| |
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Interview with Federal Foreign Minister Steinmeier in al-Hayat on the Mideast peace process published on January 25, 2007 You have been six times to the Middle East in the past year; Chancellor Angela Merkel is planning a visit to the region soon. What does the German government hope to achieve, and what role do you think Germany could play to help move forward the peace process in the Middle East? For Europe, the Middle East is a strategic region. To begin with, our religions have the same roots and we share common history. As direct neighbours, your security is of direct concern to us and we thus cannot afford to remain indifferent vis-à-vis a conflict that has been going on far too long. Germany, as you know, has longstanding and close relations with all the countries in the region. And: our history leaves us with a special responsibility towards the State of Israel and the Jewish people. During the last couple of years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has developed to the worse. We clearly need stronger and continuous international engagement, and the best way for ensuring both is through the Quartet, composed of the UN, Russia, the USA and the European Union. This is why the German government has been working to re-energize the Quartet process for the last couple of months. As you know, we will be holding a Quartet meeting of foreign ministers in Washington on 2 February, and we certainly hope that this meeting will contribute to a political process back into peace talks. Many people in the Middle East do not understand your policy – i.e. the European Union policy – regarding Hamas in Palestine. You were calling for democratic elections, and when the Palestinians elected Hamas, you chose to boycott its government, stop the flow of foreign monies needed to pay the salaries of Palestinian employees, etc… Can you explain this policy of yours? We need keep two things separate: After the elections last January, the German government acknowledged that it considered the elections free and fair and accepted their result. Does this, however, mean that we are obliged to use our taxpayers’ money to fund a government whose policy we consider irresponsible and dangerous? No! We are ready to cooperate with the Palestinian government as soon as it recognises Israel, accepts the agreements that have been signed in the past, and renounces the use of violence. We have not, however, stopped our assistance to the Palestinian people – on the contrary: Germany is fully aware of the hardship people suffer, especially in Gaza. That is why Europe has not only continued to provide aid, it has increased its aid! In 2006 alone, overall European financial contributions amounted to almost 600 million Euros. Of these, 200 million Euros were disbursed to support the heavily affected employees in the health and education sectors. Do you fear things in Palestine are now heading in the direction of a civil war, in light of the daily clashes between Hamas and Fatah supporters? And do you support President Abbas’s call for early elections? I am indeed very worried by the growing violence and the ongoing kidnappings in the Palestinian territories. The security situation must not be allowed to deteriorate further – certainly not into all out civil war, which would be a nightmare! All Palestinian factions must live up to their responsibility; the citizens of the West Bank and Gaza have suffered far too long already. As to early elections: For months, President Abbas has tried to form a national unity government, based on the Quartet criteria – to no avail. He is currently undertaking last-ditch-efforts and I commend him for the energy he has put into this vital question. We owe it to him to await the outcome of his efforts and to accept the conclusions he will draw at the end. How can the peace process start again? Is there a clear German vision for that, taking into account that you are now the head of the EU? I believe that all responsible forces agree as to what we need to achieve at the end of the day: two democratic states – Israel and Palestine – living side by side in peace and security. The decisive question is: How do we manage to get back into a process that allows both sides to sit down and address the remaining stumbling blocks? In my view, as a first step, we must try to take concrete measures that improve the security for Israeli citizens and visibly change the daily lives of Palestinian citizens for the better: a complete ceasefire – i.e. no more firing of Qassam rockets into Israeli territory , greater freedom of movement for Palestinians, the release of Palestinian tax monies, etc. First steps into this direction have been taken, following the meeting between Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas. They must now be fully implemented. I believe that the Quartet can help the parties to continue in this direction. Then – once we have built the necessary confidence – we should aim at creating a climate in which bolder steps can be taken. Is it true that Germany has been trying to play a role between the Syrians and the Israelis in order to revive the peace talks between them? Have you passed any messages from the Syrians to the Israelis, and is there any hope of renewed talks between the two sides? We have not played any mediation role between Israel and Syria. As to the future: I