Transcription
Israel's strikes against Qatar in pursuit of Hamas leaders, criticized by many countries including the US and UK. Qatar becomes the seventh country to be struck by Israel in the past year or so, along with Lebanon, Syria, Palestinian territories, Iran, Yemen, and Tunisia, including the aid flotilla. Just in the past few hours, Israel has conducted more strikes on the Yemen capital. Many of these actions have in turn brought international condemnation and huge public protests. The UK, along with France, Belgium, and Canada, is likely within weeks to recognize a Palestinian state. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen used her State of the Union speech today to announce the European Commission will sanction extremist ministers and violent settlers and pause bilateral payments. President Herzog, we have a lot to talk about, even more than it seemed 24 hours ago. Although I don't necessarily agree with the way you describe the picture. We can come on to that. This is a discussion. I wanted though to start with Qatar as the most recent. Israel struck Qatar, hoping to kill the Hamas leaders, but they're there with US knowledge and endorsement and are the negotiators for a potential ceasefire. So, should we conclude that Israel does not want such a ceasefire? What Israel wants most is to bring back the hostages. And the key to changing the entire vista of the region and the future of the region and getting out of this horrific situation, which we've endured for the last two years, is getting the hostages back home. Today, two hostages, these are Gali and Ze'ev Berman, two brothers, 28 years old. They're from Kibbutz Nir Oz. They, uh, this is a picture of them touring Britain. They are wonderful, wonderful brothers who have been abducted and kidnapped, and their fate is unclear since October 7th. So many countries, many, many countries, President Herzog, have called for the release of the hostages, for Hamas to return them. Um, but the hostage families seem dismayed by this attack on Qatar, saying that Israel is destroying the negotiations that might have brought a ceasefire. So, let's speak about the negotiations to bring back the hostages. Israel has accepted every proposal in almost for the last year or so, every proposal that was laid down by the mediators. Israel has accepted the whole notion that was led by the United States, including with other parties, meaning the Qataris and the Egyptians. And then we were faced time and time again with either a refusal or endless procrastination by Hamas. For example, in the last few months, you're probably going to ask me also about the humanitarian situation because of the way it happens, but I have to answer because of the Hamas's feeling that they had the upper hand publicly in their image war. They decided not to move on any proposal. Now, I could attest to the fact because I'm exposed to intelligence all the time that Yahya Sinwar, whose hands are filled with the blood of thousands of Israelis on October 7th, who's the head of Hamas sitting in Qatar, he kept on refusing or saying yes with a poison pill that looks like a slime, endless slime that doesn't end. We want a deal and we want to finish the war, and we say we are ready to exit the war with a full hostage deal and a ceasefire, but for that, you need Hamas to say yes.
No, no, I I want to come on to some of the points that you're raising, but but you have to understand if you want me to explain the situation for a change, because in England, I understand that there is a very strong one streak of thought, but I'm trying to present a different streak to a very decent nation that should listen to that streak. For example, Hamas has a its decision-making process requires consent. All you need is one person to say no, and there's no deal. And if you want to move on, you have to remove some of the people if they are not willing to get to a deal because that impacts.
President, we're here primarily to talk about Israel and its aims and its motives in this. You say though you were exposed to all kinds of intelligence briefings. Did you know about the Qatar strike? No, I did not know. I was in the plane to England.
So let's bring ourselves to England. You've just come from Downing Street. The UK has said, which Israel does not want. UK has said that it will recognize a Palestinian state within a few weeks from now at the UN General Assembly, unless Israel makes progress towards a ceasefire, resolves the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and commits to a peace process leading to a Palestinian state. Is Israel going to do those things?
So where we had a very frank and open discussion, me and Prime Minister Starmer at 10 Downing. It was a meeting between allies, but it was a tough meeting. It was a meeting that was, you know, I mean, things were said that were tough and strong, and clearly we can argue because when allies meet, they can argue. We are both democracies. We both understand the threat from the jihadists. Prime Minister reiterated, and of course, I couldn't agree more, that Hamas is a terror organization that must be removed. But we're doing, but we discussed it at length, including the fact that we believe that a unilateral resolution regarding a Palestinian state will be adverse and negatively affect any future process because it will be dangerous. It won't help one Palestinian, one hostage, and can be adversely interpreted by Hamas.
Come on to that, because this is more than an argument with the UK, isn't it? One of your allies is absolutely sanctioning ministers, is withdrawing arms licenses, its ministers, the UK government getting up to condemn what Israel is doing. Are you concerned that Israel is becoming a pariah state?
So, we argue vehemently with the British government and with other governments. I will say, of course, that Israel is a very open-minded democracy. We will go to elections the latest next October. Our nation debates on every issue that you can imagine. We have demonstrators all over the country all the time. That's what democracies do. It is the legitimate right of our government, the way it was formed, to pursue its own ideology. Not necessarily one has to agree with it, but one has to understand that if you sanction Israeli elected officials in a free, open society and democracy that were fully approved also by our legal system, you're actually hurting Israeli democracy, and it's not the right thing to do. It looks like a simple excuse. You know what? The way it's perceived, it's perceived as if if you don't agree with British opinion, with the government of Britain, then we will punish you with the declaration of a Palestinian state. Will that bring peace? No. Unfortunately, no. And may I say, I truly believe in the fact that we should reach peace with the Palestinians. I've said it all my life. I believe in it till now. I believe that the regional developments are so vital that they can also bring with them the development with the Palestinians. But for that, you need to bring the hostages back home, and you need to create a different future for Gaza without Hamas.
