Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
290085258
label
Saunders Memoranda - Sensitive Egypt/Hafez Ismail 1973 [4 of 5]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
290085258
contentType
document
title
Saunders Memoranda - Sensitive Egypt/Hafez Ismail 1973 [4 of 5]
citationUrl
collections
National Security Files (Nixon Administration)
Henry A. Kissinger's (HAK) Office Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
290085258
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
368fd15d2b359700
ocrText
SECRET (XGDS)
TALKING POINTS
Introductory Statement
It might be useful to review where we left our discussions at
the end of the last meeting. There were some issues identified
for further consideration and discussion at this second meeting.
Others either represented areas of general agreement or could
be left aside for the time being.
Among the subjects identified for discussion at this meeting
are:
1. The definition and the timing of the state of peace.
The Egyptian side last time put forward a fairly full
list of what would constitute obligations in a state of
peace. It was suggested that this be developed as fully
as possible. The more difficult question that needs to be
discussed further now is when the state of peace would
come into effect.
2. The inter-relationship among agreements. The issue
discussed last time was how to meet Israel's need for
recognition as a legal entity as early as possible. We do
not want to get into too theoretical a discussion of legiti-
XGDS-3
DECLAS-Impossible to Determine Date.
BYAUTH-Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 2 -
macy. The broader issue is the relationship between
an Israel-Egypt agreement and other agreements which
need to be worked out, for example settlements with
Syria and Jordan and on the Palestinians.
3. Transitional security arrangements between Israel
and Egypt. We need to be as concrete as possible in dis-
cussing the kinds of arrangements that might be made.
4. Finally, there were a couple of procedural issues
left up in the air: Who would talk to the Syrians at what
stage and what point would Israel be brought into the
discussion.
There were other issues that bear recapitulation but probably
do not need to occupy us in any detail in this meeting:
1. Mr. Ismail outlined a three-stage process in which
there would first be understanding on heads of agreement;
then provisions under these heads of agreement would be
worked out; finally, there would be the stage of implementa-
tion.
2. Mr. Ismail described the long-term objective as seeing
develop a Middle East of strong, healthy, cooperative, independent
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 3 -
states. He spoke of a peace settlement that could
be the basis for normalization of relations over a period
of time.
3. It was generally agreed that the Arab-Israeli problem
would be addressed by stages and by sectors with progress
on the Egypt-Israel front staying a step ahead of progress
on the Israel-Jordan or Israel-Syria fronts.
4. It would be possible to work out an agreement on a
first stage of withdrawal on the Suez Canal along the lines
of the interim agreement concept concurrently with dis-
cussions on an overall agreement.
Subject to any thoughts that Mr. Ismail might wish to express,
it might be worthwhile to pursue each of the first three subjects in
turn in some detail.
For Discussion
The following talking points are grouped by issue and are
designed for use only at the appropriate points in the discussion.
1. Sovereignty.
--We want to be sure that our point about Egyptian
sovereignty in the Sinai is understood. President
Sadat has spoken as if the US is thinking only of
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 4 -
"nominal" Egyptian sovereignty. This is not
the case.
What we are trying to suggest is that, as the
discussion becomes concrete about steps to be
taken, it seems to us that there are certain attributes
of sovereignty which might be restored sooner than
an Israeli pullback might be accomplished. Examples
could include the assumption of responsibility for
civil authority and for police functions.
--It would also be possible to distinguish between
those steps in the restoration of sovereignty and
whatever security arrangements might be developed
or whatever phasing of withdrawal might be agreed to.
There may be advantage in getting some of these steps
on separate tracks.
- If it were agreed that an international force be
present in the Sinai to assure security it would be useful
if both Egyptian and Israeli groups could take part.
2. Effective date of peace obligations.
--It - seems to us that any obligations in a state of peace
which are spelled out in an agreement would have to
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 5 -
become effective when the agreement is signed.
It is difficult to require concessions on the ground
until there is assurance that a state of peace does
exist. If both sides sign an agreement accepting
certain principles and setting a timetable for putting
them into practice in concrete ways, then there would
seem no reason for delaying the advent of a state of
peace.
The real check on whether peace exists or is
maintained is in the execution of the successive phases
of the agreement.
- If the Egyptians do not accept this approach, would
it be possible to consider that the state of peace would
come into effect at the point when Egypt re-assumes
civil authority in the Sinai? By that time, some Israeli
troops would have been withdrawn and others would have
been regrouped to relate to any security arrangements
or phasing arrangements that might have been agreed to.
3. Recognition.
--It may be wise to steer away from too theoretical a
discussion of legitimacy. If a peace agreement is signed
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 6 -
between Egypt and Israel, that in itself constitutes
a recognition of Israel's sovereignty, integrity and
independence.
The next problem is how to handle the relationship
between an Egypt-Israel agreement and the other
agreements that would be necessary.
--Could one visualize an agreement in principle
between Egypt and Israel on what procedures should
be followed for reaching an agreement which would
satisfy Palestinian rights and the rights of the refugees ?
- For instance, could Egypt and Israel simply agree
that the political aspects of the Palestine problem
should be worked out primarily among Israel, Jordan
and the Palestinians?
-Could Egypt and Israel agree that a refugee settlement
would be based on the principle of some settlement of
Palestinians in Israel, and compensation for those
refugees who choose to settle elsewhere?
4. Security.
- .-Mr. Ismail has stated the principle that security should
not work to the disadvantage of either side. On the other
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 7 -
hand, he mentioned last time that Egypt under normal
circumstances only stationed "frontier forces" in the
Sinai before 19.67. The Sinai was largely a buffer
zone between the heartlands of Israel and Egypt.
Could that situation be re-established?
-Would it be feasible through some transitional
period to establish early warning zones on either side of
the Sinai to be manned by international observers with
Egyptian and Israeli participation?
5. The threat of hostilities.
- We have been on the receiving end of a number of
reports that Egypt is planning to resume hostilities.
No one can make this decision for Egypt. We would
simply state that this step would weaken rather than
strengthen our ability to help toward a settlement.
The US and USSR will make every effort to avoid
conflict as they did in 1967. Efforts would be made
to restore the ceasefire, but there is no reason to
believe that attempts to go beyond that in beginning
negotiations would be any more successful after another
flare-up than they were in 1967 or 1970.
SECRET (XGDS) Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (XGDS)
- 8 -
-- What we are trying to do is to enter a new
period in which Egypt's intentions to make peace
can be made credible to the Israelis.
6. US objective.
-- The US has no interest in perpetuating the present
situation. Allegations that this is US strategy,
therefore, are not justified.
--Peace does require compromise, and defining
possible areas for compromise is one of the purposes
of these talks. Compromise is not easy.
7. Procedures.
- Mr. Ismail has proposed that the US talk with both.
the Egyptians and Israelis and then formulate a set of
-
principles (heads of agreement) which could serve as a
basis for more detailed talks.
-- We are still in the process of exploring whether it is
possible to develop such principles or what they might
look like if we could develop them. We want to reserve
this judgment a bit longer.
SECRET (XGDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
is
SANITIZED COPY
EO 12958 3.3 (b) (1) >25Yrs
(S)
INFORMATION
SECRET (GDS)
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
HENRY A. KISSINGER
SUBJECT:
Fuller Analysis of President
Sadat's Speech
The Dally Brief has contained the main points in President Sadat's
speech of March26. This memo includes B more extensive discussion
and analysis, and excerpts of the section on foreign policy are attached.
Background
Sadat has been struggling with troublesome domestic problems since
last fall. Student riots in January were followed by press criticism
of the regime's policies. Numerous journalists were dropped from
SANITIZED
the party or arrested iast month. In coruary Sadat launched his
diplomatic initiative, the main elements of which were
3.3 3(6)(1)(b)
visits to the Soviet Union and the United States. Sadat WR3 roundly
criticized in some Arab circles for opening a dialogue with the United
States, especially after the news leaked that the US was preparing to
continue supplying Israel with large quantities of arms and production
facilities for aircraft.
The Content of the Speech
Sadat began his two and one-half hour speech by declaring that Egypt
had reached a "prominent landmark. 11 The stage which Egypt is
entering is one of all-out confrontation. Turning to foreign policy,
he chastised the United States, and Secretary Rogers in particular, for
carrying on psychological warfare against Egypt over the past year by
building up Israeli military superiority, thereby removing the hope
that Egypt might regain its territory by military means. This created
a "credibility gap" for Sadat both at home and in the Arab world.
SECRET (CDS)
DECLASSIFIED
N.L.N E.O. 12958, 03-01/5 as amended, Sect 3.5 sec. 3.3 (6)(1)(b) Hr AUG 26 2003
By
Date AUG 24 2007
$
[e. of 3]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library COPY
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECR ET (GDS)
- 2 -
Next Sadat described
recent contacts with the USSR
and the US. [See attachment for the relevant excerpts. ] His main
points about the US were that Egypt was being asked to make further
concessions merely in order to start the process of a settlement,
but not to solve the conflict; and that the US could not pressure Israel.
Against these two facts, Sadat mentioned as a "positive" element of
your clarification of the need to find a way to balance Egyptian
sovereignty and Israeli security concerns. He then retreated some-
what, referring to the possibility that this formula is simply a disguise
for allowing Israel to remain in occupation of Egyptian territory
indefinitely.
Much of the rest of the speech talked about the need for stendfastness
on the domestic front and included a number of jibes at Marxist and
other extremists.
