gets in the Galilee. What a characteristic phenomenon, they are protected, completely
immune to these terrorists. Only at the civilian population, only to shed our blood,
just to kill our children, our wives, our sisters, our elderly. Such a method, so despi-
cable, terroristic. Despicable. There has been none so despicable since the days of the
S.A., the S.S. and the Gestapo [security forces in Nazi Germany].
There was never an armed organization so low, so despicable as this terrorist orga-
nization, which aims its unclean weapons against men, women and children [a refer-
ence to the Palestine Liberation Organization]. Therefore we have implemented our
right to national self-defense.
In reply to U.S. President Reagan’s letter, a very friendly letter, I explained to him:
Here the U.S. supports Britain’s actions in the Falkland Islands, or the Malvinas as
the Argentinians call them. How does Mrs. Thatcher justify it? On the basis of Article
51 of the United Nations Charter, which speaks of “The inherent right of self defense.”
[Eight thousand] miles from that country, this is a right of national self-defense?
Whereas one mile, two miles, three miles, on our doorstep, our threshold, we are
attacked and have no right to national self-defense? We have to sit by and watch the
shells falling on our brothers and sisters? It is clear that we had to implement our right
of national self-defense, and we did so. We continue to do so.
Once more, I would like to tell all peoples—for a long time, too long, the Jew
was excluded from all the laws which applied to all nations. No more. The laws which
apply to other nations will apply to our nation—to the Jewish people. The right of
self-defense accorded to all other nations is also accorded to us. No more and no less.
Since I am still on the subject of Britain, I want to return to the important and
famous newspaper, “Times,” which today published a leader attacking Israel and me,
personally, for what we have done in the north in order to protect our people in the
Galilee and in Lebanon. That is its right—we believe in freedom of the press—how-
ever, if someone attacks he has to expect a response. I wish to say:
A newspaper which supported the treachery of the Munich Agreement must be
very careful about moralizing to a small nation fighting for its life. Were we to listen
to it, we would no longer be in existence. Czechoslovakia vanished because of the
famous line of the “Times” in 1938, and the famous, or infamous lead article at the
time of Runciman’s visit to Prague. But we learned the lesson. Therefore, we are also
not taking the latest advice of the “Times,” just as we did not take its advice at the
time of Munich. It should take stock of its deeds and articles.
Mr. Speaker, I announce once again: We do not want war with Syria. From this
rostrum, I call on President [Hafiz al-] Assad to instruct the Syrian army not to harm
Israeli soldiers, and then nothing will happen to them. We actually do not want to
harm anyone. We want only one thing: That no one harm our settlements in the
Galilee any more, that our citizens in the Galilee settlements will not have to choke
in shelters day and night, that they will not have to live under the threat of sudden
death from the missile called a Katyusha. That is what we want. We do not want any
clash with the Syrian army. If we achieve the 40 kilometer line from our northern bor-
der, the job is done, all fighting will cease.
I make this appeal to the Syrian President. He knows how to keep an agreement.
He signed a cease-fire agreement with us and kept it. He did not let Syria and the ter-
rorists take action. Let him act in this spirit now in Lebanon and no Syrian soldier
will be harmed by our forces.
338 LEBANON AND SYRIA