Kissinger

World Jewish Congress luncheon, Washington, Nov. 3, 1977

[Y]

Public Statement

I came here to speak to you at the moment of ... When I left office I said that I will not speak on tactical situations for at least a year, and I am sure you will understand that I cannot for this reason go into this or that aspect of the current negotiation.

But we all know that the present situation is one that must fill all Jews with a sense of responsibility and a sense of concern. All Jews must be for peace, for no people has suffered so much from its absence as the Jewish people. And all Jews know that peace cannot rest only on professions and on verbal statements, because they have seen too much of the transitoriness of human intentions. All Jews know that in time of crisis and of frustrations they can easily become the target of popular emotions and they therefore feel deepening

the responsibility that they must not be seen as the cause of international difficulties. And yet all Jews have seen too much sufferings and too many people killed to be able to abandon their own judgment as to what is necessary for peace and for survival. And therefore the contemporary conditions are of great importance not only for the leaders of Israel but the leaders of the Jewish communities and to all individual Jews wherever they may live. This is why I take the liberty of speaking to you a little on some general reflections on contemporary conditions, as I see them. One cannot separate the destiny of Israel and the destiny of the Jewish people from the destiny of mankind. The principles applied to peace in the Middle East are the same as the principles that apply to peace anywhere else. To be sure, conditions in the Middle East are intractability and have aspects that are hard to understand for people like ours that have no experience with tragedy. But there are a number of fundamental principles that I believe Jews must stand for in all the countries in which they live, and [in America]

kissinger---22

which they can therefore defend also in relation to Israel and the
peace in the Middle East.⁹ For example, peace must reflect an equil-
ibrium of strength; no nation can entrust its destiny simply to the
good will of other states [applause]. To do this is an abdication
of statesmanship and responsibility for the future of one's country.
And therefore all foreign policy must be based on a concern for the
balance of power and on security. Therefore the Jews must stand on that
in the countries in which they live. They cannot attack the defense
programs of their own countries and stand for a strong defense
program for Israel.¹⁰ Precisely, when they also stand for the
strength of America they also must stand for the strength and the
ability to defend herself of the state of Israel. This is a necessity
that should be beyond discussion. It is why when I was in office,
whatever the difficulties, we saw to it that there was massive supply
of military equipment to Israel, and every American administration,
whatever may be the disagreements on this or that point,
in
the state of Israel as long as
it exists; it will be for all time.¹¹ Secondly, peace must be based
on justice. No people in the world has suffered as much from
arbitrariness and from injustice as the Jewish people. No Jew
anywhere can be safe except in a world that is based on some fundamental
human and moral principles. And the state of Israel can exist best
in a world in which all nations are recognized not only as tolerant
but as having a right to existence and to their expression. A just
peace is a peace that is freely accepted by all participants. A just
peace cannot be an imposed peace, and a just peace must be one in which
all nations have a stake in maintaining it and in preserving it.

kissinger---33

And therefore the process has which peace is made is almost as important as the final result. At each stage the parties must feel that it was necessary their decision and not somebody else's decision that brought about the final conclusion. Thirdly, peace must involve an element of cooperation. It is not possible to talk about peace when there is no exchange, when there is only the most grudging recognition. The problem in the Middle East is to go beyond a balance of power to a sense of which all the people of the area feel that they belong and can cooperate. Fourth, it is important to know that there are some matters that go beyond intentions and cannot be defined by intentions. I mean by it that there are some realities that develop their own logic. It was said for example that the fundamental decisions in the Algerian war was the first meeting between the National Liberation Front of Algeria and de Gaulle; once that principle was accepted, everything else flowed from it more or less automatically. I believe and I have always stated that separate Arab state on the West Bank, whatever the declaration, whatever the intention, inevitably must have as its objectives that cannot be compatible with the tranquility of the Middle East. It has nothing to do with professions, guarantees, assurances, promises; this is inherent in the logic of the situation. Fifth, as I have already indicated in my example of the French relationship with Algeria, procedures are sometimes as important as substance because there are some procedural decisions that imply the substance. It makes a great deal of difference who participates in the negotiations, what the purposes of the various countries are, and in what sequence issues are addressed.

Kissinger-- 444

These are not trivial issues; they are central issues. I will confine
myself to a statement of general principles and not answer the
[of whom to] issues each of us except to say I believe that for peace in the
Middle east to be lasting it must be achieved in the closest cooperation
between Israel and the United States. It is not enough to get
grudging acceptance and constant need for reassurance. It is
essential that there is real understanding of what is possible and
what is unreasonable, to understand the real concerns of both sides.
We are a superpower in the United States, but for Jews in general and
for Israelis in particular the margin of safety are very narrow. The
United States can afford certain experiments because if we are wrong
our worst penalty is to redouble our efforts. For
Israel certain experiments cannot be tried, Israeli leaders get
only one guess. If they are wrong it may involve the survival of
their people. To be sure, Jews in America and around the world
can assure their interests best by understanding the interests of
the country in which they live, but similarly the United States and
other countries have an understanding of the insecurity
and the traumas of a people that has survived barely the Holocaust
and has not known a day of peace in its entire history and knows
that in the final analysis it is no good to any country unless it is
meaningful to itself. It therefore must maintain its faith in itself
and its confidence that it is a master of its own destiny and not
just the protector of some other country, however well-intended that country may be.