Analysis
SANITIZED
3.3(b)(1)(6)
The
in contrast, says Sadat gave the impression of
"a beleaguered man" reacting rather emotionally to problems with which
he finds it difficult to cope. They note that his concept of "confrontation"
appears to envision continuation of diplomatic efforts parallel to military
preparations. The US remains the villain and, while the US view of
reconciling Egypt's sovereignty with Israel's security may be "positive,
1:
subsequent US actions (e. g. more arms for Israel) gave this view the
lie.
My analysis is that Sadat has been giving considerable thought to what
was told in Washington. He remains skeptical, but appears
realistic about what he can expect from the US. Finally, he seems to
SECRET (GDS)
[NLN 03-01/5:2]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
SECRET (GDS)
- 3 -
be pondering the idea that the concept of restoring Egyptian
sovereignty might allow for some arrangements that address
Israel's security concerns. It would seem premature to judge that
he has rejected the possibilities inherent in this concept. He care-
fully avoided any implied attack on you.
SECRET (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
[NLN 03 - 01/5:3] 01/5:3]
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
EXCERPTS FROM PRESIDENT SADAT'S SPEECH -- March 26, 1973
We now come to a review of the outcome of the diplomatic activity
completed SO far. First, let me review the Arab situation. There
are many negative aspects in the Arab situation
serious still are
the efforts of the campaign of doubts and the vicious psychological war-
fare to which I have called attention since the beginning of 1972.
On the first day of 1972
US Secretary of State stood up and launched
this campaign of psychological warfare. He said that despite Israel's
supremacy he would give it more weapons and increase its supremacy.
After that date, for several weeks reports leaked out every now and
then. One was about boats of such a length, such a beam and such
power. Another was about industrialization agreement, which they
announced had been concluded between the US and Israel in November
1971, for the manufacture of US arms in Israel. This psychological
warfare, as I have said, was launched the first day of 1972
the pur-
pose of this war was to strike at our domestic fronts. Israel won a mil-
itary battle in 1967 but did not achieve any political victory as a result
of our military defeat and her military victory. The problem became
even more complicated than before. The aim since the beginning of
1972 has been to strike at our domestic fronts through vicious psycho-
logical warfare. All the Arabs are being told it is no use. We shall
keep Israel superior and make it even more superior. In other words,
you have no choice but to accept US and Israel terms
As a result of
this vicious campaign -- a vicious psychological campaign -- a credi-
bility gap was created in the Arab world. The Arabs no longer believe
that anybody is going to fight a battle or has the capability to launch a
battle. The United States and Israel have succeeded in creating a credi-
bility gap in the Arab world. [Goes on to discuss positive developments
such as the Confederation and other unity efforts which Arabs should con-
centrate on in the interests of the "battle. "]
I now shift to the Big Five. When we began the campaign of
intensive diplomatic contacts, which I spoke to you about, which we
have been speaking about throughout the past period and which are
continuing even now, we said we would begin with the Big Five which have
the veto right in the Security Council and which have a commitment
to peace
Hafiz Ismail
began with a visit to the Soviet Union. Here I am
interested in telling you that through this visit and then through the visit
of General Ahmad Ismail (War) which were both made in February, I
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 2 -
can report to you that through these two visits we have put our cordial
relations with the Soviet Union in their proper perspective and straight-
ened them out completely. This, as you remember, was one of our
aims with the Soviet Union. After two long sessions between Brezhnev
and Hafiz Ismail and between Brezhnev and Ahmad Ismail, I can say
that we have put our relations in a proper perspective which is satis-
factory to all of us. This, as I have said, is one of our aims.
Later, Hafiz Ismail left for London and met with officials there --
the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary. Britain said to him,
through its Prime Minister, and its Foreign Secretary, that it is com-
mitted to the stand it adopted at Harrogate concerning the Security
Council resolution and concerning the issue at hand. There is nothing
new in Britain's stand.
Then, Hafiz Ismail went to Washington to complete his contacts
with the five Big Powers. There was much talk about Hafiz Ismail's
visit to Washington because at that time King Hussein had already
visited Washington and Golda Meir was about to. We had announced
our plan long before all this. We said we would make a move and begin
with the Five Major Powers.
In order that we may be clear, Hafiz Ismail did not leave from here
with an initiative from us nor did he go to listen to an initiative from
them. Hafiz Ismail went to Washington because it is one of the five
big powers which has the veto right. We wanted to know what was going
on in the mind of this great power with all its relations with Israel and
its influence on our cause. I say this so that matter will be clear. We
did not go with an initiative and we did not go to receive an initiative.
We went -- our contacts were with the big powers which have a re spon-
sibility for peace, particularly the United States. Inevitably, we had
to explore its views and learn what was going on in their minds there
in the US because as I have said the US is a basic party in this issue.
(Here there was a pause for a while.) Hafiz Ismail met with President
Nixon, with Rogers and with Kissinger. It is important to state our
position which Hafiz Ismail took with him so that things will be clear.
Our position which Hafiz Ismail put before them all -- President Nixon,
Rogers and Kissinger -- is the principled position to which we are
committed before our people -- the position to which we are committed
because it is the only position acceptable to us and to our people. He
told them: We have no initiative. We will not cede an inch of land and
we will not bargain with the rights of the Palestinian people. This
is our position which was presented to Pre sident Nixon, Rogers and
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 3 -
Kissinger. Ismail explored and we sat and listened to the US position.
I am sorry to tell you that all these contacts indicate one thing: That
we must make concessions so that the cause may get moving, rather
than be solved. This is the first thing. We must make concessions in
many and declared forms so that the cause can get moving. The second
thing: That the US cannot exert pressure on Israel. It is true President
Nixon took a positive position when he told Hafiz Ismail that the problem
is one of how to reconcile complete Egyptian sovereignty over Egyptian
territory and the requirements of Israeli security. I did not want to say
this because these were President Nixon's words, but this statement
was published in the New York Times. I therefore reply to it because it
was published. Since it was published, I must reply to it. This was
actually said, that is: How can we reconcile Egyptian sovereignty over
Egyptian territory with Israeli security requirements?
This is a positive statement on the surface. When we analyze it we
discover in it the mentality of the Americans, which is akin to what
Abba Eban recently said: The US coordinates fully with Israel. The
US has not denied this statement. It was the United States which de-
liberately leaked the news of the recent arms deal after Golda Meir's
visit to deter the Arabs. Israel is in agreement with the US on this
and the US has not denied it.
We would ask: How can Egyptian sovereignty over Egyptian territory
be reconciled with the requirements of Israeli security? The points
which Hafiz Ismail made plain to them were: We will not cede one
inch of land; we will not bargain with the Palestinian people's rights;
we will not accept a partial solution; we will not accept a separate
settlement.
These are clear, basic points: We will not cede one inch of land; we
will not bargain with the Palestinian people's rights. We do not accept
a partial solution. We do not accept a separate solution. I think these
points are quite clear. All the talk is centered on the requirements of
Israeli security. Many, many, many things are being asked under the
phrase "Israeli security.' " These are the concessions I told you about.
The demilitarization of Sinai is rejected. I repeat this before you
because we all agreed on it. It is not new. Giving Israel any right on
our land in any form or under the guise of superficial sovereignty is un-
acceptable. We are an alert and wise people. Everything must be clear.
When we say we will not cede one inch of our land, it means there will be
no concession of any form. We will not be lured by the title of superficial
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 4 -
sovereignty while tricks are being played underneath. No, we mean
what we say. We will not cede one inch of land. Egypt's sovereignty
over its territory must be total. Moreover, we do not agree to a
solution separate from our Arab brothers. Neither will we give up
any Arab land nor bargain with the Palestinian people's rights.
Concessions are being asked. The gist of the US stand is that open
concessions must be made to Israel so that it will be satisfied and
so that the cause will get moving. The US does not have the power
or the ability to bring pressure to bear on Israel. At the State De-
partment -- with Mr. Rogers -- there is only the interim solution:
Reopening the Suez Canal and solving the problem in stages. We have
given our answer to this. It is totally rejected. We do not accept
interim solutions, partial solutions, or a solution separate from the
rest of our Arab brothers!
Unfortunately, the essence of the US stand is that we are requested to
make concessions openly in order to get the cause moving but not to
solve it. Open concessions are requested SO that the cause will move.
In the meantime we should note that the US cannot and is not able to
bring pressure to bear on Israel.
I think the stand of the Americans is sufficiently clear. Allthis was
made clear recently by their stand following Golda Meir's visit to
the US and the deliberate announcement by the US of an arms deal.
I say before you that this matter constitutes a danger which the US
will eventually feel. It is a very grave matter. We consider it one
of the gravest situations. The US behavior, its announcement about
the deal and its supplying of Israel with more arms and aid for the
colonization and occupation of Arab land constitute an extremely
grave situation. What makes it even more grave is that Abba Eban
comes out and says that the US, in agreement with Israel, deliberately
made this announcement so as to deter the Arabs. Thus far the US has
not denied this. It is an extremely grave situation for which the US
should be held fully responsible. In the meantime, our Arab brothers
must review this situation together and make the correct calculations.
On his return, Hafiz Ismail met with the West German Chancellor.
The West German stand is between the two sides.
neutral.
France was occupied with elections. Contacts will be made with
France after the elections
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 5 -
As for the PRC, I have received a report from Dr. Zayyat (For-
eign Minister) who has actually concluded his visit to China. China's
stand is a principled one and is unchanged in its full support for us.
