“The U.S. and Israel’s Relationship; The Hamas Government and the Iranian Threat from an American Perspective”
United Israel Appeal Women’s Division
 Wednesday, July 26, 2006


As Delivered

Mr. Jack Smorgon, Chairman, United Israel Appeal,
Ms. Ruth Alter and Ms. Esther Frenkiel, Co-Chairs of the Women’s Division, 
Mr. Barry and Mrs. Barbara Landau, our hosts;


Distinguished guests,


Thank you for inviting me to address you this morning.  These are dark days for Israel and for peace in the Middle East, as we see Israel’s armed forces deployed in self-defense campaigns both in Gaza and southern Lebanon.  We have great concern for the innocent civilian populations on both sides of the borders.  The situation remains fluid, but we can say a few things with certainty.  We want to see the abducted soldiers returned unharmed and speedily.  We want to see the easing of those conflicts in the Middle East so that people can return to the path of negotiation, which is, in the end, the only way to any kind of peaceful solution.  We believe that a cease-fire is urgent.  It is, however, important to have conditions that will make it also sustainable.  We have a consensus on the international front for a lasting change that addresses the root causes of the violence and that addresses those who provoke this violence, Hezbollah and Hamas.  Secretary Rice has been very actively involved in talking with regional leaders.  She traveled to the region on July 24 to hold meetings with Israeli, Lebanese and Palestinian leaders.

The issues that you have asked me to speak about today, Hamas and Iran, also clearly implicate the current course of events in Lebanon.  Without the support of Iran and Syria, both Hamas and Hezbollah probably would long ago have been so marginalized, that they would be unable to threaten the stability of the entire region.  The crises of peace in the Middle East - in Palestine, in Lebanon and in dealing with Iran - are among the most critical matters of our time and there are no simple solutions at hand.  These, today, pose the greatest of challenges to Israel and to the United States.

The United States enjoys a unique friendship with Israel, based on shared values and a common vision of the world.  

The strength of the U.S.-Israel bilateral relationship was evident in February when Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni visited Washington soon after she was appointed to that important portfolio.  Minister Livni met with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to discuss bilateral relations and what they described as ”the great strength that Israel and the United States draw from each other; the shared values and the many ties of kinship.”

In reading about that meeting, I was struck by one of its symbolic aspects, which I think goes far in explaining the term “shared values.”  What are these shared values?  Freedom, democracy, and the right of our people to live in safety and security are rightly uppermost.  But another example is the capacity our countries have to recognize and benefit from the leadership of women.  The fact that our highest ranking foreign representatives are women should not be summarily dismissed as coincidence or random chance.  Governing is tough and the current slate of problems that these officials are dealing with requires great leadership and courage.

The Foreign Minister and the Secretary both provide firm stewardship of the foreign policy of our countries.  They also personify great things about Israel and the United States - for example, the fact that all citizens may contribute.  As we know, there are many places in the world where women are not able to share in, much less guide, the destiny of their country.

Over the past few months, I’ve had the opportunity to meet with a number of Jewish groups in Melbourne.  At those events I've gone into great detail discussing Iran, Israel, Palestine and issues related to our hope for sustainable peace in the Middle East.  It's very clear to me from those discussions that the Jewish community here in Melbourne is strongly bonded to Israel and cares deeply about peace.

Everyone knows that there is no country on earth that has been a stronger, closer, better advocate for the rights of Israel – or for the aspirations of the Israeli people to live in peace and prosperity and freedom –than the United States.  In fact, we’re harshly criticized for it around the world all the time.

One of the cornerstones of American foreign policy – certainly since the founding of Israel in 1948 – has been our unwavering commitment to the security and the safety of the people of Israel.  Continuing U.S. economic and security assistance acknowledges these ties.  American assistance is a tangible contribution that underscores our commitment to Israel.  In other words, the United States puts its money where its mouth is.

Our two countries also participate in military exercises.  We collaborate on military research, on weapons development programs and on counterterrorism operations.  And our economic engagement mirrors our close military connections.  As you know, the U.S. and Australia celebrated the first anniversary of our Free Trade Agreement in January.  But this year marks the 20th anniversary of the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement.

In the diplomatic arena, the major focus of U.S.-Israeli relations has been to seek an Arab-Israeli peace.  American efforts to achieve this are premised on the assurance that as Israel takes calculated risks for peace; the United States will help minimize those risks.

I think about the many crises of the past that seemed insoluble:  apartheid in South Africa, the centuries-old troubles in Ireland, and the juggernaut of worldwide communism, to name just a few.

At some point, despite the naysayers and the seeming hopelessness of the situation, there came a paradigm shift which moved these situations towards resolution.  These examples remind us that the road to peace is long and arduous.  It takes commitment to that goal, and the belief that many small increments will, at some stage, reach what columnist Thomas Friedman has called “a tipping point” when peace may be brokered.  Peace, in its first incarnation, requires vision.  The United States and other key members of the international community have such a vision for Israel, and for the greater Middle East, and it's called the Roadmap for Peace, which I know everyone here is at least partly aware of.