We will come on indeed to those points about the future, which I hope are more hopeful. But this isn't just the UK. This is Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway. Others have joined. Uh, in June, they put out a statement about these two Israeli ministers, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, saying they have incited extremist violence, violence, serious abuses of Palestinian human rights. This is appalling and dangerous. These actions are not acceptable. That's the big mistake of all of these countries. They are making a huge mistake about who's their friend, who's their ally. All of these countries are fighting here to defend the free world. Israel is at the frontier of fighting jihadist civilization. Your friends and allies are calling on you to stop. We are defending Europe. We are defending Western values and the free world with the blood and the tears of our sons and daughters and families. That's what we're doing. We're fighting an aggressive, barbaric enemy that has butchered, slaughtered, burnt, raped our citizens, and say that we want Israel out. We have not attacked seven countries. We were attacked from seven corners of the earth by ballistic missiles, by the most advanced weapons supplied by Iran to the proxies who want to eradicate.
What I'm going to bring us on to though, to defend ourselves, and the countries I've mentioned, and many others, have never contested, indeed have supported Israel's right to defend itself, but not want us to do it in a different way. So they are asking you to stop. Your friends and allies are calling on you to stop. Is it not time to stop?
We said we are willing to stop. Prime Minister Netanyahu, the government agreed, laid out a five-point plan saying we want to stop, and there will be a day after. And I sincerely hope that the efforts of Jared Kushner and Tony Blair and others under the auspices of President Trump will bring forward the day after. But for the day after, let's be pragmatic about it. Everybody says the day after without Hamas, who exactly will take Hamas out? Who will send his daughters and sons to fight Hamas to get Hamas out? One has to be to understand that we are the ones who are doing the work. Just like Counselor Emerich said about Iran. He said, Israel is doing the dirty work for the West. We are not, unfortunately, on the day after, not in reality, and not in this conversation yet. We are on the day that we are now.
And I want to ask you about two points of Israel's response. As I said, many, many countries, not contesting in any way Israel's right and need to defend itself and to respond to October 7th, but one of these aspects which has the crowds on the streets here is famine. And indeed, David Lammy, as Foreign Secretary, said just some weeks ago, "The confirmation of famine in Gaza City by the UN-backed IPC and the surrounding neighborhood is utterly horrifying, wholly preventable. The Israeli government's refusal to allow sufficient aid into Gaza has caused this man-made catastrophe. This is a moral outrage." This is part of where the British government's stance on this and the outrage of the crowds outside is coming from.
So, we're not shying away from the shortage of food, and because of that, there was an overhaul of the supply of humanitarian aid to Gaza in the last six to eight weeks. There's a major overhaul, major change, and we reject the notion that there's now any famine. On the contrary, huge amounts of produce are going in, in huge amounts of trucks, tons and tons and tons of food, drops, water supplies, electricity, medical supplies, free market supplies, and so forth and so on. There's a major reduction in the cost of food. There's a major reduction in the cost of food. And the supply of food has gone all over Gaza. It's not simple life. And believe me, I'm saying it out of my own heart and my own conscience because the last thing we want is people to suffer. And we care, and I care for the people of Gaza. But let's be honest about it. When there was food supplied, Hamas took it over. Okay. Profiteering by reselling it. Money laundering.
No, President Herzog, I must, I must stop you there. We wanted to, I must stop you there because it is something that, um, Israeli ministers say quite a bit. I have found, and many have found, no credible evidence for that. And indeed, Jack Lew, who is former US ambassador in Jerusalem, recently wrote that he never saw evidence of systematic diversion by Hamas. And that, so the former US ambassador is lying. They take the food and then they sell it triple price, not only double price. They launder the money and use it for their war machine. The fact is, once we flooded and opened all the gates into Gaza, including, by the way, the last 24 hours, 600 trucks have gone into Gaza, for example, and airdrops and huge amounts of food have gone in, the prices have gone down sharply and dramatically. That means it's not in the control of somebody who's blackmailing the market. But the question is also what happens to that when it gets inside. I'm not talking about many, many agencies have said they're blocked from distributing it. So I must say that we are, myself, I'm studying it. I met with many organizations, including the World Central Kitchen and others. We met recently with the World Food Kitchen, World Food Program, and others to make sure that the procurement and the supply and distribution will be much more efficient. Part of it has to do also with UN failure to take hundreds of trucks and distribute them forward into Gaza. They say that they are systematically blocked. The problem is that it's very easy just to put the blame here on Israel. Well, Israel is in control. No, people have to go into Gaza and understand the situation in and of itself. The place is full of booby traps. Every building is booby-trapped and prepared with cameras so that they control it from underneath so that they can fire at anybody getting close. This is a very dangerous terrain. We, that's what we are fighting against. We want to get the Hamas war machine out and enable a better future for the.
