Articles

— What is happening, Natan Borisovich? — I asked Minister of Construction and member of the Security Cabinet Natan Sharansky on Sunday morning. He was clearly troubled, and it was not difficult to understand why. Our conversation took place two days after the horrific explosion at the entrance to a seaside disco in Tel Aviv on the night from Friday to Saturday.

— About ten days ago, Abu Ziad, one of Arafat's closest associates, said in a candid conversation with a Western parliamentarian that many Israelis misunderstand the situation. They think Arafat's refusal to negotiate and the beginning of the "Al-Aqsa Intifada" would unite all of Israel against him — but that is not the case. They simply do not understand. It will take them several months, he said, to realize that life has changed — that their children cannot go to school, that they will not be able to continue their normal lives, that everything has changed.

And then, he said, a new division within Israeli society will begin, and Israelis will accept all of Arafat's demands, including the right of return for Palestinians. That conversation took place about ten days ago. I do not believe it was directly connected to the disco bombing, but it clearly reflected a strategic vision.

What does that vision consist of? If over the course of a year, losing one or two soldiers a week led Israel to a point where it could not remain in Lebanon, then now, if within a few months it cannot absorb constant civilian casualties — including children — casualties that force Israelis to reconsider their entire way of life, this could lead to the collapse of Israel as a society and as a state.

In this sense, the fact that the Security Cabinet finally, openly acknowledged — first by experts and then by politicians — that Arafat is the head of a terrorist organization, involved not just in isolated acts but in a vast terrorist network, that he manipulates various groups and uses terrorism to extract political concessions, gives some grounds for cautious optimism.

— If I understand correctly, this conclusion about Arafat was reached only after the Tel Aviv attack?

— Yes, it was a formal acknowledgment of reality following the attack. Why was it so difficult to say this earlier? Since the Oslo process, there has been an illusion that Arafat is the only one who can guarantee our security — that the stronger he is as a dictator controlling his people, the more likely he is to ensure our safety. Therefore, we believed we had no alternative but to compromise with him.

Twenty-four hours before the attack, I said in an interview that Arafat was waging a terrorist war against us, and that we would have to respond with war. Hopes that we could reach an agreement with him are mistaken. I hope that in these days we will finally overcome these errors.

— But haven't we paid too high a price to come to this understanding?

— Yes, the price is too high. Even one life is too high a price. But what is obvious to you and me is not always obvious to society as a whole. The situation is objectively very difficult. To create a Jewish democratic state in the heart of the Islamic Arab world is a unique historical experiment. We must prove its viability.

There is also a psychological difficulty. People naturally want quick solutions — either victory in 48 hours or peace in 48 hours. But the reality is different. Today we have no partner for peace negotiations.

At the same time, we cannot win the war in 48 hours either. This will be a long, exhausting, consistent struggle. But when people understand the historical perspective, when they see the purpose and the light at the end of the tunnel, when they know they are fighting for their future and their children's future — and that there is no other place where this future can be secured — their lives gain meaning.

The problem arises when the connection between the people and the land weakens. Then the entire structure begins to falter.

These days I have been in contact with the families of the victims. I first went there at midnight, after the Sabbath. For the second time in my life in Israel, I broke the Sabbath — first to attend a cabinet meeting, then to visit hospitals. Late at night, when cameras are gone and people are left alone, the most important truths emerge from the heart.

Why did these people come here? Cynics say — for a better life. But in reality, they came because they wanted a place where their future depends on themselves, not on the will of changing regimes or political moods. A place where the government's primary responsibility is to protect its people.

If this feeling weakens, it is more dangerous than any external threat.

— Do you believe in the importance of the information war?

— Absolutely. Today wars are fought not only with tanks and planes, but also — and perhaps primarily — through the media. If you win on CNN, you usually don't lose in reality. If your truth dominates in the media, it is much easier to gain international support.

We have a clear example: the Cold War. The suppressed voices of dissidents were eventually heard worldwide and influenced global politics. This constrained the Soviet Union and accelerated the West's victory.

Propaganda is a powerful weapon — one that Israel has long underestimated or misused, often prioritizing internal political struggles over presenting a unified message to the world.

The "peace process" is a clear example. Instead of allowing critical voices to be heard, they were suppressed. As someone who monitored the Oslo agreements, I tried to raise concerns loudly. In the Soviet Union, we were dissidents whose voices eventually reached the world. Here, however, the government discouraged attention to our warnings, presenting Arafat as a necessary partner.

That made our struggle more difficult. Still, I believe we will prevail, because truth, morality, and law are on our side.

— Does the world understand this?

— Not fully. Not only because it doesn't want to, but because we ourselves have hesitated to explain our position clearly and consistently. If we speak openly and without fear — as was done in the Security Cabinet — the world will begin to understand. We must not abandon this tool.

— Your forecast?

— We have finally recognized that we are in a state of war. Now we must act accordingly. When someone is shooting at you with a machine gun, you cannot negotiate — he wants to kill you, and you must stop him.

— We have finally recognized that we are in a state of war. Now we must act accordingly. When someone is shooting at you with a machine gun, you cannot negotiate — he wants to kill you, and you must stop him.

We have a government of national unity, which prevents internal division. We may eventually reach negotiations — not necessarily with Arafat, but with other Palestinian leaders who genuinely represent their people.

The first step is a firm and uncompromising fight against terrorism. The second is creating conditions for negotiations with leaders who truly serve their people’s interests.

If we conduct a strong and consistent informational effort — both among our allies and beyond — this is achievable. But if we once again allow others to decide our fate and push us into compromises without real change, our future will be at risk.

Still, as you know, I am an optimist.

— Thank you.