do believe that Syria can be an important player in the region. I don’t believe, however, that Damascus’ current policy serves its legitimate interests. President Assad recently told me that Syria wants to be part of the solution, not of the problems in the Middle East. That is a positive statement, but is has to be matched by deeds: Full acceptance of Lebanese sovereignty and a constructive and positive approach to the Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts are two key elements in this respect. I hope for Syria’s leaders to show the necessary wisdom and courage, and play a constructive role in the future. This would open a broad array of options for Syria. Is Germany playing any role now in the negotiations between Israel and Hezbollah to free the two (may be dead) soldiers kidnapped on the Lebanon-Israel borders last summer? As you know, the German government, in the past, has tried to be of help in humanitarian matters wherever possible. I am not at liberty, however, to comment on the case you refer to. Who do you think is to blame for the war in Lebanon in July-August last year: Israel or Hezbollah? And is there any justification for Israel to bomb Lebanon’s infrastructures during the summer? The confrontation last summer was clearly started by Hezbollah, who in blunt violation of UN-resolutions kidnapped two Israeli soldiers from Israeli territory. There is no justification whatsoever for this action. During the subsequent fighting, we underlined our conviction that all military action must be proportionate and spare innocent civilians. I would like to draw your attention to another consequence of Hezbollah’s attack: In Israeli public opinion, the result was that more and more people believe that any withdrawal of Israeli troops will not lead to peace, but to further violence. Israel withdrew from south Lebanon – Hezbollah attacked. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip – Kassam rockets continue to be fired. How to you expect any Israeli government to convince its people that withdrawal from occupied territories is a recipe for peace? Those who justify their attacks by continued occupation don’t understand that they are actually sabotaging the chances of further withdrawal. Lebanon’s government seems to be locked in a power struggle with the opposition (mainly Hezbollah and general Aoun’s supporters). Does Germany support the government of Mr. Seniora? And do you agree with the Lebanese government’s claim that Syria is behind the opposition’s movement to topple it? First of all: The question is not whether I personally prefer this or that government. The point is: In a democracy, you have to stick to democratic procedure in changing elected governments. I personally admire Prime Minister Seniora for the courage and responsibility he has shown during the bitter conflict in summer. And I think people should not underestimate the role he played – and continues to play – in rallying international support for Lebanon. Second: I am gravely concerned by the ongoing domestic crisis in Lebanon. We must not risk renewed factional violence; the Lebanese people have been suffering through too many years of violence and war, have witnessed too many political assassinations, and desperately need peace in order to rebuild their country. We must not permit a situation where Lebanese citizens once again ask themselves whether their children have a future in the country! Third: I am convinced that the current crisis can only be resolved through dialogue between the government and the opposition. This is a question only for the Lebanese people and their political leaders to decide. Lebanon’s neighbours must accept its sovereignty. Germany did not support the US-led action against Iraq in 2003. Would you agree with those who blame America for Iraq’s miserable situation nowadays, and do you think Iraq is now in the middle of a civil war? Germany opposed the war against Iraq for good reasons and, sadly, we today see that many of the concerns we voiced have materialized. In view of the daily bloodshed and increasing ethnic and religious violence, however, I do not think it adequate to enter into a discussion of “who is to blame”. Rather, we must focus on how to build a secure, stable and united Iraq. Germany and Europe will continue to support the Iraqi government in its efforts to reconstruct and stabilize the country. But I am convinced that the key to a united, federal and democratic Iraqi nation lies first and foremost with the people of Iraq themselves. It is up to them to agree on the principles of coexistence and reach a political consensus on their common future. We stand ready to support all efforts to bring about national reconciliation and dialogue. Do you support a quick withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq? Do you think America should put a timetable for its presence there? The primary objective in Iraq must be to stabilise the country, maintain its territorial integrity and allow the Iraqi people to lead a decent and secure life again. How best to achieve this goal is something that must be agreed upon by the Iraqi government and the coalition forces. I think we all agree, the US included, that eventually, responsibility for Iraq’s security should be with the democratically elected government and Iraq’s security forces. I do not have the impression that any of the countries contributing troops in Iraq