Statement by Mr. Abdel Halim Khaddam, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Syria, to the People’s Assembly regarding President Anwar Sadat’s visit to Israel.

Mr. President,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Our nation is currently facing a critical, decisive, and perilous phase in its national struggle against the Israeli enemy. This danger became evident through the visit of the Egyptian president to Jerusalem, its aftermath, and the potential consequences that may ensue.

As the immediate Arab reaction transitions from shock and disbelief to anger and apprehension about the future, the Arab nation is now gaining a clearer and more sensitive understanding of the events surrounding the Egyptian President’s visit to Jerusalem.

The question arises: Why did the Egyptian president choose to visit the enemy? And why did he choose this particular time?

We can observe a growing global consensus that supports the Arabs in their just struggle to reclaim their occupied lands and secure the rights of the Palestinian people. As this international campaign intensifies, so does the pressure and isolation imposed on the enemy and Israel. This places the enemy in a challenging situation, where it cannot afford to disregard world public opinion or overlook the developments in the Arab and international arenas. These developments undermine its ability to implement its plan, which is based on the following points:

1. Resolving the Palestinian question through a just and equitable solution.
2. Establishing normal, peaceful, and mutually beneficial economic, political, and cultural relations.
3. Seeking a viable settlement for the occupied territories of Egypt and Syria within the framework of the Israeli security concept.

Despite the enemy’s persistent efforts to enhance its military capabilities and break international isolation, the Arab nations have persevered, albeit gradually, on a progressive path towards attaining their objectives. This commitment is clearly demonstrated in the resolutions of the Algiers and Rabat Summits, which emphasize:

1. The complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem.
2. Ensuring the inherent national rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to return and exercise self-determination.

The Arab stance continues to evolve, reflecting a steadfast determination to overcome the challenges and advance towards achieving a just and lasting resolution:

1. The Arabs’ economic power is steadily growing.
2. Significant strides have been made in progress and the eradication of backwardness.
3. There is a heightened realization of the importance of Arab unity and a unified Arab stance.
4. World public opinion increasingly shows clear support for Arab rights and objectives.

Despite the challenges present in the Arab arena, such as internal divisions, events in Lebanon, and the expanding interests of Qatar, these positive developments have transpired in favor of the Arab nations. It is worth noting that the country’s Arab and international policies, guided by decisions from party conferences, leadership resolutions, and directives from the President of the Republic, have played a vital role in the Arab advancements achieved during the previous phase. Our emphasis on the national dimensions of the conflict, the significance of Arab solidarity, and our efforts to win over world public opinion all contribute as positive factors towards these accomplishments.

Mr. President,

The enemy has consistently been alert to these developments. While it is expected for the enemy to work towards implementing its policies and goals, it is not normal to find individuals within the Arab arena who serve and aid the enemy in achieving its objectives. The enemy has devised its tactics, which can be outlined as follows:

1. Actively working to sow division among the Arabs and exacerbate divisions in the Arab stance.
2. Creating a sense of despair, powerlessness, and an inability to effectively confront the enemy.
3. Attempting to shift the blame away from itself and unload the burden of hostility onto others.
4. Removing one of the forces of confrontation from the conflict scene, leading to adverse consequences on the moral and material state of the Arab world.
5. Continually posing the threat of using force.

Consequently, numerous international efforts have been made to assist Israel in implementing this plan, with particular emphasis on President Anwar Sadat. The first attempt succeeded in breaking the initial engagement after the October war, followed by the second attempt through the Sinai Agreement, and finally by implicating him in the act of visiting Jerusalem.

This visit to the enemy has resulted in the following outcomes:

1. The enemy has successfully achieved the cessation of hostilities, resulting in the removal of the Egyptian government and the establishment of realistic reconciliation and normal relations.
2. The recognition of the Israeli state and Jerusalem as its capital by Kassab is a realistic and legally recognized act. Visiting a hostile state as a head of state, showing respect to the Israeli flag, embracing those who displaced our people and occupied our land, delivering a speech in the Knesset, laying a wreath on the grave of an unknown Israeli soldier, and engaging in direct communication and contacts all signify a realistic and legal recognition.
3. To instigate severe divisions within the Arab world. It is anticipated that this event will not pass without a sharp and intense confrontation throughout the country.
4. The state of war persists, and Arab lands are still under occupation. The question of Palestine has not received the minimum guarantees for resolution.
5. To deliver a strong insult to the Arab nation by having an Arab president undertake this visit.
6. To alleviate the international isolation imposed on Israel. It is undeniable that following the visit of the President of Egypt to Jerusalem, many countries will no longer hesitate to restore broken relations.