But you have many aid agencies calling for the return of the UN-led system, saying, you know, that they are blocked. The UN-led system is gone back substantially, dramatically, and totally overhauled because of the lack of food that occurred two months ago. And that occurred because there was an effort for an alternative system to take the control of Hamas out and have direct supply to the families. It did not work out so well.
Let me ask you about a second aspect that has distressed people and given rise to these government condemnations, and that is the level of civilian casualties in Gaza. 60,000 or so people, several percent, then, of the population of of of Gaza. How do you?
Percent, and it's not true. How do you justify the scale of civilian casualties?
Look, every one person aches and pains us truly. But when, let's just put the picture in in clear perspective. We were attacked by a jihadist organization who wants to eradicate us, and these fighters, they don't care dying because they are jihadists. In jihad, you believe that you die, you go to heaven, and you served your purpose in killing Jews. And by the way, Christians as well. And we've gone in in order to prevent the attacks on our people and get the hostages back. And when we go in, the terrain is full of ammunition and missiles in living rooms and and missiles in bedrooms and missiles in shops and mosques and whatnot. And these missiles can be also long-range missiles, not only short-term missiles. Now, we have the full right under international law to defend ourselves. And what we are trying to do is to uproot those those systems and enable a better future for Gaza. Any plan for the day after requires at the end that Hamas will not be able to take over Gaza again. That's the issue here.
International, international law absolutely gives you the right to defend yourself. Um, but it doesn't give you the right to cause unlimited suffering. And where people argue that Israel is breaching, clearly breaching the laws of war, is not differentiating between civilians and combatants as obliged to do, using too much force beyond what is necessary, and having, having, and how can you judge it? It's having goals that are militarily achievable. We still have our kids, and using proportion. We still have our our citizens on the border of Gaza. Let's just remember October 7th, because in October 7th, they slaughtered Muslims and Jews and many other religions and 36 nationalities, and they raped them, and they burnt them, and they hanged them, and they abducted them, and they want to do the same and the same, and they say they want to do the same. Yahya Sinwar himself said, "I want to do the same, and I celebrate that incredible day of October 7th." So we have the full right to defend ourselves in the way that this will not recur again. So what do we do? We go in and say, "You want to stop? Let's stop, get out, and bring our hostages back home." But on the contrary, they torture our hostages. They don't allow any ability to get them out. And because of that, we're going in. We go into a neighborhood. It's all booby-trapped.
President, you have, you have several times described the reality of fighting in a sniffing dog. A sniffing dog. If it's booby-trapped, the building itself explodes. You guys are unaware of it or don't want to listen that this is the war zone that we are dealing with. You don't have that in England. But if it was in England, the whole British people would have gone as big as strong as possible, just as they've done in past wars. And that's the issue because if Britain would have been attacked from separate.
We're not, you're talking beyond hypotheticals there, President Herzog. We're talking about, and this is, this is what is driving the international outrage, repeating. I have, will you let me finish, please? Supported by many elements in the digital arena as well. What we're talking about is the repeated bombing of residential areas, of hospitals, and of the scale of civilian hospitals in Gaza, of the scale of civilian.
The hospital is a headquarters, is a headquarters of a terrorist machine operating and sending missiles on us. Then we target only that specific place because under international law, we do it. We target only the specific place where they're shooting.
One of the laws of war is proportionality. Avoiding excessive civilian harm relative to military advantage. You haven't got rid of all Hamas, and you have killed a lot of people in Gaza. How is that proportionate?
Because we are, first of all, we, we argue with a lot of the data, and we are willing, and I propose to Prime Minister Starmer also, for example, on the humanitarian aid, to send a fact-finding mission and get all the data. We have it all transparent and open. We supply it every day, and we can show the difference between what is reported and what is happening on the ground. Same goes for warfare. We abide strictly by the rules of international law and how it relates to warfare. But the issue is, you have to judge the war according to the terrain of the war. The terrain of the war is no, that isn't one of the, that isn't part of the international laws of war. Huge amount of tunnels that were built for decades, which was a major error of oversight for not seeing it, where about we've demolished about 34 to 40% of this huge infrastructure. Money that would have gone to help and aid the people of Gaza went to these tunnels, to this war machine. There are down under, and from down under, they send all their cameras to see upstairs again.
You are describing the circumstances of fighting in Gaza, which we all understand. But I want to stick on this question of international law, which you said that is important to Israel. It is central to what Chatham House does. It is written on the as a goal on the ceiling of the entrance hall. And I, I want to ask you whether it is the aim of the Israeli government to expel or persuade Palestinians to leave. Finance Minister Smotrich, also a defense minister, has said that Gaza will be completely destroyed and its Palestinian population will leave in great numbers to third countries. That provoked a statement by the UK, France, and Canada condemning this abhorrent language and warning that this could be a breach in international humanitarian law.
