| Palestinian
National Authority Official Website Peace Process |
JULY 05, 2000
Text of Clinton Announcement
By The Associated Press
Remarks by President Clinton at a White House press conference Wednesday, as transcribed
by eMediaMillWorks Inc.:
CLINTON: Good morning. Early next week Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat will come
to Camp David. A few days before that, their negotiators will arrive to help pave the way
for this summit. The objective is to reach an agreement on the core issues that have
fueled a half-century of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
After a lengthy discussion with the two leaders and after listening to Secretary
Albright's report, I have concluded that this is the best way, indeed, it is the only way,
to move forward.
To state the task is to suggest the magnitude of the challenge. Behind the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict lie the most profound questions about beliefs, political
identity, collective fate. Etched in each side's mind are intense fears and emotions and a
deep-seated commitment to defend their people's interests. There are no easy answers and
certainly no painless ones, and, therefore, there is clearly no guarantee of success.
Why this summit and why now? While Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have made real
progress, crystallizing issues and defining gaps, the truth is they can take the talks no
further at their level. Significant differences remain, and they involved the most complex
and most sensitive of questions.
The negotiators have reached an impasse. Movement now depends on historic decisions that
only the two leaders can make. I will be there with them, and I intend to do all I can to
help them in this endeavor. But to delay this gathering, to remain stalled, is simply no
longer an option, for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as all of us have seen, knows no
status quo. It can move forward towards real peace or it can slide back into turmoil. It
will not stand still.
If the parties do not seize this moment, if they cannot make progress now, there will be
more hostility and more bitterness, perhaps even more violence. And to what end?
Eventually, after more bloodshed and tears, they will have to come back to the negotiating
table, they will have to return to face the same history, the same geography, the same
demographic trends, the same passions and the same hatreds, and, I am sure, the exact same
choices that confront them here and now.
Of course, action does have its perils, but so too does inaction.
The decisions will not come easier with time. Fundamentally, that is what I have
concluded.
The leaders have to make the decisions that are still there to be made, and the longer we
wait the more difficult the decisions are likely to become. The Israeli and the
Palestinian people have leaders now who are visionary enough, courageous enough, capable
of building a fair, just and lasting peace.
Coming here and accepting this challenge, Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat have
shown they are ready to take risk to pursue peace. The rest of the world, and especially
the rest of the region, cannot afford to be bystanders. For all those who are truly
committed to the cause of peace and to the well-being of the Israeli and Palestinian
people, now is the time to lend their support to the peacemakers.
To the people of Israel and to the Palestinian people, I would like to say this: Peace
under circumstances like these is never cost-free.
Neither side can achieve 100 percent of its goals. For the optimal solution of each party
is by definition one the other party cannot and will not accept. Negotiations, therefore,
must create an outcome that is realistic, balanced and fair, and that meets the
fundamental objectives of both sides, an outcome that strengthens the two parties rather
than weakens one of them, an outcome that accommodates both sides' vital needs and dreams,
an outcome that reconciles their competing grievances. That is the only outcome that will
permit Israelis and Palestinians to offer their children a future far different from the
past, one with more opportunity and less fear, more hope and less despair. And that, of
course, is the ultimate prize of peace.
The objective is often overshadowed, I might say, as all of you know, by the abject
dreariness of the pursuit, one that you will no doubt have occasion to comment on in the
days ahead.
The ups and down of the process, the daily hassles and disputes, the open-ended nature of
the negotiations—all these over time have blurred the vision of what it is we
are trying to achieve.
For Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat, the challenge next week will be to start
drawing the contours of the long-awaited peace, a peace that can fulfill the Israeli
people's quest for security, for recognition, for genuine reconciliation with Palestinians
and genuine acceptance in the region, acceptance in deeds as well as words; a peace that
can fulfill the Palestinian people's legitimate aspirations to determine their destiny on
their own land and to build a better future.
CLINTON: Almost seven years ago now we witnessed the historic handshake between the late
Prime Minister Rabin and Chairman Arafat. It began a process that offered the Israeli and
Palestinian people the chance to achieve what I then described as the quiet miracle of a
normal life. That is still the vision that must inspire the efforts and call forth the
commitment, courage and creativity of Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat next week.