Therefore, of the five big powers only France remains to be contacted.
Contacts were not confined to the five big powers however. As you
have seen it was an intensive diplomatic campaign. nonaligned
leaders
of Yugoslavia and India and with the Eastern bloc
Asia, China.
India,
Pakistan and Iran.
Bangladesh.
The purpose of this intensive
diplomatic activity, as I have said, is not to present initiatives or to
expect initiatives to be presented to us or promised to us. We must
acquaint the whole world with the stage the battle has reached,
with the present phase and with how the situation has become explosive
and liable to erupt at any moment.
As I told you, we were proceeding
and continue to proceed along two parallel lines: Acitivities related to
military rebuilding and preparation by every possible means and intensive
diplomatic activity.
diplomatic activity and action never ceases --
before, during or after the battle. It is a continuous action which assumes
various forms. At times it will be intensive as we have just seen; at other
times it will continue in various degrees, according to the requirements
of the phase through which we are passing at the time.
What do we emerge from this stage with? The USSR sup-
ports our stand. It fully understands it. The USSR stands with us.
As I said, our relations with the USSR have returned and we have placed
them in their proper framework. We have always been eager to place
these relations in that framework.
After all that I have said, I think it is quite clear that the US wants us
to surrender by stages, or on the basis of a partial solution or separate
solution or through concessions which will make us lose everything.
All end in surrender in one stage or by stages. The US also insists on
another thing: negotiations between us and Israel. It is important to me
that I make the decision in front of you because this decision springs
from our people. The decision is that negotiations are rejected in form
and substance.
The US is giving Israel aid and it has announced that it will maintain
Israeli superiority. It announced and leaked this information deliber-
ately in order to deter us, the Arabs, psychologically with aid and the
continuation of aid to Israel in the coming stage. What proof is there
of all this? The prof of what I have told you has been emerging since
the beginning of 1972. It is a psychological war against our domestic
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 6 -
front, against us internally. The US said: We will maintain Israeli
superiority. We will increase its superiority. Arabs, you must lose
hope, you cannot at all stand up to Israel. The US wants to reach this
situation. We should know what we are going to face in the coming
stage. It is clear in all our diplomatic action.
There is one point or sign which is as clear as the sun. This is the
stand of the US. This is a basic element in the battle we are living in.
Today, the US is escalating the situation in agreement with Israel to shake
our domestic front. They defeated our armed forces in 1967. We re-
built these forces. This time they want to defeat the willpower of our
people. Obviously the armed forces will not be able to play their role
if we as a people are shattered and fragmented.
then the issue will
come to an end and they will need not to wage a battle
because we
will be fragmented internally
the aims of Israel and the US will
have been realized.
I wanted to state this lesson
unless the world feels your presence
and feels that you have a cause, it will not pay attention to you or feel
that you are there. Only you can make the world feel your presence.
Neither the US nor the USSR, only you and your action can achieve this.
the upshot of the situation concerning the diplomatic contacts is that
we must assume full responsibility for telling the world, like Vietnam,
and other have done, that we have a cause. We should do this on the
basis of a move on our part, an earnest military move, an earnest pol-
itical move in every direction. Unless this happens, the world will not
feel our presence
The useful lession which we learned clearly is that in order for the
world to feel your presence, life must first throb within you and you
must tell the world: I am alive and I can change situations militarily
and politically
[Sadat turns to lengthy discussion of domestic matters, along lines of
his favorite theme that a "battle" must progress at home - - domestic
unity and progress to complement and enhance the battle on the
foreign policy front. He criticizes leftists and others who have taken
advantage of "democracy" and plotted against the government instead.
He urges Egypt to get back on its proper route and says he will work
closely with the ASU (Egypt's only political party) in the future to
"share" the burden of decision-making with then.]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
- 7 -
Sadat returns to foreign policy at the end of his speech:
What are the features of the coming stage, the stage of
all-out confrontation? The features of the past stage were military
preparedness with all our resources and complete and concerted
diplomatic moves
I say the responsibilities of the coming stage,
the stage of all-out confrontation will be: First, completing the
military building so it may complete its taks with all strength, with
all that we have, and with all that we possess; and second, completing
the diplomatic move, which I said will not stop before the battle, dur-
ing the battle and after the battle
As I told you, the gist of the international position is that we must tell
the world we have a cause, namely that we should bear all the required
sacrifices to activate the situation militarily. As I have told you, other
nations did this before us. Russia, in order to liberate its soil, sacri-
ficed 20 million people
A battle means sacrifices. As I told you in summing up the external
position, you must make sacrifices, wage your battle and tell the
world: We are here, we can dictate our will and challenge our enemy.
This is clear.
[Sadat closes with explanation of his taking over Prime Ministership
and his interest in sharing responsibility with the people. End. ]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
G1
V. 27 Mar 73
EGYPT
PRESIDENT AS-SADAT PRESENTS :NEW LANDMARK' TO NATION
Speech to ASU, People's Assembly
Cairo Domestic Service in Arabic 1700 GMT 26 Mar 73 M
[Statement by President as-Sadat at the 26 Mar joint meeting of the ASU Central
Committee and the People's Assembly--recorded]
[Text] In the name of God, I planned this meeting in accordance with the traditions
We have laid down. Practice has proved the suitability of these tradtions, which we
have laid down together, because these have made us all understand our affairs and
made us confident of whatever course or decision we adopt.
My commitment to you was and will continue to be, God willing, that I should come to
you at every prominent landmark and to put before you what I have to say, hear what
you have to say and conduct a dialog together from which we would become aware of our
next step and where its exact place in the line of our march will be, what we would
anticipate from it and what we would tolerate for its sake. That has achieved for
us several guarantees: We are practicing democracy, and we constantly think matters
over and we will not surrender to chance or surprise but will, in all circumstances,
be in control or -directing them, not directed by them.
Today I feel that we are facing a prominent landmark which necessitated the convening
of this meeting. Brothers and sisters, you will recall that we met in this way last
July when I made decisions regarding the Soviet experts and advisers.
That decisionwez a prominent landmark in our action. We must remember that it was
not 2 hostile action against the Soviet Union because our attitude toward it is one
of a friend, however, we, ourselves, made that decision motivated by the interests of
our general struggle. you will also recall that we convened a similar meeting last
October after having held contacts with the Soviet Union in an attempt to clarify matters.
Today, along with important developments in all fields, I believe we have arrived at
another prominent landmark that has necessitated by inviting you to this meeting. As
I said, our meeting today is due to the presence of a prominent landmark along the
course of our struggle. It was inevitable that we would meet here to decide, and,
as J. said, 50 that we could become aware of our affairs.
You will recall that on J. May 1971. in my speech in Hulwan, I said verbatim: It is
inevitable that we use this battle as a staging point for rebuilding.
At that time J. cited as an example the battle in the summer of 1941 between the
Russian and the Germans when the latter were 15 kns from Moscow. and how the Soviet
Union made out of its defeat a starting point for rebuilding as well as liberating the
land, I gave this as an example and I said that even if we triumphed in our battle
but do not rebuild the state, the people and the individual; if we do not rebuild in
every direction, if we do not rebuild on the foundations which I described then as
based on science and belief, we will be bohind the times in which we live. At the
same time we must adhere to the basic fundamentals for we cannot succeed or achieve
if we neglect them or abandon them. It is really from this point that I begin my
talk with you today.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 2
EGYPT
Unless we make this battle a starting point for rebuilding completely in all
directions such as building the armed forces, building the factories and building
the individual- I said, if this battle is not a starting point for rebuilding,
then our people will not be destined to live. We will, after 5, 10 or 15 years,
be a target of similar invasions. We will remain lacking in our responsibilities
and will be behind the times in which we live. And this is the worst thing a people
can face because it means the destruction or complete defeat of this people.
Today, I want to review with you--and I say that we are before a prominent landmark
of the struggle. I can describe this land mark decision as one to which all of us
must be committed. The stage which we are beginning with your decision today is one
of allout confrontation. It is an allout confrontation because all of us believe
in the work, which has been done abroad and at home, that I am going to explain and
cite for you. I am going to explain the situation in a comprehensive manner from
all its angles. After we see the dimensions of all this, we will realize that we
must enter this stage--the stage of allout confrontation--believing in our fate, so
that we will not go astray or hesitate as some did in the previous period.
The stage is a stage of all-out confrontation with all its burdens. Why? During
the previous period and since the aggression, and in the past 5 and 1/2 years, we
entered many stages. We entered the stage of steadfastness; we entered the stage
of the war of attrition; we made a diplomatic effort in all directions. We took
initiatives. We accepted initiatives. We have done everything that had to be done
in the previous stage, but like our commitment on the first day, we have to commit
ourselves to two principles: First, not ceding an inch of land; second, not bargaining
Over the rights of the Palestinian people.
In all stages-whether in presenting initiatives, accepting initiatives or exerting
diplomatic efforts or contacting all the forces in the world, big or small--in all
these stages up till this moment, this commitment continues to stand because it is
a specific commitment on which we agreed and on which we have decided because it
stems from the conscience and will of our people, not ceding an inch of land and not
bargaining over the rights of the Palestinian people.
What happened in the past stage? I begin with the foreign situation because, as you
have seen, we have carried out and continue to carry out intensive diplomatic
activities with the five major powers, with West Europe, with Asia, with our friends
in the nonalined states, with the entire world and with the United Nations.