Mr. President, gentlemen,

The Israelis are acutely aware that resolving the Palestinian issue and achieving the Israeli security doctrine can only be accomplished through the establishment of normal relations. Therefore, the focus of Israel has been directed towards this goal, as it will enable them to gain complete control over the Arab world in economic, cultural, and political aspects. The Arabs will essentially become a workforce in the Israeli economy, much like the current situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

One of the primary objectives of global Zionism is to control the economy of the Middle East, including the Arab economy. This will be achieved through various means. Under the guise of normal peaceful relations, the Arab citizens, whether workers, farmers, professionals, traders, or intellectuals, will be reduced to mere instruments that serve the Israeli economy. On the other hand, from the Israeli perspective, a state of peace entails opening the region to millions of Jewish immigrants worldwide, allowing them to emigrate and acquire land in the Arab world, following the precedent set in Palestine. The lands in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt, populated by Jewish immigrants, will serve as a foundation for Israel’s expansion, aimed at establishing a Jewish state spanning from the Nile to the Euphrates.

From this perspective, we need to examine the gravity of the Egyptian president’s visit to Jerusalem and the policies he is implementing. By doing so, he has accomplished, with the assistance of Arab hands, what “Israel” has failed to achieve in previous decades. The plan was not unveiled during the visit itself but through its underlying context and subsequent events. This becomes evident from the following points:

1. President Sadat has undermined the unity of the Arab position outlined by the decisions of the Arab Summit, which not only established goals but also defined the methods to achieve them. In doing so, he attempted to eradicate the national dimensions of the conflict.
2. Yesterday, the Egyptian President announced the initiation of what he referred to as a preparatory meeting, aimed at furthering the invitation to visit Israel as part of the implementation of the agreed-upon plan.
3. During an interview with the American television station “N.B.C.”, the Egyptian president declared his intention to establish a bilateral agreement with Israel, asserting that this agreement does not contradict a comprehensive settlement.
4. He embraced the Israeli security doctrine, both in his speech and subsequent statements. It is noteworthy that the Zionist and pro-Zionist media worldwide have focused on President Sadat’s speech, highlighting his commitment not to sign a unilateral peace agreement and his affirmation of adherence to Arab territories and the Palestinian cause. This serves as an attempt to deceive Arab public opinion, divert attention from the visit’s objectives and underlying context, and shift people’s focus towards the speech itself.

These entities have overlooked the fact that the Arab citizen, driven by their national sentiments and sensitivity towards the Arab-Israeli conflict, cannot be deceived for the following reasons:

1. During his press conference, the Egyptian president, when asked about his opinion on the speeches delivered in the Knesset, responded that the content of those speeches does not reflect the reality. He emphasized that the real discussions take place in closed meetings. With these words, he aimed to reassure Israelis that certain phrases do not carry significant weight.
2. The issue at hand is not solely about a speech. If that were the case, it could have been addressed through the United Nations. However, the true gravity lies in the dangerous implications of an Arab president’s visit to Jerusalem and the agreements reached during the preparations for this visit.
3. In any case, it did not take long from the time of the speech and pledges until the Egyptian president revealed the next phase in his address. This occurred yesterday before the Egyptian People’s Assembly, where he announced the invitation of Israelis to Cairo under the pretext of a working committee. Additionally, he announced his intention to sign a bilateral agreement with Israel in front of the television station “N.B.C.”
4. The Egyptian president has renounced his commitments to the Palestinian issue by declaring his abandonment of the principle of PLO representation for the Palestinian people. Moreover, he accepted the establishment of a local administration under Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza.
5. The most concerning aspect of the visit is the removal of Egypt from the conflict arena and the pursuit of a policy that has generated a profound state of division within the Arab world.