The Roadmap is a performance-based and goal-driven plan.  It has clear phases, timelines, target dates, and benchmarks aimed at making progress through reciprocal - or mutual - steps by the parties in a host of different areas, which include political, security, economic, humanitarian, and institution-building, all under the auspices of the Quartet - which is made up of the United States, the United Nations, Russia and the European Union when they deal collectively with the Middle East conflict.
The destination is a final and comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  But such a resolution will only be achieved by ending violence and terrorism.  It will only be realized when the Palestinian people have leadership that acts decisively against terror, and is willing to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty.  It will come about through Israel’s readiness to do what is necessary for a democratic Palestinian state to be established.  It will remain elusive until there exists a clear and unambiguous acceptance by both parties of the goals in the Roadmap for Peace.
A settlement, negotiated between the parties, will result in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state, living in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbors.

Let me tell you today that the United States still remains committed to this plan, despite those detractors who claim that it’s out of date.

Of course, the Palestinians have obligations as well.  But what can we expect from Hamas?  Who knows?  But if the events of the last three weeks are any indicator, then there is no partner for peace to be found on the other side of the table at present.  The United States has been clear that the Hamas-led government must do three things:

1)	Commit to the principles of nonviolence;
2)	 It must recognize Israel and its right to exist; and
3)	 It must accept the Palestinian Authority’s previous agreements and obligations, including the Roadmap.

In spite of the reported measures taken by others in the Quartet, the United States’ policy with respect to Hamas HAS NOT CHANGED.  Hamas is a terrorist organization and we have no contact with it, because it’s responsible for the death of hundreds of innocents.  In our judgment, Hamas has, to date, profoundly hurt the Palestinian people’s aspirations for statehood.  

Secretary Rice has said that if the Hamas-led government is going to live up to the aspirations of the Palestinians for peace, then it goes without saying that it cannot have one foot in the camp of terror and the other foot in the camp of politics.  The Palestinians themselves must now decide whether Israel will have a partner for peace.  During this ongoing hostage situation, Israel has taken the actions it deems necessary for its defense.

As I said earlier, we condemn these kidnappings and by Hezbollah and Hamas and call for the immediate and unconditional release of the Israeli soldiers.  We recognize Israel's right to defend itself.  However, we also believe it is critical that Israeli actions avoid casualties among innocent civilians and damage to civilian infrastructure.  Israel must be mindful of the humanitarian and strategic consequences of its actions, including the potential destabilization of the Lebanese government.  

Let me explain that in Lebanon the goal of the international community has been to see the central authority of the Lebanese Government extended throughout the country.  We continue to work hard through the United Nations and others to achieve that goal and to strengthen democracy there.  We also are making clear that the democratic aspirations of the Lebanese people must not be undermined by the actions of Hezbollah and its Syrian or Iranian patrons.

Relations with Iran are at an all-time low for both Israel and the United States.  Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism is well known.  And, quite frankly, Iran’s nuclear ambitions are exactly contrary to what is needed for a stable Middle East.  The international community is of one mind that a nuclear-armed Iran, in the midst of the world's most volatile region, is dangerous and destabilizing, and must not be permitted.

The United States has been very clear about its position in public, in private, and in every conceivable way.  We back the options that have been given to the Iranians for a civil nuclear program.  It is patently clear, however, that Iran is running a covert nuclear weapons development program; and that threatens the region and, indeed, the world.

Iran must recognize how serious the international community is about this issue, and we remain committed to a diplomatic solution, but will, naturally, take none of our options off the table at this point.

To date, the Iranians have given no indication at all that they are ready to engage seriously on the substance of the proposals presented by the international community.  Iran has failed to take the steps needed to allow negotiations to begin, such as suspending its enrichment of uranium and its reprocessing activities.

We are profoundly disappointed over this situation.

In this context, we have no choice but to return to the United Nations Security Council and take forward the process that was suspended over two months ago. 

As we speak, informal preparations are underway for a U.N. resolution that would make it mandatory for Iran to suspend all enrichment related and reprocessing activities, and we expect formal discussions on this grievous matter to commence very soon.  Iran's stalling game will not be allowed to go on indefinitely.

Should Iran continue to refuse to comply, then we will work for the adoption of measures under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

However, if Iran implements the decisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the UN Security Council and enters into meaningful negotiations, then we and our allies would be ready to hold back from further action in the Security Council.

The pathways of Israel and America and Israel have long been intertwined.  We have in common a desire for living in prosperity and peace within a robust democracy.

We hope someday to see a democratic Iran at peace with its neighbors and respecting the rights of its people.  We also would like to see similar tranquility in Palestine.  This, we understand, is exactly what Israel wants to see happen there as well.  We are both on the same page and our ties remain strong, as we pursue common goals of peace and security in the wider Middle East.

Thank you.