As I have told you, in the past stage we were following two parallel lines: Military
preparations and intensive and continued diplomatic activity. Of course, all this--
military preparations and the diplomatic activity--fall within the socialist lines
to which we are committed in our charter, in the 30 March statement and in the
National Action Program to which I added to the 30 March statement.
We now come to a review of the outcome of the part of diplomatic activity completed
so far.
First let me review the Arab situation. I would like to say, as we all can see, that
unfortunately there are many negative aspects in the Arab situation, but there are
also positive ones. It is true that we did not hold a summit conference. Perhaps
it is not the time now to hold a summit conference. In my estimation and in my
opinion, holding an Arab summit conference now without preparation and without
paving the way for its success, would be a shock and this would not be at all in the
interest of the battle.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G3
EGYPT
More serious still are the effects of the campaign of doubts and the vicious psycholog-
ical warfare to which I have drawn attention from the beginning of 1972. On the first
day of 1972 that is, 1 January 1972, or more than a year ago--the U.S. secretary of
state stood up and launched this campaign of psychological warfare. He said that des-
pite Israel' supremacy he would give it more weapons and increase its supremacy. After
this date, for several weeks, reports were leaked every now and then. One was about
boats of such length, such width and such power. Another was about the industrializa-
tion agreement, which they announced had been concluded between the United States and
Israel in November 1971, for the manufacture of U.S. arms in Israel. This psychological
warfare, as I said, was launched from the first day of 1972 on 1 January 1972, a little
more than a year ago. The purpose of this war is to strike at our domestic fronts.
Israel won a military battle in 1967 but did not achieve any political victory as a
result of our military defeat and her military victory. The problem became even more
complicated than before. The aim since the beginning of 1972 has been to strike at
our domestic fronts through vicious psychological warfare. All the Arabs are told:
There is no use. We shall keep Israel superior and make it even more superior. In
other words, you have no choice but to accept the U.S. and Israeli terms. I have
drawn 'attention to this campaign throughout 1972.
I will go back to my talk about the Arab situation. As a result of this vicious cam-
pàign--the vicious psychological campaign--a credibility gap was created in the Arab
world. They no longer believe that anybody is going to fight a battle or has the
capability to launch a battle. The United States and Israel have succeeded in creating
a credibility gap in the Arab world. For this reason I say that the call for an Arab
Summit should come after all these factors are removed whether the credibility gap to
which I referred or the effects of the psychological warfare or the other considerations
about which I have just spoken. There must be preparations so that this conference
will not backfire on us and se that we would emerge with a single Arab stand. No Arab
summit conference was held.
But, as I said, there are positive aspects. There are bilateral contacts; for example,
the state of the Confederation of Arab Republics exists and is composed of Egypt, Syria
and Libya. It is moving in slow steps but on firm ground and it forms a real nucleus
of unified Arab work. I take this opportunity before you to greet Syria's people and
the Syrian Armed Forces on the northern front. They, as you know, [applause] represent
a part of the front and the unified command between Egypt and Syria. I also take this
opportunity to greet the Libyan people and their leaders who are participating with us
in our battle and who are truly standing by us to face the destiny with us. [applause]
There are bilateral contacts and there are positive results stemming from them indeed.
It is not the right time yet to disclose these positive results. It is better if we
keep them going and if none of our enemies know anything about them because what ulti-
mately concerns us is the battle, the battle which is before and above everything else.
There are bilateral contacts and there are positive aspects in the Arab situation des-
pite the negative aspects which we see, such as the battle which has taken place recent-
ly, or the situations which have developed recently between Kuwait and Iraq or Jordan's
stand toward the resistance and such other stands. All these are negative aspects in
the Arab situation but, as I said, there are positive aspects which have really begun
to bear fruit as far as the battle is concerned.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 4
EGYPT
Having discussed the Arab situation, I now shift to the big five. When we began
the campaign of intensive diplomatic contracts, which I talked to you about and which
we have been talking about throughout the past period and which are continuing even
now, we said we would begin with the big five who have the veto right in the Security
Council and who have a commitment toward peace, the world's peace as a whole regard-
less of the inclinations of any of these powers.
Hafiz Isma'il, the national security adviser, began with a visit to the Soviet Union.
Here I am interested in telling you that through this visit and then through the visit
of Gen Ahmad Isma'il, which were both made in February, I can report to you that
through these two visits we have put our cordial relations with the Soviet Union in
their proper perspective and straightened them out completely. This, as you remember,
was one of our aims with the Soviet Union. After two long sessions between president
[as heard] Brezhnev and Hafiz Isma'il and between president Brezhnev and Ahmad Isma'il,
I can say that we have put our relations in a proper perspective which is satisfactory
to all of us. This, as I said, is one of our aims.
Later, Hafiz Isma'il left for London and met with officials there--the prime minister
and'the foreign secretary. Britain said to him, through its prime minister and its
foreign secretary, that it is committed to the stand it adopted at Harrogate concern-
ing the Security Council resolution and concerning the issue. There is nothing new
in Britain's stand.
Then Hafiz Isma'il left for Washington to complete his contact with the five big
powers. There was much talk about Hafiz Isma'il's visit to Washington because at
that time King Husayn had already visited Washington and Golda Meir was about to
visit Washington. We had announced our plan long before all this. We said we would
make a move and begin with the five major powers.
In order that we may be clear, Hafiz Isma'il did not leave from here with an initia-
tive from us nor did he go to listen to an initiative from them. Hafiz Isma'il went
to Washington because it is one of the five big powers which have the veto right.
We wanted to know what went on in the mind of this great power with all its relations
with Israel and its influence on our cause. I say this so that matters will be clear.
We did not go with an initiative, and we did not go to receive an initiative. We
went--our contacts were with the big powers which have a responsibility for peace,
particularly the United States. Inevitably we had to explore its views and learn
what goes on in their minds there in the United States, because, as I said, they are
a basic party in this issue.
Here there was a pause for a while. Hafiz Isma'il met with President Nixon, with
Rogers and with Kissinger. It is important to state our position which Hafiz Isma'il
took with him so that things will be clear. Our position which Hafiz Isma'il put
before them President Nixon, Rogers and Kissinger--is the principled position
to which we are committed before our people--the position to which we are committed
because it is the only position acceptable to us and to our people. He told them:
We have no initiatives. We will not cede an inch of land and will not bargain over
the rights of the Palestinian people. This is our position which was presented to
President Nixon, Rogers and Kissinger. He [Isma'il] explored, and we sat and listened
to the U.S. position.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
05
EGYPT
I am sorry to tell you that all these contacts indicate one thing: that we must make
concessions so that the cause may get moving, not be solved. This is the first thing.
We must make concessions in many and declared forms so that the cause can get moving.
The second thing [which the contacts indicate 1s] that the United States cannot exert
pressure on Israel. It is true there was a positive position by President Nixon when
he told Hafiz Isma'il that the problem is one of how to reconcile complete Egyptian
sovereignty over Egyptian territory and the requirements of Israeli security,
I did not want to say this because these were President Nixon's words, but this state-
ment was published in the New York TIMES. I therefore reply to it because it was
published. Since it was published, I must reply to it. This was actually said, that
is: How can we reconcile Egyptian sovereignty over Egyptian territory with the Israeli
security requirements.
This is outwardly a positive statement. When we analyze it we find out the mentality
of the Americans in it which is the same as what Abba Eban recently sàid: The United
States coordinates fully with Israel. The United States has not denied this statement.
It was the United States which deliberately leaked out the news about the recent arms
deal after Golda Meir's visit to deter the Arabs. Israel is in agreement with the United
States on this and the United States has not denied it.
We would ask: How can Egyptian sovereignty over Egyptian territory be reconciled with
the requirements of Israeli security? The points which Hafiz Isma'11 made plain to
them were: We will not cede an inch of land. We will not bargain over the Palestinian
people's rights. We will not accept 6 partial solution. We will not accept a separate
settlement.
These are clear, basic points. We will not cede an inch of land. We will not bargain
over the Palestinian people's rights; we do not accept : partial solution. We do not
accept a separate solution. I think these points are quite clear. All the talk is
centered on the requirements of Israeli security. Many, many, many things are being asked
under the phrase "Israeli security" these are the concessions I told you about. The
demilitarization of Sina1 is rejected. I repeat this before you because We all agreed
1
on it. It is not new. Giving Israel any right on our land in any form or under the
guise of superficial sovereignty is unacceptable, We are an alert and wise people.
Everything must be clear. When we say we will not concede an inch of our land, it means
that there will be no concession of any form. We will not be lured by the title of
superficial sovereignty while tricks are being played underneath. No. We mean what
we say. We will not cede an inch of land. Egypt's sovereignty over its territory must
be full; moreover, we do not agree to a solution separate from our Arab brothers, nor
will we give up any Arab land or bargain over the Palestinian people's rights.
Concessions are being asked. The gist of the U.S. stand is that open concessions must
be made to Israel so that it will be satisfied and so that the cause will get moving.
The United States does not have the power or the ability to bring pressure on Israel.
At the State Department--with Mr Rogers there is orly the interim solution: The
reopening of the Suez Canal and solving the problem in stages, We have given our answer
to this. It is totally rejected. We do not accept Interim solutions or partial solutions
or a solution separate from the rest of our Arab br thers.