So let me say that Israel is a democracy with as far-reaching free speech as imaginable, but does not reflect in any way the Israeli policy. Israel does not intend. This is the finance minister and a member of the government. Does not intend. Our political system is somewhat different than yours. It's a coalition. The world is quite aware of the Israeli political system. But this is absolutely not the Israeli position or intention. Israel made clear it does not intend to expel anyone. It does not.
Do you condemn that statement then? I, we've made it clear. Do you wait? Because I'm the president, and I'm the president of all political views in Israel. I'm not dealing with the way we argue with Israelis in Israel as when I'm appearing in the international arena. But what I want to say, it's like, it's like you would say, these ministers spoke about occupation. The Prime Minister made clear even two weeks ago in a podcast here in Britain that Israel has no intention to occupy land in Gaza. But for the day after, we want to have a different management of Gaza. Somebody should go in and manage Gaza. And this is what you should focus on in the international arena. How do we bring the day after? Because we should all look for the day after. We should all include it as part of the major change in the region with our Arab allies and with the Abraham Accords countries, because that's the future of the region. That's where we need to move on as nations, and by that also reach a platform of dialogue with the Palestinians.
So that is where many, many people and countries would like to get to. But I just want to ask you about one more aspect of the present, which is the West Bank and what is happening at the moment there. I'd like to ask for what your, what your view of the expansion of settlements that is going on now and the authorization by the Israeli government of more controversial building, particularly the outpost, the the area known as E1, which would bisect.
So the issue by the issue of E1 is it was declared by member by Minister Smotrich, but that does not mean that it's happening tomorrow. It's a long overall process with a lot of bureaucracy, and therefore, I think it's also part of the political discourse in Israel, and it's part of the legitimate discourse in a democracy. Meaning, there is a strong school of thought in Israel that definitely has evolved dramatically for following October 7th, that casts doubt about the ability to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. That is the outcome. They also, the emotional, psychological outcome of the of October 7th, because people had a wake-up call about the fact that in a area near Gaza, in an internationally recognized boundary since 1949, it was violated in the most brutal way. That so they have their doubts. That's what we human beings do when they have they've been traumatized and they're thinking about it. And that's, I respect the fact that there is an enormous debate in Israel about all these issues. These are life and death issues for us. That does not mean that everything you read here in the media, which usually, honestly, I'm saying, is most times one-sided and does not go into the details itself, does not understand the debate in Israel, takes a certain sentence that says, "This is Israel," because we need to bash Israel on a daily basis.
What is your view of these settlements? You've said, uh, in May this year, "Settlement is one of the cornerstones of Zionism and the Jewish story, and that on the West Bank, it is a positive, wonderful, and thriving project, and Israel's defensive change."
I will say that because people translated the word "hityashvut," that means from day one in the Zionist movement, every town and village in Israel was a settlement. I spoke about the whole notion of building a new village and a new town in Israel, and I respect that notion because that's from the early days of establishing our nation. So, I understand that. I did not speak about boundaries, nor did I speak about any specific thing. And yet, I must tell you that there are settlements and towns and villages in the West Bank that are a source of pride, and people are amazing. And we agreed way back that there are ways and means to reach an amicable agreement with the Palestinians, despite the fact that there are settlements. It's been discussed in the Camp David discussions already back in 2000.
What do you think the Israeli government should do now to stop the violence that is happening by settlers against Palestinians?
So there is, we have a very strong legal system. There are investigations and adjudication and law enforcement apparatuses and courts, and the entire legal system is operating on it. We, we are not indifferent to it that there could be such instances, but I would not because of that in any way generalize or categorize the citizens of Israel who live beyond the '67 boundaries.
Let's come to, if you like, the day after. Who or what do you think should manage Gaza?
So I think that, you know, in the vine leaves or how you call it, there are many ideas, but part of it has to do with regional cooperation. We should make sure that the pillar of the region called the Abraham Accords will stay strong and intact and be enhanced and upgraded, including with other nations. And part of it has to do with their ability to have a Marshall Plan for Gaza for the day after, without terror, but giving a real future, including the ability of young people to study and grow and understand that they're part of a Middle East that moves towards peace. It's difficult to imagine it right now. So, a Palestinian, there's nothing I want more than that. But for that, sometimes you have to take harsh steps and fight in order to change the course. Otherwise, the Middle East will be jihadist. Look at the fate of Lebanon. Look at the fate of Syria. Give a chance to all of these developments in the region and understand that they're all a direct result of the fact that we fought bravely and courageously against many people's views and changed the course of history, and unfortunately also paid heavy prices for that.
Can you see the point where Israel comes to recognize a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people living in parallel?
So in order to reach that stage, it's like, you know, it's like a chicken and egg. First, you have to attend to the innermost psychological fears of all sides concerned and deal with it. Just coming with a formula saying, "Okay, two-state solution," doesn't attend to the fact that you have to have to deal with people-to-people relationship and tissues of life. If you walk in the streets of Jerusalem, if you go to any institution in Jerusalem and many other places, you see Jew and Muslim dwelling together, living side by side in enormous success, fantastic success, which is not reported anywhere or described anywhere. Right. And in the war, and in the war, I can tell you, if you go to the Soroka Hospital, which was bombarded by missiles from Iran, and you walk into the bunkers now because the building was demolished above ground, and all of these units and all of these medical systems, you see Muslim professors and doctors and nurses with Jewish professors, doctors, and nurses.