Mr. President, gentlemen,

the Zionist media and their supporters are attempting to present the visit of the Egyptian President and the actions he has taken or may take as a bold and courageous step towards peace. In light of this, one must pose the question: Why is President Sadat hailed as brave for his visit to Israel, while Begin was not labeled as a coward for not declaring his acceptance of relinquishing land and recognizing the rights of the Palestinian people?

Does courage lie in making a decision against one’s own nation, its interests, and goals? Or is true courage found in confronting the enemy and addressing them in service of the nation and its objectives?

If such a step is deemed courageous, those who assign that label should reassess history and consider figures like Churchill, de Gaulle, Stalin, and Tito as cowards, simply because they did not personally visit Berlin to negotiate with Hitler. They should also reevaluate individuals like Marshal Petain, who faced condemnation by the French people after World War II, despite his actions being far less significant compared to those of the President of Egypt.

The Egyptian Penal Code includes a criminal penalty that can be applied to individuals who engage in contact with “Israel” or Israelis. Numerous individuals have been convicted under this provision. However, should we now consider all those who were convicted as brave?

Gentlemen, it is well known that we hold a deep affection for our brothers in Egypt and hold great respect for its people and its army, acknowledging their historical role in our national struggle. We have consistently made efforts to stand alongside Egypt in the fight for the cause of our Arab nation.

Based on this sentiment, the President of the Republic endeavored to persuade President Sadat, during his recent visit to Damascus, to reconsider his decision to visit “Israel” for the sake of Egypt and its role.

Out of concern for the people of Egypt, we felt a profound sense of sadness, hurt, and bitterness when we witnessed the Egyptian President on television greeting the Israeli flag, embracing Meir, and holding the hands of Dayan and Sharon.

For the dignity and pride of Egypt, we experienced sorrow and pain when we witnessed the President of Egypt laying a wreath on the grave of an Israeli soldier who had killed Egyptians, Syrians, Palestinians, and other Arabs.

In the interest of Egypt, the people of Egypt, the dignity of Egypt, and the role of Egypt, our hearts were filled with sadness when we saw the President of Egypt in the captured Arab Jerusalem recognizing the enemy and shaking his hand, embracing him, thus erasing many years of pain, sacrifice, and bitterness.

What was the benefit ?

Did this visit serve the goals of our nation for a just peace?

Did this visit help establish a just, lasting, and honorable peace? Was President Sadat able to restore Palestinians’ national rights in Palestine, or will Sinai be restored to Egypt through the path he has taken?

We are deeply saddened by President Sadat’s eventual fall on a path that we had not hoped would occur.

Betting on peace does not mean surrendering all the cards and weapons to the enemy, but rather taking control of them.

Gentlemen,

If the Israelis, due to the pressure of Arab solidarity, global pressure, and the possibility of a military escalation, remain uncompromising in their positions, continuing their expansionist and aggressive practices, how can we envision President Sadat’s policy?

Under this policy, he abandoned the Arab nation and its solidarity, leading to a profound state of discord in the Arab arena, and publicly renounced the use of all means, including the armed forces, to liberate the land. How can we expect him to act under such circumstances?

Mr. President, gentlemen,

What is required of us to address the emergency circumstances resulting from the visit of the Egyptian President to the occupied territories is as follows:

1. Mobilizing Arab public opinion regarding the significant risks to our national destiny.
2. Establishing a unified Arab stance on a comprehensive strategy aimed at: a. Rejecting the outcomes of Sadat’s visit and the overarching plan behind it. b. Ensuring the widest Arab solidarity on this stance. c. Emphasizing the nationalist nature of the conflict with the Israeli enemy. Therefore, the responsibility to confront this phase will always remain an Arab responsibility.

Within these principles, the Syrian government will initiate a series of contacts and meetings with brotherly and friendly countries, as well as various international powers, including the upcoming mini-summit and People’s Congress scheduled to be held in Libya in the next few days.

The circumstances surrounding us are not easy, but rather extremely complex. Regardless of the challenges we face, and without undermining their significance, we are confident that we can overcome them. We are fighting for a cause rooted in truth and justice, firmly believing that our nation, which has endured centuries of injustice and aggression, has the strength to overcome all obstacles.