Unfortunately, the essence of the U.S. stand is that we are requested to make concessions
openly in order to get the cause moving and not to solve it. Open concessions are
requested so that the cause will move. In the meantime, we should note that the United
States cannot and is unable to bring pressure on Israel.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 6
EGYPT
I think the stand of the Americans is sufficiently clear. All this was made clear
recently by their stand following Golda Meir's visit to the United States and the
deliberate announcement by the United States about the arms deal. I state before
you that this matter constitutes a danger which the United States will eventually
feel. It is a very grave matter. We consider it one of the gravest situations.
The U.S. behavior, its announcement about the deal, and its supply to Israel of more
arms and aid for the colonization and occupation of Arab land constitute an extremely
grave situation. What makes it even more grave is that Abba Eban comes out and says
that the United States, in agreement with Israel, deliberately made this announcement
so as to deter the Arabs. Up to this day, the United States has not denied this.
It is an extremely grave situation for which the United States should be held fully
responsible. In the meantime, our Arab brothers must review this situation together
and make the correct calculations.
On his return, Hafiz Isma'il met with the West German Chancellor. The West German
stand is between the two sides. They adhere to some sort of neutrality between the
two sides. But if they could possibly play some role--if they could qualify to play
some role--they would attempt to do so, however, they adhere to a neutral stand
between the two sides.
France was occupied with the elections. Contacts will be made with France after the
elections, God willing. We all know France's actual stand; however, for further
clarification, in its capacity as one of the big powers, we must contact France and
acquaint it with the latest stand and learn their latest stand and everything that is
going on in their mind as we are doing with the five big powers.
As for the PRC, I have received a report from Dr az-Zayyat who has just concluded his
visit to China. China's stand is a principled one and is unchanged in its full
support for us. Therefore, of the five big powers, only France remains to be con-
tacted. This was due to the elections. Contacts were held with the Soviet Union,
Britain, the United States and China. France remains to be contacted. As I said,
in the coming phase we will set a date and acquaint them with the latest stand and
learn their latest views.
Contacts were not confined to the five big powers however. As you have seen, it was
an intensive diplomatic campaign. Contacts were also held with the nonalined leaders
of Yugoslavia and India and with the Eastern Bloc. First Secretary of the ASU Central
Committee Sayyid Mar'i visited the Eastern Bloc and returned recently from a long
trip that lasted over 20 days. During this trip he visited five Easter Bloc countries.
Dr Zayyat continues his trip to Asia. After he visited China, as we said, he
visited India, Pakistan and Iran within the framework of our contacts with the nona-
lined leaders, and now he is in Bangladesh.
I have, therefore, covered the positive and negative aspects of the Arab stand, our
contacts with the five big powers, the current intensive contacts with the East and
the West and with the nonalined states and in all directions.
The purpose of this intensive diplomatic activity, as I said, is not to present
initiatives nor to expect initiatives to be presented to us or promised to us. We
must acquaint the whole world with the stage the battle has reached, with the present
phase and with how the situation has become explosive and liable to erupt at any
moment. This was contained in the text of the messages I addressed to the five big
powers. I said that the situation is about to explode and that every responsible man
in the world should assume his responsibility toward world peace and that our question
can no longer tolerate any more than what we have already endured.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
07
EGYPT
This was the part pertaining to the intensive diplomatic activity in the previous
phase. As I told you, we were proceeding and continue to proceed along two parallel
lines: activities related to military rebuilding and preparation by every possible
means and intensive diplomatic activity. The diplomatic activity began with the five
big powers, and naturally with the Arab countries who are our brothers and who share
our destiny, and ended with all the world's states, the big powers, the nonalined
states and all world states to which our voice can reach.
We are now emerging from this phase or from this part of our activity in the previous
phase. Diplomatic activity was carried out in the previous phase and will continue
in the coming phase because political and diplomatic activity and action never ceases,
before, during or after the battle. It is a continuous action which assumes various
forms. At times it will be intensive, as we have just seen; at other times it will
continue in various degrees according to the requirements of the phase through which
we are passing at the time.
It must be borne in mind that there will be political and diplomatic activity before
the battle, during the battle and after the battle. It is a continuous action. It
goes on all the time. With what do we emerge from this stage? The USSR supports
our stand. It fully understands it. The USSR stands with us. As I said, our
relations with the USSR have returned and we placed them in their proper framework.
We have always been eager to place these relations in that framework.
After all that I have said, I think it is quite clear that the United States wants us
to surrender by stages or on the basis of a partial solution or separate solution or
through concessions which will make us lose everything. All end in surrender, in one
stage, or by stages. The United States also insists on another thing: Negotiations
between us and Israel. It is important to me that I make the decision in front of
you because this decision springs from our people. The decision is that it [negotiations
with Israel] is rejected in form and substance.
The United States is giving Israel aid, and it announced that it will maintain the
Israeli superiority. It announced and leaked out this information deliberately in
order to deter us, the Arabs, psychologically, with aid and the continuation of aid to
Israel in the coming stage. What is proof of all this? The proof of what I have told
you has been emerging since the beginning of 1952. It is a psychological war against
our domestic front, against us internally. The United States said: We will maintain
Israeli superiority. We will increase its superiority. Arabs, you must lose hope, you
cannot stand up to Israel at all. The United States wants to reach this situation.
We should know what we are going to face in the coming stage. It is clear in all our
diplomatic action. There is one point or sign which is as clear as the sun. This is the
stand of the United States. This is a basic element in the battle we are living in.
Today, the United States is escalating the situation in agreement with Israel to shake
our domestic front. They defeated our armed forces in 1967. We rebuilt these forces.
This time they want to defeat the willpower of our people. They want to make us
shatter internally, to shatter us as a people. Obviously the armed forces will not
be able to play their role, if we, as a people, are shattered and fragmented. If
we disagree, if we are influenced by suspicions, disputes, divisions, ideologies and
other things which some wanted to circulate, if this takes place the United States or
Israel will not need a battle because we will collapse internally and then the issue
will come to an end and they will not need to wage a battle. They will not need a
psychological war to wage against us.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 8
EGYPT
They will need nothing because the whole thing will be finished because we will be
fragmented internally. There will be no need for a military or political battle. It
will be the end. As a people we come to the end and then the aims of Israel and the
United States will have been realized.
I wanted to state this lesson to the world. I want to tell you something. They said
it in West Europe while we were talking with them. They said that unless the world
feels your presence and feels that you have a cause, it will not pay attention to you
or feel that you are there. Only you can make the world feel your presence. Neither
the United States nor the USSR, only you and your move can achieve this. This is the
upshot of the situation. [applause] The upshot of the situation concerning the
diplomatic contacts is that we must assume full responsibility for telling the world,
like Vietnam and others have done, that we have a cause. We should do this on the
basis of a move on our part, an earnest military move, and earnest political move and
a move in every direction. [applause] Unless this happens the world will not feel our
presence. The cause will continue to languish. The maximum they will offer will be
the partial solution, the interim solution and the other talk we have been hearing.
My meeting with you today to discuss this stage, which I call a landmark and a stage of
allout confrontation, was scheduled to take place in November. This meeting was
supposed to take place in November in accordance with the summer schedule. You remember
that at the opening of the People's Assembly in October, I said that I summoned the war
minister, the prime and the ASU secretary in August and I gave them my views of the
coming stage. In August, I believed that we were about to enter this stage which I am
discussing with you today, in order to approve it and approve the commitments and
sacrifices it needs and in order that we have a clear vision. This meeting with you
was scheduled to take place in November, but in view of conditions, which, as I once
said, it is not the right time yet to disclose, the meeting was postponed. Today, we
are meeting in order to enter this stage.
I mean to say that this stage was calculated and has been taken into account since last
summer by all top officials of the state. The planning for this was in force, This
means we are proceeding in accordance with a plan and a strategy. Questions do not arise
just because certain events occur and influence us or changes take place and make us
deviate from our aim or battle.
This is what happened in the past stage concerning the diplomatic move in front of the
entire world, a move which we began, which is continuing and which will continue.
The useful lesson which we clearly learned is that in order for the world to feel your
presence, life must throb in you first and you must tell the world: Iam alive and I
can change situations militarily and politically. Only then will the world feel our
presence and only then will our issue move. This is a summation of our diplomatic action
in the past stage, and it serves now and will in the future, God willing.
I turn to the domestic situation during the past stage. At the beginning of my statement
I told you that in May 1971 I said in Hulwan that we should make this battle a staging
point for rebuilding; otherwise, our people will be lost forever. It is not enough to
win the battle. New building based on all the science and technology of the age is
necessary. We are not short of brains, industrial bases, cadres or anything. We have
everything, and we are qualified to enter this age while many other states are not. We
are completely qualified, and we have already part of these requirements.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G9
EGYPT
Without using the battle as a staging point, there will be no life for our people.
I cited the Soviet Union 85 an example. Germany's scientific and technological
superiority over the Soviet Union in 1941 was tens-of-times more than Israel's
superiority over us. Germany took the whole world, including the big industrial
states, by surprise. Hitler prepared himself for 10 years exactly like Israel prepared
itself for 10 years between 1957 and 1967.
Hitler took the big industrial states by surprise. England was a major industrial
state. The United States was a major industrial state. France was a major industrial
state. Yet, because one state prepared itself for 10 years while the others were
sleeping, it. was possible for Germany, within a certain period, to become superior to
not only. Russia, which was not a major industrial state but an ordinary state, but
also to the major industrial states. This is because the first degree industrial
states were not alert while Germany was alert and preparing itself, which is exactly
like what happened between Israel and us.
