    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1993, Book I)]
    [March 15, 1993]
    [Pages 303-308]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of
    Israel
    March 15, 1993

        The President. Good afternoon. It's a great pleasure for me to
    welcome Prime Minister Rabin back to Washington. Since we first met here
    last August, much has changed. But one thing I can say definitely will
    never change is the unique bond that unites the United States and
    Israel. It is a bond that goes back to the founding of the state of
    Israel and beyond, based on shared values and shared ideals.
        Israel's democracy is the bedrock on which our relationship stands.
    It's a shining example for people around the world who are on the
    frontline of the struggle for democracy in their own lands. Our
    relationship is also based on our common interest in a more stable and
    peaceful Middle East, a Middle East that will

    [[Page 304]]

    finally accord Israel the recognition and acceptance that its people
    have yearned for so long and have been too long denied, a Middle East
    that will know greater democracy for all its peoples.
        I believe strongly in the benefit to American interests from
    strengthened relationships with Israel. Our talks today have been
    conducted in that context. We have begun a dialog intended to raise our
    relationship to a new level of strategic partnership, partners in the
    pursuit of peace, partners in the pursuit of security.
        We focused today on our common objective of turning 1993 into a year
    of peacemaking in the Middle East. Prime Minister Rabin has made clear
    to me today that pursuing peace with security is his highest mission. I
    have pledged that my administration will be active in helping the
    parties to achieve that end. At the same time, Prime Minister Rabin and
    I agree that our common objective should be real, lasting, just, and
    comprehensive peace, based on Resolutions 242 and 338. It must involve
    full normalization, diplomatic relations, open borders, commerce,
    tourism, the human bonds that are both the fruits and the best guarantee
    of peace. And Israel's security must be assured. The Israeli people
    cannot be expected to make peace unless they feel secure, and they
    cannot be expected to feel secure unless they come to know real peace.
        Those like Prime Minister Rabin who genuinely seek peace in the
    Middle East will find in me and my administration a full partner. But
    those who seek to subvert the peace process will find zero tolerance
    here for their deplorable acts of violence and terrorism.
        Prime Minister Rabin has told me that he is prepared to take risks
    for peace. He has told his own people the same thing. I have told him
    that our role is to help to minimize those risks. We will do that by
    further reinforcing our commitment to maintaining Israel's qualitative
    military edge.
        Another way we can strengthen Israel and the United States is to
    combine the skills of its people with those of our own. I am pleased to
    announce today the establishment of a U.S.-Israel science and technology
    commission, chaired on the American side by our Secretary of Commerce,
    Ron Brown. The commission will enhance cooperation to create technology-
    based jobs for the 21st century in both Israel and the United States.
    Our economies will also benefit from a lifting of the Arab boycott. And
    I hope that this boycott can end soon.
        Prime Minister Rabin, this year will be a year of enhanced relations
    between our countries. It should also be a year of peace in the Middle
    East, as you have declared. We have an historic responsibility and an
    historic opportunity. We stand here together today resolved not to let
    that opportunity pass.
        Prime Minister Rabin. President Clinton, in just a few days I will
    return to Israel, but I know, and will tell everyone in my country,
    Israel has a friend in the White House. Our home is many miles away, but
    Mr. President, we feel very close. We thank you for the hours we spent
    with you and your team, for the atmosphere of friendship and the
    openness and the depth of our discussions. The leadership which you have
    displayed in coping with America's domestic problems is inspiring and
    stands out like a beacon in the night.
        Today we were happy to learn that at the same time you are also
    willing to invest efforts in promoting peace and stability in the Middle
    East. In this effort, Mr. President, you will find us to be full
    partners. You are aware that no one wants peace more than us and that
    there is no country more resolved to defend itself when necessary. We
    are veterans of many wars. And today we say, no more blood and tears. We
    now wish to experience lasting and meaningful peace.
        In our talks today, I presented to you Israel's approach to the
    peacemaking. And we are willing to take upon ourselves risks for peace.
    But we are determined to protect our security.
        Peace has many enemies. Terror is used by the enemies of peace in
    our effort to undermine it. And we will combat it while we continue to
    seek a solution that will lead to peace.
        Since the formation of my government, we have invested efforts in
    trying to advance towards peace in the framework of the Madrid formula.
    We introduced new ideas in the negotiation tracks with Syria, Lebanon,
    Jordan, and the Palestinians. Some progress has been made, but more is
    needed in order to come to agreement. We are ready for compromise, but
    compromises cannot be one-sided. We call on our partners, the Arab
    States, the Palestinians from the territories, to seize the moment, to
    return to the negotiating table so that we can use this historic
    opportunity. We call upon them to respond openly and willingly to our
    positions. Our

