation before as we try to achieve a solution to this very difficult conflict with one part of the Palestinian people, as the other is controlled by a terrorist organization which attacks Israel on an ongoing basis. These groups aim not only to undermine the state of Israel but also to jeopardize the legitimacy of the negotiations held between us and the Palestinian Authority.

But if there is no humanitarian crisis then how would you explain all those Palestinians flocking to the Egyptian border?

Hamas had planned for some time now to break the fence and they succeeded in crossing the border.

Basically, I think that Egypt and Israel share interest in preventing terrorism next to our mutual border. We would like to see a peaceful entity next to our border and not one run by Hamas.