I say that unless the building of the new state proceeds side by side with the battle,
that the two proceed simultaneously, survival cannot be decreed for our people. The
Soviet Union spent 3 years fighting a fierce war until it ousted the Germans from its
territory. The rebuilding did not stop but went on and turned the Soviet Union from an
ordinary state into one of two superpowers in the world today. They went up to the
moon; they sent Lunokhod to the moon. They have technology and intercontinental
missiles. The United States reached agreement with them. Nixon travels to Moscow to
reach agreement with them. Why? Because they built up [the domestic front] side by
side with the liberation of the land. They liberated their land, yes, but they
established a pattern for new building which would protect their land and make any man
think a hundred times before attacking them. That is what I mean when I say if the
battle is not a starting point for rebuilding then even if we were to win this battle
militarily and liberate our land, 5 years later we would be in 2 worse situation. We
would be attacked again. The dimensions of the aggression, in view of the fearful
scientific progress in the world, would be much greater than those of the aggression
already committed against us and the defeat would be worse than the one we suffered in
1967. This is what I believe in general terms: Unless we make the battle a starting
point for new building then we will be gambling with the future of our people and we will'
not be fulfilling our historic responsibility before God, our conscience, people and the
coming generations.
What has happened internally? We have spoken about what happened abroad and we have
emerged with the lesson. What has happened internally? With 'Abd an-Nasir, we began
our march with the charter and the 30 March Manifesto. On 28 September 1970, 'Abd
an-Nasir died. We all shouldered the responsibility and proceeded until 15 May [1971]
came, May 15th, we said, is a landmark along the road. The charter is our guide.
The 30 March manifesto is the basis on which the people gave me their confidence and in
accordance with which I was elected. These are the fundamental documents. The post 15-May
era is a continuation of the charter and the 30 March Manifesto. But after 15 May and
after what happened to us as a people, Istated that in order to apply the charter
soundly and to practice the sound democracy set forth in the 30 March Manifesto, we must
adopt the concept of a state of institutions and supremacy of the law. May 15 gains
importance not because it is the date or a new revolution, hot at all. The 23 July
revolution is the one and indivisible revolution. Our documents are established ones.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 10
EGYPT
These are: the charter; the 30 March Manifesto and after 15 May I added to the 30
March Manifesto, the National Action Program. Our documents are established. But
after 15 May, in order to apply the charter, and in order that the entire people
would be able to take part in shouldering the responsibility, we advocated the concept
of the state of institutions and the supremacy of the law. The People's Assembly
enacted the Laws which implement the constitution such as the laws on liberties.
Discussions were and are held in the People's Assembly. After 15 May everyone began
to feel his responsibility in the. phase and the battle we are experiencing. When I
say the battle, I mean that the battle has been going on since the aggression and
even before the aggression. But the battle entered its final stage with the 1967
aggression.
We have been waging a battle since 1967. It is not something new. For those who
want to cast doubts, we say we have been waging a battle since 1967. The battle
has been going on since 1967.
We said that in order to implement the charter and to implement our socialist line,
we would set up a state of institutions in which the supremacy of the law would
prevail. We said we would establish controls over the exercise of democracy, namely
defining the relationship among the institutions and consequently the relationship
within the state as a whole and between the state and the people. Imust be frank
with you. My hopes in this respect have not materialized to the degree I wanted,
both in respect to the state of institutions or the supremacy of
the law.
Why? Certain old circumstances and feelings imposed themselves on the new circum-
stances. of course, you understand what I mean. Certain forces did not know their
roles in the new democracy. The rules for practicing démocracy were themselves
always engulfed with danger from certain circumstances which we experienced and which
you experienced. The rules for practicing democracy, which I stressed at the People's
Assembly, have all been engulfed with risks. In such a situation, as I said at the
People's Assembly, one must be tolerant--there should be some tolerance--until we
complete the experiment. This means that there will be mistakes and that we will
correct the mistakes,
Matters, however, went beyond this. As I said, there have been sensitive feelings
and some people have not understood the role required of them. As I also said--and
this is the most serious point--the practice'of democracy was misunderstood, the
supremacy of the law was misunderstood and the state of institutions was also mís-
understood. Simply speaking, you are all aware of this. The people see how people
abroad are talking about the struggle between the government and the ASU, between
the ASO and the government, between the People's Assembly and the ASU and between
the People's Assembly and the government. In a state of institutions, this is not
possible; otherwise, it would be a state of contradictions, not of institutions.
In the midst of all this, we are governed by an overwhelming situstion--the battle.
We annot postpone the battle until we organize ourselves and organize democratic
practice Internally. The interests of our homeland, the historic stage through
which we are passing and the stage of international circumstances surrounding us,
about which I spoke to you and which became clear following our contacts with the
whole world--all these factors do not allow us to walt until we organize ourselves
internally. Postpone the battle until we organize things? No. The battle is urgent
just as the correct practice of democracy, the state of institutions and the supremacy
of the law are urgent. The two must go together. I cannot postpone one for the
sake of the other. The tvo must go together.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
EGYPT
V. 27 Mar 73
G 11
What has been the result of all this? What has been the result of the contradiction
and of the ensuing struggles? We ourselves initiated the causes for perplexity
regarding our position. We ourselves started this; it came from within our midst.
This, or course, WES reflected in the world around us. I warned against this at the
People's Assembly meeting and also at my meetings with the Standing Committee of the
People's Assembly and with the journalists.
As a result of these contradictions, we confused ourselves and caused this confusion
to reflect itself in the world around us. This is what really hurt me. We damaged
Egypt's prestige without justification. This is not right. There was no reason for
this as I told you: There was no reason for this damage at all.
A statement would be issued in the name of the students. All of you know that there
are 250,000 students in the universities and higher institutes. All those arrested
in December numbered about 48 students. Do these represent the students of Egypt?
Yet the statement was issued and sent abroad as though it spoke for the youths of
Egypt's universities. It is we who have confused ourselves.
Who wants this confusion in our midst? In my summing up the external situation, I
told you that the aim of the 1972 campaign, which began at the beginning of January 1972
at the hands of Mr Rogers, and the aim of the escalation which began in 1973 following
Golda Meir's visit [to Washington] is to deter the Arabs, confuse our internal front,
cause division among us and destroy us from within. Abroad, this is the aim of the
enemy, and we see it in front of us; at home, it is we who work for their aim and
prepare the atmosphere for it. Thanks be to God, fortunately the effect of all this
has been very limited. I am talking to you about it because it constitutes a grave
sign regarding the coming stage which I term the stage of comprehensive confrontation.
This stage of confrontation cannot at all tolerate a period of confusion which we
create for ourselves
As I said, this confusion has been helped by the daily psychological warfare against
us which says that the Arabs cannot beat Israel and in which the United States
declares: I will guarantee superiority and more than superiority, and so forth.
On the other hand, there is no doubt that bureaucratic conditions exist in our
government machinery, which are hard on people's interests. Bureaucracy and its
stagnation are like a fearful octopus lying on the chest of all the people. This
is one of many factors. Consequently, there was certain political deviation in the
country.
It is very strange. There was a casting of doubts about everything. There were
doubts regarding any decision made. It was said that there was no plan and the state
had no plan. There were even personal attacks. Perhaps you have heard of these
personal attacks. It was a strange political negligence. The biggest phenomenon was
actually what took place in the universities. Events at the universities began at the
beginning of last summer and not on the reopening of the universities. I spoke about
this at the People's Assembly. Last summer's events were a continuation of the first
movement in 1972 when the socalled Higher Students Committee was formed; however, when
the movement failed and ended and its organizers confessed their role, we, at the
National Congress, said we would pardon them and refer the case to the universities.
The case was referred to the universities but the activity continued. Then in
October 1972, with the same objective in mind, they changed the name of the Higher
Students Committee to the Committee for the Defense of Democracy and Liberties.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 12
EGYPT
As I told you before in the People's Assembly, a seminar was held at 'Ayn Shams
University under the name of 'Abd an-Nasir's idea with the purpose of portraying
!Abd an-Nasir as a Marxist. Why then did he establish the alliance of the working
peoples forces? On 28 September when we held a commemoration ceremony for him in
this hall I said that 'Abd an-Nasir's ingenuity included the concept of alliance of the
working peoples forces. This was the idea he created. Why? Because, as I told you
on 28 September, the man was inspired only by the legacy, soil, character, structure
and objectives of the country and the phase through which it was passing. He could
have said: Party dictatorship or proletariat dictatorship or multi- parties or
anything else. What he said was: The alliance of the working peoples forces.
We say that work is sacred and that all of us, as 'Abd an-Nasir said--who receives
a salary for his work and has no other incone--beginning with the president of the
republic to the most junior employee, we are all workers. Work is the most honorable
thing. That is why he said: The alliance of the working peoples forces. Neverthe-
less, the seminar in question sought to portray 'Abd an-Nasir as a Marxist. As I
told you before, the professor told his students that what, they were saying was not
'Abd an-Nasir's ideas but Marxist words. 'Abd an-Nasir's ideas, he told the students,
were contained in his speeches, in the revolution's documents, in the philosophy
of the revolution and in 'Abd an-Nasir's writings which have been printed and recorded
and which exist. We do not need to look for someone to provide us his writings since
they are available and recorded here. The movement began during the summer and was
extended to the universities.