want to leave their soldiers longer there than necessary. Would you agree with those who say that Iraq is now a central part of the American war on terror, and therefore cannot be lost? And would you say the American action there has weakened Al-Qaida or helped it becoming stronger instead? What do you mean by “cannot be lost”? There are 23 million Iraqi citizens who crave for the murderous bloodshed to stop. They have a right to live in peace and security, and should not have to worry each and every day which cousin or brother will be found murdered in the morning – whether by al-Qaida operatives or other militias! Building a secure and prosperous Iraq therefore is not merely part of any “war on terror”, but an obligation towards its people. What do you think of the manner in which the execution of President Saddam Hussein was carried out? I believe there is a risk that the timing of the execution and the way it was carried out might turn Saddam Hussein into a martyr in the eyes of his followers. It remains to be seen, however, what the effect will be in the long run. Our position is clear: we oppose capital punishment under all circumstances. We have no illusions, however, as to the character of Saddam Hussein’s regime, which brutally oppressed its own population for decades. Thousands of innocent people were killed and tortured, many disappeared – and we should never forget their pain and suffering. Many see Iraq as becoming divided into three main sectarian components: Sunni Arab, Shia Arab and Kurdish. Some politicians in Washington have been supporting publicly dividing Iraq along these three main sectarian components. Does Germany have a view on that, and do you support the division of Iraq into three federal components (in light of the fact that your country in also made of different federal states)? Germany strongly believes in the territorial integrity of Iraq – any breaking up of the country would carry incalculable risks and endanger regional stability. This does not prevent federal structures. But don’t misunderstand the concept of federalism: It’s about diversity in unity, not a first step towards the division of a country. Are you part of the American war on terror? And how do you explain your involvement in the US-led operations in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al-Qaida, and at the same time your refusal to participate in similar operations in Iraq? Global terrorist activities and networks, unfortunately, are a reality today that we, as politicians who are responsible for the safety of our citizens, have to face – whether we like it or not. We have to defend ourselves against this threat, including by military means, and you have cited Afghanistan as an example where the German military is involved. The very example of Afghanistan shows, however, that military means alone are not enough to fight the root causes of terrorism. We need comprehensive political measures, too – such as an inclusive political dialogue and economic development. As you might recall, it was in Germany that the international community started its civil commitment for Afghanistan with the Petersberg Conference in 2001. There has been a lot of talk about the actions of your Isaf troops in Kabul (the infamous incident of ‘playing’ with the scull)? What action has been taken against those soldiers involved in that incident, and can you assure us that your government will never tolerate any similar actions by your troops again? The whole German government – and the German public at large – have unanimously reacted with abhorrence to these acts that shocked us all. We have never and will never tolerate such behaviour. Disciplinary inquiries against the soldiers concerned are under way. Does Germany support the idea of freeing the Bulgarian nurses in Libya and in return the UK sends the Libyan convicted bomber Mr. Abd Al-Basit Al-Megrahi to a Muslim country in order to serve the rest of his sentence? Is this an option you would be happy to discuss with the Libyans in order to find a solution for the nurses issue? I strongly take issue with comparing two cases that have nothing in common! Our position with regard to the imprisoned Bulgarian nurses – and the Palestinian doctor, whom we should not forget – is crystal clear: We want to see them free as quickly as possible. We have serious doubts as to the judicial proceedings so far. And we will do everything in our power to get them home. At the same time, let me stress that we do feel strongly with the victims of the terrible AIDS-epidemic that has endangered the lives of so many children in Benghazi. Since 2005, the EU has pledged 2 million Euros in humanitarian aid; international companies have added another 750.000. With these monies, we have contributed to establishing a therapy centre in Benghazi, have trained personnel, supported awareness-raising and a national AIDS-campaign, and have enabled infected children to come to Europe for treatment. I personally went to Benghazi last November to visit the centre, to which we have granted further national funding. What happened in Benghazi is a tragedy for Libya and above all for the infected children and their families. I simply do not believe – and there is plenty of scientific evidence for this – that the nurses and the Palestinian doctor are in any way to blame. Link
|
|
 Newsletters
 Printer-Friendly
Page
Email This Article |
||
|
|||||
|
|||||