    [[Page 305]]

    children and grandchildren in Jerusalem and the Arab children and
    grandchildren in Damascus, Beirut, Amman, and elsewhere in the Arab
    world will not forgive us if we all fail to act now.
        We have heard today with satisfaction, Mr. President, your concept
    of the role of the full partner as an intermediary. We shall continue
    our direct talks with our Arab neighbors. But in order to expedite the
    dialog between the parties, we welcome your good offices and hope to
    rely on your role as facilitator.
        President Clinton, we are deeply indebted to you and to your
    predecessors who helped us in hours of need. We do appreciate and
    greatly value the decision to maintain the current level of aid to
    Israel. This decision will help us to integrate new immigrants into our
    society and to bear the heavy burden of our security.
        You know, President, that we will not be able to win the battle for
    peace without a qualitative edge. Therefore, I wish to thank you and
    your colleagues on behalf of the Israeli soldiers and their parents and
    the citizens of Israel for your decision to help to maintain that edge.
    Moreover, such a qualitative edge enables the Israeli defense forces to
    contribute to the overall effort to maintain stability in our stormy
    region. The decision made today to raise the level of strategic dialog
    between our two countries will open new doors of opportunity. The fact
    that the next months we will renew the memorandum of agreement between
    us for 5 more years, and that we do it as a matter of course, is a proof
    of the kind of mutually beneficial relationships that we enjoy. The
    formation of new high-level forum for strategic dialog will further
    upgrade this relationship.
        We will also have a turn in the near future with much urgency to
    address the struggle against various kinds of fanaticism which give
    birth to murderous terror, the kind that recently landed even on these
    shores. We must institutionalize our dialog and include all free
    countries in consultations on the ways to curb the threatening
    extremism.
        We attach much importance to the decision made today to create the
    high-level joint commission for the development of projects of science
    and technology. The investment in research and industrial applications
    in Israel and in America will explore new frontiers of knowledge. And
    they are a telling example of how our two countries can mutually benefit
    from this cooperation.
        President Clinton, thank you for your invitation and reception, for
    the warmth on a wintry day, and for your good will. I came from
    Jerusalem, the city of the prophets. I return to Jerusalem, the city
    that witnessed so many wars and wants so dearly peace because she knows
    that in war there are no winners and in peace no losers.
        Thank you very much.

    Palestinian Deportees

        Q. President Clinton--[inaudible]--demands for the immediate
    repatriation of the Palestinian deportees, and where did you leave that
    subject?
        The President. No, we did not discuss that. As far as I'm concerned,
    the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister reached an agreement on
    that. And I think that is the framework within which we are proceeding.

    Middle East Peace Talks

        Q. Mr. President----
        The President. Yes. Go ahead.
        Q. Mr. President, the last peace agreement between an Arab nation
    and Israel was, as you know, the Egyptian Peace Agreement. In that case,
    the President kept a very personal part as an intermediary. To what
    extent are you willing to become personally involved? And Mr. Prime
    Minister, to what extent are you willing to see the President become
    personally involved in this peace negotiation?
        Prime Minister Rabin. Well, as you can expect, I cannot answer in
    the name of the President of the United States. But I believe, as it has
    happened whenever agreements were reached between the Arab countries and
    Israel from '74 to '79, and even the creation of the Madrid peace
    conference, could not be achieved without the United States being
    involved in encouraging the parties to do so. I believe that there was,
    there is a need of the United States' partnership to the peacemaking
    process. At what level, at what time, it's not up to me to answer.
        The President. The answer to your question is that I would be
    prepared to commit the resources, the effort and the attention of this
    administration, of my Secretary of State, and my personal efforts to
    achieve lasting agreements.
        We have, on the table, the potential of very significant bilateral
    agreements and the potential of some regional agreements that I think
    ought to be pursued. I feel very strongly about it,

    [[Page 306]]

    and I think the opportunities for progress are there. I don't want to
    minimize the difficulties, the obstacles, the years of frustration, but
    I think the fact that this Prime Minister, who became a hero as a
    warrior, is doing what he can and risking significantly to promote
    peace, is a good beginning. And I think there are other good indications
    in the region. And I'm prepared to personally do what I can to
    facilitate that.
        Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