We say that the basic documents available after 15 May are the same documents which
existed before 15 May--the charter and the 30 March Manifesto. After 15 May I added
to this the National Action Program. NO. Certain forces with vested interests began
to take control. The law on liberties was enacted. The People's Assembly debated
the subject at length and drew up laws, including the law on liberties. The case
which has been referred to the socialist prosecutor, and regarding which I asked
the People's Assembly to issue the law. [sentence as heard]. I knew nothing about
it. What concerns me is the society's safety. I ask the People's Assembly to issue
the socialist prosecutor's law to protect the society. [applause] There is no
society in the world without protection. The attorney general in the United States,
who replaces the secretary of justice, is not called the secretary of justice but the
attorney general, protects the capitalist system in the United States. The socialist
prosecutor in the socialist camp in Russia and other countries protects the socialist
system. We need a socialist prosecutor to protect our system, public property and
protect the society against deviation. [applause]
A certain provision of the law cannot be applied at times. The judge is governed
by his conscience only. We must encourage such conscientiousness so as to give our
people guarantees. Hcwever, there should be someone to protect the interests of the
society. Therefore, I am requesting that the socialist prosecutor law be enacted
in view of the plotting.
I am speaking thus so that we will not deviate from our line. I have spoken about
the foreign stage, now I. am speaking about the domestic stage. The outcome of what
we said about the state of institutions and the sovereignty of the law has been felt.
There are certain elements which have been harmed by the changes which took place
on 15 May.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 13
EGYPT
We all know that they are members of the Vanguard organization, A great part of
the left wing, which was linked to the centers of power==because, we must be frank,
the centers of power were operating with the left, 28 you all know. [sentence
incomplete as heard] When the National Charter was in the hands of the socialist
institute, its thoughts were Marxist. The thoughts of our charter were Marxist.
For this reason they want to say that 'Abd an-Nasir was a Marxist. All these people
suffered on 15 May. For this reason 15 May has become important. We must wake up
and go back to it. We must revise our calculations.
The Vanguard organization plus a great part of the left-which sincere, falsely or
for selfish and Opportunist reasons believed that 1t suffered because of 15 May,
began to plot. They imagined that they could exploit any situation through the
supremacy of the law and the state of institutions.
In fact, one of them wrote in a statement to the socialist attorney that "the hands
of the authorities will always be trembling. DO not be afraid. They said the
same thing in the university.
Certain elements have been workeng en this theme since October and up to this date.
Imagine that this has become a means of plotting. The supremacy of the law, the
state of institutions and the law on liberties have become a means of plotting.
No.
I will not 80 back on the state of institutions, the law on liberties and the supremacy
of the law. I will not go back. But we must apply controls. Therefore, it is
important for me to tell you that using these things for plctting will absolutely
not be allowed in the future. We have given a free rein for It months and we stood
watching. We have been scandalized in all the world. The Egyptian students sought
the help of the world's students. These people are now before the judiciary and the
prosecution and they will give you their opinion on them. Since these people are
before the judiciary, I. must not express an opinion before the judiciary does so;
some 40 or 48 students these represent Egypt's quarter of a million students- or
so it is depicted abroad. Unfortunately, some of our journalists and other people
say such things. All the world is shocked as a result. We have arrested the
leaders of the sedition in accordance with the ordinary public law and not the
emergency law. They speak about the sovereignty of the law the detention camps.
There is not a single detained person in Egypt today. There has not been one for
a year and a half. There are no detainees, male or female. There are no more. It
is finished.
Whoever we arrest is arrested on the order and with the persmission of the prosecution
and 100 percent in accordance with legal action.
Then the feverish situation, which you all felt, broke out in the student movement,
Everytime we dispersed the students and the more Mamduh [the interior minister] doalt
with the matter prudently and quietly, the more the others created disturbances
and heated up the situation. Why? Because- is stated in the written documents
now in the hands of the socialist astorney-- the authorities' trembling hands.
must be faced with revolutionary violence. They want a bloodbath in our country.
These things are imported from abroad. But our country does not like such things
at all. Our country never lived on blood nor does it like blood at all.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
G 14
EGYPT
We have all been brought up this way, This is contrary to our charter which says
that we should settle conflicts peacefully. We do not solve them through bloody
conflicts. Even during the change of the social superstructure which 'Abd an-Nasir
carried the sweeping changes of the 1961 decisions no blood was shed in our
country. We all remember that the society's structure changed without bloodshed.
Egypt remains today as it was then.
Egypt always follows a middle course; it does not like extremism at all. Our
history goes back 7,000 or 8,000 years. We have assimilated all those who invaded
us while our people have never been assimilated. Our people have always followed
a middle course. Egypt does not like the extreme right or the extreme left. The
people choose the course they like and the course that suits them best. Violence
and bloodshed have never been our way. The aim of the whole operation was violence
and bloodshed in the country. Egypt is an oasis of security for all the Arabs
and for us, even during the catastrophe through which we are living. We are
facing an enemy. We must prepare ourselves for him and shed blood while fighting
him there [on the front]. Instead, we want to shed one another's blood and create
a rancor which is strange to us.
As I told you, two persons would ride a bus and start talking in front of the bus
passengers about two students who were beaten and say that one of them died. After
two bus stops, these persons would leave the bus. They would take the mothers of
the arrested students to the trade unions headquarters or to the university and go
inside in order to instigate the others.
While I watched, a feverish situation was developing. The situation smacked of
something foreign. It was the first time that it had happened here. There has been
an operation, premeditation, insistence and planning. I told Mamduh that there
is something behind it. There was only a handful of people at Cairo and 'Ayn Shams
universities who would wait for the students after the 1130 lecture and would take
with them those who wanted to run away and go out in a demonstration.
Are these Egypt's students? No. All the rest of the universities and higher
institutes were normal. Whenever the situation is calm there is conspiracy to
cause trouble.
Was the Central Security Department made to contain demonstrations? No. The role
of the police changed long ago. The Central Security Department, because of the
training going on It it, will be one of the bases of the popular resistance when
the battle takes place. It is trained exactly like the shock troops in the army
in order to be a popular resistance protecting the rear of our armed forces. We
are not establishing it to contain demonstrations. What demonstrations? This talk
was made a long time ago. Today we are working on another concept.
There are those who plan, prepare, plot and say the hands of the authorities are
trembling. This is because we have enacted a law on liberties. They are reassured
about the law on liberties. We have established the supremacy of the law and they
are reassured about the supremacy of the law. That is it. They plot, enter and
release [presumably prisoners], and even commit massacres and bloodshed in the name
of the freedom and democracy that they were calling for. Do freedom and democracy
mean blood, the shedding of blood in the streets and natred? No. Hatred is in the
heart. It is easy to have it with our present wound. Were we not wounded? All
of us were wounded and all of us are suffering from the high cost of living, from
the bureaucracy I talked to you about and the contradictions.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
0 15
EGYPT
There are one million problems, Our telephone network 13 50 years old and should
have been changed 20 years ago. Everything we have is loaded with more than it
can bear. But we say ve bear all this, continue our battle and then we will renew
all the building, We will build while the sccialist construction is going on.
But we will finish our battle and then begin a fullscale reconstruction. That all
our networks telephones, sewage--will be changed. But we must first finish
our battle. Any person can be critical these days.
I say this to the journalists who are sitting with us because they have had a strange
attitude. They criticized us by saying it rained and flooded the telephone lines.
What will you do during the battle? From the first day of the battle the telephones--
ours and the enemy be out of order. From the first day of the battle every-
thing will be out of order at our end and their end. The enemy will hit me, and I
will hit him. This is not a problem. Is this the understanding by the press of the
responsibility of the phase?
During the student incidents, the attitude of the press was very strange. Journalists
are sitting here with us, and I am speaking to let them hear. Not one journalist
defends the state of institutions and the supremacy of the law. I do not want him
to defend the authorities as they were saying. No. Let them defend the state of
institutions and the supremacy, of the law because without these no one could have
opened his mouth as they are doing now. No one defended the state out of fear of
the students or to appease them or because he himself was terrified and thought
that the world had been lost. Why so? Why did this happen in the press? The
situation reached the extent among the press that five journalists were controlling
the press syndicate and issuing decisions. They sent me a warning: Within 2 weeks,
while the General Assembly is meeting, you have to do 50 and so. The assembly
met for 2 weeks. Let us see what it would do. Will it bring me to account? Warning!
It is strange. This is a political deviation.
Every meeting I held was attended by the journalists who are with you here. They
know the entire picture. But they say the situation is unclear. What is the meaning
of 'unclear'? You read news cables more than anyone else, know what is taking place
abroad, know the picture, know that unless we wage our battle the world will not
pay attention to us and know that we are going to do that. You attended all our
meetings on the high responsibility level. Unfortunately, as a result of the
political deviations which have taken place, the plotting went on until we checked
it. There is no need for details because these are with the socialist presecutor.
He is the one who has the right to disclose details of this subject at the time he
deems fit. But I want to speak to you about the students operation, the first and
second leaflets which were printed and which were said to represent the students
movement and were distributed in the name of the students and the apartments which
were rented. I do not know what kind of a student who can afford to rent apartments
in Al-Haram street in order to harbor wanted students and feed them. What kind or
students are these? During our times students were poor.
The entry of mothers to the university stadiums and their going to trade union is
also recorded by the order of the prosecutor.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V.
27 Mar 73
G 16
EGYPT
The plotting was uncovered. But this is not what I want to talk to you about today.
