(2 of 5)
A. We have asked ourselves this question many tunes. One of the main reasons is that we do not have voters in the U.S. to elect a President. However, there have been American Presidents who have dealt with Middle East problems in the light of American interests rather than in the light of Israeli interests as imposed by the Zionist lobby in the U.S. Everybody remembers President Eisenhower and credits him with such a stand.
When I say that the main reason is Jewish votes that presidential candidates endeavor to win, this does not mean that I can justify the attitude of American Administrations. Candidates anywhere in the world conduct campaigns on the basis of the interests of the whole country and not just the interests of a certain group, especially when such a group works for the sake of another country and at the expense of the interests of its own. Nobody is un aware of the fact that the Zionist lobby in the U.S. works foremost for Israel and not for the interests of the U.S. Therefore, an American President who heeds the ambitions of such a group is not primarily concerned with the interests of the U.S.
Q. But if you had recognized Israel as a fact, would you not have had a greater influence on American opinion?
A. Why are we asked to give everything? Why not stop the flow of billions of dollars to Israel? Why not stop shipments of American weapons to Israel? Why is it not required to tell the American Jew that he should only be an American Jew, in the same way as an American Christian is only that, an American Muslim only that? Our view is that the American, whether he is Jewish, Christian or Muslim, should be an American. Only then will the U.S. have an objective view [of the Middle East] and work for genuine peace.
Peace is not mere words. Peace is not wishful thinking. It has a tangible foundation. Had the U.S. really wanted to bring about peace, it would not have given such tremendous aid to Israel, because this has tipped the balance in the area. Do you believe that peace can be achieved while Israel continues to behave like a big power in the region? Any such belief is lacking in logic and objectivity.
Let us look at what happened following the Camp David accords. Egypt represented at least half the Arab force facing Israel. The U.S. always claimed that it supplied Israel with weapons and money in order to strike a balance between Israel and the Arab forces. After the departure of Egypt from the Arab ranks following the Camp David accords, the U.S. was supposed to cut its aid to Israel, and Israeli military forces were supposed to be cut down as well. Instead, the opposite happened. We Arabs lost at least half of our force, and yet American aid to Israel even increased. So, how can we say that this served the purpose of peace?
After the war in Lebanon, I received a delegation from the American Congress, and in discussing aid with them I said, "You offer us only talk about peace, and while you talk to us about peace you will be debating in Congress a few days from now [proposals for] military and economic aid to Israel estimated at billions of dollars. Don't you see that your talk is unbalanced, if on the one hand you offer us nice words about peace but on the other hand you offer the Israelis tanks, artillery, aircraft and dollars? Where is the logic in all this?"