    West Bank and Gaza Strip

        Q. Do you support the transitional--[inaudible]--policy of self-
    determination for the people on the West Bank and Gaza who have been
    living for years under military occupation? Mr. Prime Minister, do you
    think that during your regime there will be any measure of self-rule for
    the Palestinians while you are a leader?
        Prime Minister Rabin. I don't want to give you a lengthy answer, but
    allow me to say, in 1967 we did not want war. It's more than that. Even
    when we found ourselves in a clash with the Egyptians, we offered to the
    Jordanians, stay out of the war and we'll keep your line with us without
    any change.
        If you'll follow the history, we were always for compromise. U.N.
    decision, partition of Palestine to two states: We accepted; they
    rejected. They went to war to destroy us. It's bad luck to the Arabs.
    Whenever they go to war, they lose. We offer them this time, to the
    Palestinians in the territories, what no one offered them when the Arab
    countries were in occupation, Jordan of the West Bank, Egypt of the Gaza
    Strip, self-rule--run your own life by yourself--as an interim agreement
    for a transition period of not more than 5 years. Not later than the
    third year, we are ready to enter negotiations with them about a
    permanent solution based on Resolution 242 and 338.
        What else can we do? By violence and terror no one will make us run.
    The solution should be around the negotiation table, by talks, not by
    weapons.
        The President. The answer is the United States position has not
    changed. As I said in my statement, we support a solution based on the
    governing United Nations resolutions. But the important thing is that
    everything we say or do today sends a clear message, particularly to the
    other parties in the Middle East, that the time has come to negotiate
    peace. And the United States is prepared to be involved all the way
    through the process.
        Wolf [Wolf Blitzer, Cable News Network].

    Syria

        Q. [Inaudible]--both of you have addressed the question of bilateral
    arrangements between Israel and Syria. It seems that the Prime Minister
    in recent statements has backed away from some earlier statements that
    Israel would never go down from the Golan Heights. Is there a change?
    Would Israel be prepared to accept a complete withdrawal from the Golan
    Heights in exchange for complete peace with Syria, along the lines of
    the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement? And would the United States
    welcome that kind of separate Israeli-Syrian agreement even in advance
    of a Palestinian agreement?
        Prime Minister Rabin. Well, first, we are serious in our
    negotiations with every one of the Arab partners for the peace
    negotiations. We are ready to negotiate and reach agreement with every
    one of the partners that sit around the negotiation table with us.
        Second, peace has to be negotiated not between me, as the Prime
    Minister of Israel, and you. After all, you don't represent Syria. We
    made it clear that we accept the principle of withdrawal of the armed
    forces of Israel on the Golan Heights, to secure the recognized
    boundaries, but we'll not enter negotiations on the dimension of the
    withdrawal without knowing what kind of peace Syria offers us. Is it a
    fully fledged peace, open boundaries for movement of people and goods,
    diplomatic relations including embassies, normalization of relations?
    Will they let that peace treaty stand on its own two feet, will not be
    influenced by what happens or doesn't happen in the negotiations with
    the other Arab partners?
        Before we know that, why would I have to say how much we will
    withdraw once it is an issue to be agreed on between Syria and
    ourselves, with the assistance of the United States?
        The President. The answer to your question, from my point of view,
    is that the United States believes that the full peace process should
    resume. We hope very much that the Palestinians will come to the table.
    We would like to see all the bilaterals go forward. But if the parties
    could reach an agreement consistent with security interests and the
    governing United Nations resolutions that was their genuine agreement,

    [[Page 307]]

    would I welcome that and be prepared to support it? Yes, I would.

    The Peace Process

        Q. Mr. President, the Arabs think that you favor Israel against
    them. What are you doing to balance this situation? We know that
    Secretary Christopher has gone there, but what specifically has been
    offered to them, and how would you see a confederation of Jordan with
    the Palestinians? And also I would like to ask the response to that from
    Prime Minister Rabin.
        The President. Secretary Christopher went to the Middle East, and I
    can assure you, one of the things that he did was to say the same thing
    to everybody in every capital that he visited, to say that the United
    States wanted to be a partner in this process, but that we recognize we
    had to be a mediator, and that, in the end, the only thing that would
    make peace possible was the assurance of security that would come to the
    parties afterward.
        I believe that the other nations involved know that the United
    States has had an historic relationship of friendship with Israel, but
    also know that we can be counted upon to keep our word and to do what we
    can to support the security of all the parties if an agreement can be
    reached.
        Do you want to answer that?
        Prime Minister Rabin. I can speak only as an Israeli, and in the
    name of Israel. I believe that the government that I serve as its Prime
    Minister is the first government that accepted the principle or the
    Resolutions 242 and 338 as applicable to the achievement of peace. No
    government in the past did so, which shows that we understand that in
    peace, compromises have to be made by both sides.