President, it is again a wonderful picture that you are painting. What I'm asking you, inviting you to see, is whether you think Israel can take a step towards a two-state solution in the future.
We should dream and try to realize amicable peace with our Palestinian neighbors. Absolutely. But for that, we have to deal with the fact that terror cannot reign in our land. I said it three months before October 7th. In a speech in the US Congress, I described how terror creates havoc and cannot be acceptable in any way. And if I, and I beg all my friends in the United Kingdom and all my friends in Australia and Canada and other places, they have to understand terror starts with us, but will never end with us. If we don't stand firmly against terror, it will hit and plague all our cities.
What is your plan for how Israel can live along with the Palestinians and with the Israeli-Palestinian Arabs who are within its?
So I truly believe, I truly believe that if you look at the historical trajectory, okay, there's a very strong engine of the fact that Israel is a fact of life, an acceptable state in the Middle East. And for that matter, it's about time that we have an inner deep dialogue between Jew and Muslim around us. This is the way it should be. Whenever people try to do it, there's a lot of backfiring. But it's inevitable that we will have a dialogue, and as part of that dialogue, should also have a dialogue about the Palestinians and the Israelis as such. It is not detached from the fact that in order to do it, we have to overcome the situation of terror.
I, that is a vision of a dialogue which is admirable. But I'm asking you for a plan that countries can work to, including Israel.
So the plan right now, and it should be an immediate plan, a practical plan, not something metaphorical. And a practical plan, I mean, you know, we have the Palestinian Authority right near us. We're having a, we have interface with them all the time. But the plan should be how do we make a secure state of Israel living in peace side by side with the Palestinians. And in order to do that, all must be ruled out. I think that the big error of the free world and its leadership in the current crisis is that they should have said to Hamas, "If you guys don't release the hostages immediately, we're not talking to any one of you." But instead, what we're getting is, "Okay, you're not releasing the hostages, get them out, but in addition, we will punish Israel and say that we recognize a Palestinian state." And what's the outcome of it? And Marco Rubio said it correctly was that for a long time, Hamas refused to sit down and negotiate with Israel on a hostage deal because they felt they have the higher ground in the international media, international arena. And what transpired is that if and only when the Israeli cabinet made a decision that it goes into Gaza, then they went back to the table.
Do you wonder how it's come to this? You, as president, have a role, as you said, above politics. Exactly. Responsible, responsible. I don't have any core values. I don't have an of a country and the free world, as you've talked about it. Your allies and friends are using some of the worst words that are used about human relations, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and so on, about Israel, that used to be a beacon of democracy to those countries. Do you feel a responsibility to change that?
But look, we have, we are a beacon of democracy. We have a very vibrant democracy. We debate on so many issues that sometimes a lot of you guys are confused. But that's what we do. We are a democracy. We have, I meet thousands of Israelis a week. Israelis care. Israelis want change. Israelis want to exit from this war. But the fact of the matter is that the enemies down there in the tunnels, together with allies in Qatar, okay, they think that they can drive Israel crazy, and the region crazy, and the world crazy. And I think that it's very difficult because media likes to put a certain focus, but they have to open a larger vista. And I say it outright, believe me, Israelis are not indifferent to anybody's pains. And part of it is like blaming Israel for all the faults of the world. But the truth of the matter is, we were on the verge of normalization with Saudi Arabia, and somebody decided to carry out the most aggressive, barbaric derailment. That is true. And then Israel decided to take all the actions that followed and have brought this condemnation. What should we have done? Leave our citizens abducted and the missiles landing on our on our heads? You know how many years missiles landed from Gaza? We pulled out of Gaza in 2005 to the last iota. We are going to stick with the present and future. We're not going back into that bit of history. Thank you. Let's go to questions. We have a lot. Let me have the lights up as well. We have a lot of questions. A lot of people. We need the timetable of 20 minutes left. We do 23 minutes. Okay. Whether whether you'll thank me or not for those extra three minutes remains to be seen. Thank you, Brown. Hello, uh, Tobias Ellwood, former Foreign Minister for the Middle East. Sir, really pleased to see you here and use those words that friends can speak frankly and can argue. But I say this as a military man. What's made it difficult for me to continue to support is the utility of military force in securing a long-term strategy because I don't understand what that strategy is. If we take, um, Doha, was Britain lobbied to then say, let's get rid of any Hamas leader there? And you mentioned the Marshall Plan, and this is my question. You could start this today using those Abrahamic Accord signatures to take Arish or Rafah, to take a 10-kilometer zone and start to rebuild without Hamas, to show that there is a future for Palestinians that don't want to be part of Hamas, don't want anything to do with them. That is where we are all united in a Palestinian area without Hamas responsible. But at the moment, there is no plan, no strategy, no vision, clarity as to where you want to go other than more war. And that's led to the idea that actually not interested in a two-state solution, and that makes it tougher for people like us that want to continue to support Israel. Thank you.