Q: Mr. President, do you think that this is the last opportunity for peace during your
presidency? And how long will you give these negotiations?
Q: Are you talking days, weeks, what?
C: Well, the answer to the first—actually, the short answer to both questions
is, I don't know. I'll tell you what I do know. I know that Prime Minister Barak strongly
believes that the nature of this process is such that the final decisions cannot be made
except by meeting between the two leaders and that he cannot go further than he has gone
without that sort of meeting.
Chairman Arafat understands that the nature of the process is such that the final
decisions will have to be made by the two leaders, and so they're willing to give it their
best shot and they understand, too, that, as we have already seen, delay tends to make
these things worse, not better.
One of the most important judgments any political leader has to make when dealing with a
thorny problem is whether delay will make it better or worse. And occasionally, you
actually get problems where the best thing to do right now is nothing; that delay will
actually cause them to become less severe. These are not such problems. Delays only seems
to me to make them more severe.
C: So that's the answer to the first question.
The second question is, we all know what the deal is, we know what the issues are. We know
at least within a range what the options are. I think if we work hard, we can get it done
in several days. But I will give it what ever time is required as long as we're still
moving forward.
Q: Mr. President, could you describe the extent of your participation? Are you going to
move up to Camp David lock, stock and barrel for as long as it takes? And are you going to
present a U.S.—maybe a model plan that might bring these two sides together?
C: Well, I think that the less I say right now about what I'm going to do, the better. And
I will spend as much time there as I need to spend. You know, I may come back here from
time to time, depending on what else is happening, what else I need to do. We've got a lot
going on in Congress now, even though they will be gone a lot, some of the time perhaps.
But I think they will be here most of the time we'll be here, and I may have to come back.
So we'll just see. But I will be there a lot, and I'll work as hard as I need to work.
Q: ...the deadline in September—how important is that deadline?
C: Well, it's a deadline they set for themselves. And I think they all see it in terms
that are—both sides see it in terms that are different from the deadline they
set for the framework agreement. That is, they knew that there were—that there
were problems inherent in making the framework agreement that if they could overcome, they
could make the final agreement consistent with the framework agreement.
So that's one of the things, obviously, that has driven my decision here. I think that
neither of them really want to see us go by September without a resolution of this. And I
think they understand the stakes here.
Q: Mr. President, can you talk about the symbolism of the location of Camp David, what
impact at all it might have on the parties to help them bridge this—close gaps
between them?
C: Well, it is a place where, obviously, a milestone in the Middle East peace was reached,
and I hope—in that sense, I think it has to be a positive environment.
But I think they also realize that from the very beginning these were the hardest
questions. They go to the core of both sides identity and sense of themselves. Far more
difficult to resolve, with all respect, than any issues between Israel and the Egyptians
or the Jordanians or even the Syrians, although we're not there yet with the Syrians.
Everybody knows pretty much what the deal is there and that there are practical questions
there that are not nearly so charged with emotion and identity and almost national
consciousness as these are. So these are the difficult ones.
And obviously I hope that the setting will help to inspire them and to inspire us. I hope
we'll all be inspired by it.
But it's also a great place for us to be because it gives a reasonable chance to work in
quiet and without interruption and to observe the necessary discretion, without which we
won't be able to move forward.
Thank you.
Q: ... the Mexican elections, please.
C: Well, I called President Zedillo and congratulated him on what was clearly an open and
fair and well-fought election.
And I called President-elect Fox and congratulated him on his victory. We talked a little
bit about the importance of our relationship and what lies ahead. And I told him that he
would be welcome here at any time if he would come up.
Obviously he has a lot of things to do, and he'll have to make that decision. But I'd be
happy to meet with him if he would like to come up and sort of get our relationship
started.
Most of his term will unfold with the next president. But the relationship that we have
with Mexico needs to go beyond individual personalities always, because we have too much
in common and too much of a future to build together.
Thank you.
| Front Page | Back to Index |