    Security Issues

        Q. Mr. President, Prime Minister Rabin today spoke about raising the
    level of strategic dialog; you spoke about strategic dialog. I was
    wondering if you could elaborate what that means more, and does this
    mean greater coordination between the two countries in terms of what
    approaches to take to peace, and then bringing that to the table? Are we
    talking about a whole new approach here?
        The President. No, we're not talking about a whole new approach. Our
    two governments have some very gifted people who work on a continuous
    basis on security issues between us and facing the region. Looking ahead
    10 years down the road, we know that we have to pay greater attention to
    missile defenses; we know that we have to pay greater attention to the
    possibility of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; we know
    that in order for any agreement in the Middle East to have lasting
    impact, there will be significant, and must be, significant security
    implications flowing out of any kind of arrangements which might be
    made. And we just want to make sure that beginning now we give those
    matters the most careful attention at the appropriate level.
        This will not supplant anything that is now being done. We're very
    well satisfied with the work being done by our people now. But these
    three things, it seems to us, will shape a lot of our deliberations for
    a decade to come.

    Russia

        Q. Mr. President, can you clarify your administration's views on the
    situation in Russia today? In particular, do you believe that the
    Russian Parliament is a democratically elected institution? And if it is
    not a democratically elected institution, why would you object to its
    dissolution by Mr. Yeltsin--the rewriting of a new Russian
    Constitution--would that not be helpful?
        The President. Mr. Friedman [Tom Friedman, New York Times], those
    are great questions. But I think any answer I'd give to them might only
    complicate the decisions I might have to make in the days ahead.
        Q. It would be a great story. [Laughter]
        The President. It will be a wonderful story, and I must say those
    are questions I have, we have all posed to ourselves. But let me say
    this: I hope that everybody in America, I hope everybody in Israel, is
    pulling for the triumph of freedom and market reform in Russia.
    Democracy is an uncertain process. The Prime Minister and I have been in
    and out of office. We know that. And I don't pretend to know everything
    that's going to happen in Russia in the days and weeks ahead, and I
    don't want to say anything now which might constrict my field of
    decision in ways that would not be in the interest of the United States
    or of freedom and market reform in Russia.
        So I wish I could say more, but I can't. All I can tell you is I'm
    working like crazy to get ready for that meeting with President Yeltsin.
    I'm going to do what I can and mobilize what forces I can, public and
    private, in the United

    [[Page 308]]

    States to support the march of progress in Russia. And I'm going to hope
    and pray that all those who want the same thing will be in there pushing
    with us.
        Last question.

    North Korea

        Q. Can you give us any more insight into what the situation is in
    North Korea, whether you believe they do have nuclear capability? If so,
    where did they get it from, and what leverage the United States might
    have in addressing this issue?
        The President. I cannot answer your exact question. I can tell you
    that I, personally, and speaking for the Government, the United States
    is very concerned and very disappointed that North Korea has at least
    for the time being chosen to eject the IAEA inspectors and to withdraw
    from the international regime of which they are part.
        The board of directors of the IAEA is meeting on Wednesday. They
    will make a statement at that time, and I will make a response. There
    are 3 months still to go, and as you know, any country that wants to
    withdraw is bound for 3 months. I hope that North Korea will reconsider
    its decision. I think there is a genuine impulse among the peoples of
    North Korea and South Korea, among the peoples to see a reduction in
    tensions and an increase in commerce and communication and contact. And
    I'm very disturbed by this turn of events. But I'm hoping that it will
    not be a permanent thing. There are several weeks ahead when North Korea
    might reverse its decision. I hope they will do so, because we simply
    cannot back up on the determination to have the IAEA inspections proceed
    there.
        The answers to your questions could only be found in complete and
    thorough and ongoing investigations by the IAEA, either in North Korea
    or any other country where these questions are asked. And I'm hoping
    very, very much that they will reconsider their decision and permit the
    inspectors to come again.
        Thank you very much.

    Note: The President's sixth news conference began at 2:02 p.m. in the
    East Room at the White House.