You've actually touched upon a very, very important topic. We've seen fascinating TV reports in Israel, interviews of a huge amount of Palestinians in Gaza who have been interviewed. And eight out of 10 out there say, "We want a different life. We're fed up of Hamas. We want them out. We want to live in peace. We had a much better life before this war. We want to finish with this war and move forward." It's amazing to see. This is not reported at all in the international media. Channel 12 in Israel, Ohad made a series of interviews because he has his own, all his friends in Gaza, and they say it out loud. They say it either on camera or under disguise, and they say, "We beg you, finish the job and get us a better life. Get rid of Hamas. We're fed up of all."
All I'm asking you is, what is what is the plan? If there were elections now, that's why your idea is smart. I've never heard of the idea. It's a smart idea. It's worthwhile. It's worthwhile checking. It's worthwhile checking. I will actually pass it on because we are looking for ways. There are also a lot of opposition forces in Gaza who want to start, and we opened up now for the private sector to go into Gaza. Okay.
Thank you. Let's go here. Amelia Jen from Channel 4 News. Uh, our Health Secretary has said that you need to answer the allegations leveled against your government of war crimes, of ethnic cleansing, and of genocide. What is your answer?
But I did, totally, we totally rejected, totally out of hand. Our distinguished ambassador here, she actually responded, and the embassy responded. Mrs. will be retiring in five days' time. So we thank her for five years' service in the United Kingdom. But we reject it out of hand. We just answered it. And may I just remind you that even a recent UK report said that it, that Israel is not carrying out, God forbid, any genocide. And we reject it out of hand. Not only that, there are 13 fully operational hospitals in Gaza. All the medical equipment and services are there. The UAE hospital in southern Gaza is operating fully, and there are clinics all around. These are all there's, you know, it's very easy to blame Israel without understanding the facts or without seeing it for themselves. And so, just if I may, you said that you had a tough discussion with Keir Starmer. What was tough that was said? Because of course, you know, the Prime Minister presented his views regarding a Palestinian state, regarding the humanitarian aid in Gaza. And I offered that there will be a fact-finding mission coming to Israel, sitting with us and studying the situation in Gaza on the humanitarian level, because we have full answers and we are fully transparent. And so, you know, we argued. We definitely argued out of respect. We also had things that we agreed upon. We agreed that Iran is a worldwide threat. We agreed that Hamas must be removed. We agree on it. But how to do it? How to reach from this point of an idea into reality? Then, of course, starts the argument.
Let's go to another question. Uh, a second, uh, back on the aisle. Yes. Nick Garing, private member of Chatham House. President Herzog, twice you used the word "amicable settlement" you envision with the Palestinians. Amicable. How on earth can you achieve that in the current atmosphere?
So, you know, because in Chatham House and throughout history, you remember moments where things look dire and then reality changes. I mean, you have to seek a dream. Martin Luther King said, "I have a dream." We should have the dream, but we should have the dream with somebody who does not call for my eradication, who doesn't call me an infidel, who doesn't want to butcher me or rape my family. That's the story. We should have an applicable, amicable solution with people. We can sit down and negotiate in depth. And because of that, right now, we're in a situation of war which we did not want, we did not seek. It was forced upon us, and we were forced to defend ourselves. And all of a sudden, we woke up and realized that the entire surrounding of ours has a huge infrastructure which was laid down by Iran, by Qassem Soleimani, and all his other allies, and of course, by the Supreme Leader, to have a grand plan to annihilate us. That's the real story. Think about it. Let's take a small tribe.
You're talking next question is about the amicable, but but let's say a small tribe in Yemen, the Houthis, 50,000 people in all Shiites, they are armed to their neck like a major country. They have ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. And let me just tell you what the life in Israel is with these guys who are being fanned. And no, because you can have a solution, but you can't force me to retreat or give up land or do anything before I know my security is arranged. And these guys, we get an alert on our app saying to us, "A missile is on your way, get ready." And then we are told where it's going to land, and then Star Wars starts, and we have to intercept it. That's the new current reality that we have to deal with. I don't think we got far with the amicable. Um, but we did get back to the Houthis, um, in the middle there, and then I'm coming over here again. Um, uh, sorry, with the, um, next to you, and then I'll come back to you. Mark Wella, University of Cambridge, and soon Chatham House. Welcome, President. Um, you are familiar with the view, and particularly familiar with the view of some, that the Palestinians of the regions all share in responsibility for the dreadful events of October 7th. And the question is, could this view not risk justifying the transfer of the horrible cost of urban warfare in a highly densely populated territory onto civilians? Brunwin told us or reminded us of wholesale destruction of civilian infrastructure, sort of Grozny-like pictures, failure to protect sensitive sites like hospitals and concentrations of civilians that displaced the vulnerable. Failure to provide civilians with sufficient food. After all, is it not, forgive me, welcome to Chatham House. Could you get to your question, please? That that is the final point now. Um, after all, is it not the foundational principle of humanitarian law that civilians remain protected whatever the origin of a conflict?
Absolutely. And that is why, you know, from day one, we said that there are many innocent civilians there, and they must be protected. And that is why, if you go to a neighborhood, okay, that's the tragedy of this war. The war is that this terror organization, which has operated like an army of a state, okay, I mean, it's a real army of a state with tens of thousands of terrorists and under a huge system of control and command. They do it from civilian surroundings. They do it from people's homes. Missiles that were fired at my me and my family were pressed from people's living rooms. Nobody doubts it. It's known. We have pictures. It's also from Lebanon. Same from here, from Gaza. So, what do you do? How do you undermine it? How do you deal with it? It's not that anybody, you alert with millions and millions of phone calls and messages and leaflets and tell people, "Move out," then you go in, then you eradicate that infrastructure, and then you can enable people to go back. That's what happened throughout that war. And if you have killed the families, and that you've said various things down the years about whether the families are accomplices, I'm thinking not just of the remarks that have have we never said that the families are accomplices. God forbid, we try in so many, in many, many cases, we rescue, we help, we remove, we do a lot of things. You know, I, my wife and I, we've gone to well over 1,300 bereaved families in Israel, in many cases, soldiers. The families tell us how they're proud that the soldiers helped Palestinian civilians get out of the war, even though their loved ones were under danger. We could dwell on that point. I, we have gone back over the things you've said on this, including a 2009 way back interview with radio saying that actually the families are accomplices.
No, I did not say the Dutch radio. I say that if you have, and if you had in your own living room a long-range missile, what do you think it is? I mean, think about it. Does any decent human being in a free world have such lethal weapons in his own infrastructure? Does it make even sense? Does it make sense? Is it responsible? That's what I mentioned then in 2009. Come over here on the AR, and that was with Lebanon too. Yes.
Um, Lama Shahadi from The National. Um, how will you repair the Abraham Accords? How can they survive? And how confident are you that the Arab states will agree to the Marshall Plan that you're proposing?
I'm not, I'm not in the negotiation process, nor am I in the back room or anything like that. My vision, my vision, and I think it, it, I mean, despite this very complicated moment, and actually this complicated moment can give rise, can be a jump start for an exit strategy from the war by getting all the hostages out and having a final deal on the table and a proposal for the day after, which will have the pillars of the Middle East based on this regional cooperation. We, we, I mean, we all share, we all share the threats from Iran. We all share the desire to move forward and have strong relations. You can see the incredible relations with the Arab Abraham Accord countries. You can see the tissues of relationship that have evolved dramatically. And I can tell you that the potential is unbelievable. My vision, really, the vision that has been laid out by the US administration, also by President Trump, the connectivity between Israel all the way to India through the Middle East, through Saudi and the Gulf States, can be a major sea change also for Britain, because it will connect Britain to Southeast Asia and the United States to Australia through the Eastern Hemisphere. It's a huge change.
Uh, again, on the aisle. Thank you, President Herzog. Jane Princeley from the Jewish Chronicle newspaper. Um, President Herzog, young Jews in this country and in other Western states are turning against Israel over this war in Gaza. Are you worried about this in an existential way for the Jewish state? And what's your message to them?
My message is to all Jews around the world that we respect, love, and care for them and their well-being. It's legitimate to have a debate. I invite people to come and see for themselves. There are also many, many, many young Jews who care and support Israel. I heard there was a very impressive rally last Sunday with about 70,000 people demonstrating. I can only regret the fact that the BBC and other outlets did not report about it, because that's a very important statement to combat anti-Semitism. I also raised with Prime Minister Starmer the worry about the rise of anti-Semitism in the United Kingdom, and he has promised me, of course, and he reiterated his stance that he, that his government is fighting very harshly against anti-Semitism. So we know that there is debate, and debate is something legitimate, provided people know the facts. In the middle here. Thank you, President. Uh, my name is Professor Amnon, and my question to you is as follows. You said in the beginning that Israel, sorry, that Hamas has procrastinated and also negotiated in bad faith. And
That's why, um, a deal has not been reached. We've had a different narrative from the Israeli government, members of it, especially Minister Beng, who said that he was proud to have blocked several deals, as has Minister Smidge. And my question to you is, do you feel that you have used the full power of your office to suppress those kind of positions and their ability to prevent a hostage deal?
So, I've used the full power of my office to get to a hostage deal and to assist the hostage families. No, because you wasn't there. Wasn't because I don't think, because I don't think that the focus on Ben and Smrich is everybody's scapegoat. It's everybody's scapegoat because I've been working with the hostage families and the military and the negotiating team and the prime minister and his team and everybody and the international community to get to a deal. And the issue is, there could have been errors in the past. But I can attest clearly that in the last six months or eight months, Israel has said yes to every proposal, and it was made clear. May I remind you that Wit even left the government? And therefore, it's this issue of saying because of them everything stopped is a mistake. Because the truth is, and I say it outright, because I've seen also the intelligence, I see how this rhetoric of the jihadists, they say, "Yeah, we'll say yes in order to appease the world, but here we'll put the poison pill in that makes it impossible." And this works in terms of the good image. But the truth of the matter is, ask the Americans. President Trump said it many times. Even Witkov, his emissary, said to me, okay, last week and made it clear that Hamas is impossible in the way they negotiate. He said, "These are bad guys. They don't want to move an iota in any term in the negotiations." And that's we should understand that it's very easy always to blame Israel. But let's remember, Israel has released the worst kind of terrorists in those deals and was willing to do the same now, the worst kind of terrorists. People that you will not imagine that will be freed, but for the get our hostages back, we see it as a top priority.
Okay. Over here in the middle. Hi there, John Ray from ITV News. Um, you said a couple of times that you see, uh, all the intelligence. So, can I take you back to Doha? Can you tell us, uh, whether that mission was a failure, given the reports that the targets, uh, escape with their lives? And secondly, hit or miss, was it a just a great big signal to the world that there are no circumstances in which Israel will do any kind of ceasefire deal with Hamas, given the fact that if they turn up to discuss the proposal, you try to kill them?
So, as was said many beforehand, of course, I wasn't involved in or aware of the operation, but because I was traveling here. But I would say clearly that this actually can be an opportunity to get to a deal. And Israel made clear, even yesterday and today, that it's open and wants to get to the deal. The deal is the end of the war, the exit from the war, and a hostage deal. And I can attest, wait, I can, let's, let's, let's analyze Khalil Ala, for example. Khalil al-Kaya was the chairman of Hamas, and I remind you all that I said that they take decisions only by consent. So, one dissenting opinion ruins the deal. Khalen al-Kaya was one of the perpetrators, planners, and instigators of the October 7th massacre. He was, he was part of it, and he's known for that. He had blood of thousands of Israelis on his hand. And Khala kept on, like a slime, like carrying this. We've had the slime before. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. President, unending. I don't know. I don't know. I don't have any information as to the outcome of the operation at this moment.
Can you tell us something about the fact-finding mission that you've talked about?
Yeah, I think that if you want to study the humanitarian situation in a professional manner, rather than keep on repeating these declarations all the time, when we know otherwise, and we have a monitoring system on an hourly basis of everything from calories to electricity to water to food supplies to distribution and everywhere. So, is that argument? Yes, president. Is that an invitation to the international media to go into Gaza? Media. It's not my role. You've been complaining about the media not, not reporting things, right? Offered a mission on behalf of his, his majesty's government to come and study, um, here on the aisle.
Thank you. Olivia Sullivan, Chatham House. Uh, Mr. President, I want to stay on the topic of a fact-finding mission. You said repeatedly that you want people to understand the reality that you face and see for themselves. But in April, two British MPs, Abdam Muhammad and Yuan Yang, tried to visit Israel to do just that, and their entry was blocked. Are you saying now that you will allow British parliamentarians to come to Israel and assess the humanitarian situation in the West Bank and Gaza?
Starting to distort the discourse. I'm not getting into political debate, nor am I relating to the fact that these two MPs, according to Israeli law, were not allowed for obvious reasons in the law. I'm talking, I'm talking on the level of a dialogue between governments, between foreign ministers, between professionals. They know how to do it. That's what diplomats do, and they have to work. May I invite you to the website of the of COGAT, that's the coordination, the coordinator of the Israeli government, which publishes in-depth data every day? You can challenge it, look into it, and ask questions. It's all there, just as an example for something which is not broadcasted or told to the British public. Thank you. I think we've got room for one more on the edge. Thank you. Christian Edwards from CNN. We reported today that the Hamas delegation in Qatar was due to respond to the latest ceasefire proposal yesterday evening. Israel targeted that delegation yesterday afternoon. Should we conclude that Israel does not want a ceasefire?
Well, it was, it's just a repetition of the previous question, and I said Israel made clear yesterday, all the time makes clear that it is ready for the complete deal, the end of war, getting our hostages, and moving forward. This is what Israel is willing to do and waiting and waiting and waiting. And we see all the time how they manipulate the proposals. We can, I think we're almost at the, we're almost done. There's one chap who has been very patient in the front. I'm going to take one more here. There are more hands up, and thank you for asking questions. You'll remember our time. Thank you. Uh, excellent, uh, to listen to you and get your views and the inside information that we all don't always get from the media. Um, my question is that there's two wars being. You haven't said who. Oh, David Abraham, former vice president of Ferusi. Um, my question is that, um, there's two wars being waged. We've spoken very much about one of the wars. The other one is soft power, public relations. Israel has never been very keen to put any resources into public relations into different countries. For instance, this country, that's why we've got marches on the streets very regularly. Will you forgive me? Could you make it a question?
Well, yes. Well, why do you regret the fact that we haven't put money into public rel, you haven't put money into public relations, and are you prepared to do so in the future, going forward?
I definitely regret, regret this fact. Again, I'm the president, I'm not the executive branch. I think we should have done much better. I could not agree with you more. On that note, we're going to have to stop. Thank you very much indeed for your time, President Herzog. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much.