Is there a room for the repetition of such things during the forthcoming full-scale
confrontation stage? No. Therefore, we must take our sound and correct positions.
The supremacy of the law and the state of institutions do not mean plotting nor
anarchy. On the contrary, we teach them how to respect law and respect the insti-
tutions and not do as they did and push them to curse all institutions and everything
else.
Just as we have learned a useful lesson from our diplomatic activity, we have also
learned a useful lesson from what happened on the domestic front as a result of mis-
understanding or premeditated bad intentions in interpreting the state of institutions,
the supremacy of the law and liberties. I believe we have learned a useful lesson
for the coming stage, the stage of allout confrontation and even for the stage of
peace. We must not permit anyone to undermine the instutions, the supremacy of the
law and liberties or to imagine that he can plot in this way against the country
either in a time of war nor in a time of peace.
For example: The name of our sons, the students, is being exploited in this respect.
I say they are innocent of all this. Because of this I say, and I asked the youth
minister, that the students should make their own charter, a charter for the student
movement and that they should tell me whether the student movement should burn buses,
destroy factories--which with great effort we build for them and for their education--
or to wreak havoc on the university campuses on which we spend millions for the sake
of those who come from the rural areas. Is this the student movement of our students?
No. I know that our students are innocent of this. Let the students prepare the
student movement charter. Let everyone abide by it. In accordance with this charter,
the student has the right to education from the state and he, as a citizen, can
express his views fully in a sound democratic way. After this, anyone who departs
from this charter will not be considered a student. He Will not treat him as a
student in accordance with this charter.
Practice opens our eyes and helps us to put our fingers on the mistakes. We correct
our mistakes but the march continues. We must not stop at all; we must not change
our road at all, we must not become nervous and change the principle of the supremacy
of the law or the principle of institutions or the principle of liberties. We
must isolate those who try to exploit this but the march will continue forward, God
willing, in time of war or in time of peace.
As a result of what happened in the past stage at home and as a result of the several
factors which I have explained, I believe we have learned a useful lesson that we
should never allow anyone to make us deviate from our course in establishing the
state of institutions and the supremacy of the law. We must not allow any contra-
diction in the coming stage within the institutions, among the institutions or
between the institutions and our popular bases.
What are the features of the coming stage, the stage of allout confrontation? The
features of the past stage were military preparedness, with all our resources, and
complete and concerted diplomatic moves. All this was within our socialist building.
I say the responsibilities of the coming stage, the stage of allout confrontation,
will be: First, completing the military building so it may complete its task with
all strength, with all that we have and with all that we possess; and second, com-
pleting the diplomatic move, which I said, will not stop before the battle, during
the battle and after the battle.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been-reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 27 Mar 73
a 17
EGYPT
Something is added to the tasks of this stage. It is sacrifice. Sacrifice is
required in the coming stage.
We are entering the stage of allout confrontation as a people, with each one of
us shouldering his responsibility and carrying his fate in his hand. The battle
will not be on the front only or in Sinai only. The battle will be in the village,
in the factory, in the school, in the barrages, on the bridges and everywhere in
our country. Therefore, we are all in the battle all of us as a people. Therefore,
the burdens of the battle must be fairly distributed on every man. Everyone of us
must shoulder his burdens in this battle according to his abilities. [applause]
This needs legislation and the People's Assembly can sit and study. Our situation
is similar to the battle of England in which the people were contributing with what
they could and what was possible and the state was channeling all these potentials
for the battle. I hope that the People's Assembly will discuss this question
speedily and redistribute the burdens of the battle on all of us as a people. The
People's Assembly must have a look at the owners of parasitical income and people
who suddenly show signs of parasitical wealth. What is required 1s legislation,
not rancor. Legislation is the way to rectify the situation, as England and as other
states have done before us, and we will not resort to rancor as the plotters want.
black rancor which would ultimately. lead to our shedding each other's blood and
leaving the enemy sitting on our Egyptian soil.
Among its basic duties, such as the socialist prosecutor law, the People's Assembly
should redistribute the burdens of the battle. Everyone on the soil of this home-
land must bear according to his ability. This must be clear. [applause] In the
past we used to laugh at the story of the tithes, when we would read and say: They
impose tithes. when a man would take things to sell at the market, those in charge
would levy a fee on a goat and a fee on this or that commodity. Peasants in our
country call it a tithe. People used to laugh at such things, but not today.
Today this is a fact. Anyone who has 2. privilege that others do not have must
sacrifice more than the person who does not have such a privilege. This is a must.
Burdens will be equally distributed. Then, all of us as a people whatever be the
picture -will shoulder the burdens of our battle.
The same goes for supplies. We must tell the people the whole truth--this commodity
is available and this commodity is not available. Commodities should be distributed
fairly. Important people must not take more. Everything must be distributed justly
and equally. This is a role for the ASU--to lay its hands on those people who do
not want to shoulder their responsibilities or who do not appreciate the responsi-
bilities of the present stage. Everyone of us must carry out his task and fulfill
responsibility in this respect.
As I told you, the gist of the international position is that we must tell the world
that we have a cause; namely that we should bear all the required sacrifices to
activate the situation militarily. As I have told you, other nations did this before
us, Russia, in order to liberate its soil, sacrificed 20 million people. In one
city alone, Leningrad, it sacrificed 1 million people, of whom 500,000 are buried in
one cemetery. In one city alone, 1 million were killed, of whom half a million
lie in one cemetery. They regained their independence and liberated their soil and
became a superpower.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V.
27 Mar 73
G 18
EGYPT
A battle means sacrifices. As I told you in summing up the outside position, you
must make sacrifices, wage your battle and tell the world: We are here and can
dictate our will and can challenge our enemy.
This is clear. If this is the gist of the international position after our diplomatic
contacts and the gist of the internal position in the coming stage that we can no
longer possibly delay the battle until we rearrange internal conditions and that we
can no longer possibly delay rearranging internal conditions until the battle
is over, because both must go together--then the stage of all-out confrontation,
in which we demonstrate faith in our destiny and in which we will not spare sacrifices
or hesitate, has become the inevitable stage which we have entered, whether we like
it not. It is final. Since we have entered it, let us enter it as we must.
For this and against my own wish, which I had often expressed, I reached a decision
to bear my lot by myself at this stage, just as everyone of you is bearing his lot.
[applause] I ask each of you to bear his lot by himself and in his hands. There are
moments in history when man must bear his own lot and let the will of God take its
course. We are living these moments.
There remains one question after I assume the post of prime minister [applause], if
you agree to this, namely that a committee be formed to draw up controls for constitutional
questioning before the People's Assembly in light of our present constitution.
(?Our' legal experts can help in this). Our system is presidential, permitted by the
constitution, within the framework of the constitution. We, however, have learned from
the past period. So let us draw up controls for every move we make, so that there
will be no repetition of past plotting, oneupmanship and so forth.
I believe that with this, I have given you a full picture and have told you everything
in my heart. I told you the way things should proceed. There remains one thing--this
move may be misunderstood, or at least, the plotters will try to distort its aim.
I tell you that the state of institutions--its principles and philosophy continue.
We must protect it against all plotting. The supremacy of the law as a principle
and a philosophy is not at all subject to argument. I add that this joint conference
shall meet every month in the coming stage. We will review every phase we cover
until we pass the present crucial stage and decide for ourselves what we want.
However, I want the leadership to be expanded and this joint conference to meet every
month, or whenever necessary, or whenever something arises in principle, however,
every month. All policies and conditions, which we will face and whose details we all
need to know, will be presented to this joint conference until we pass this stage,
God willing. In this way, we will expand the base of decision-making so that we
all feel reassured regarding the coming stage, because as I said, all of us are
bearing our lots, each one in his own hands.
In conclusion, I can only say: "Our Lord, in Thee we trust, to Thee we turn; to
Thee is the homecoming. [Koran recitation] Peace be with you.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
2. Newsweek
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
3. 3 May 1
\
K.K
v. 2 May 73
E G Y P T
G 1
PRESIDENT AS-SADAT ADDRESSES MAY DAY RALLY
Cairo Domestic Service in Arabic 1020 GMT 1 May 73 M
[Speech by President Anwar as-Sadat on May. Day at Al-Mahallah al-Kubra--live]
[Text] In the name of God. [applause] Brothers, our meeting at this place, in this
manner, on this day and under the present circumstances has a meaning, nay several
meanings, which must not escape us. This place, Al-Mahallah al-Kubra, the heart of
the Egyptian delta, the heart of the Egyptian countryside, is at the same time the
X.
heart of Egyptian industry. [applause This place, the heart of the Egyptian countryside,
is at the same time the heart of the Egyptian industry. It is one of the most important
strongholds of industry and a symbol of Egyptian continuity of work. Industry began
here before the revolution and has increased threefold in size and capacity since the
revolution. Thus, being the heart of the Egyptian countryside and the heart of the
Egyptian industry, Al-Mahallah al-Kubra, fully represents the struggle of the Egyptian
man in the village and in the factory, the struggle of peasants and workers and the
struggle of the leading forces in the alliance of the working people's forces. [applause]
On this day, by celebrating the day of workers, this meeting has great significance in
a country whose entire history and civilization has been based on human work and human
work alone. Its development and future is interested in human work, human work alone.
Under these present circumstances in which we are trying to hold our destiny, shoulder
our responsibilities, revive our hopes and our nation's hopes, protect our land and the
land of all the Arabs and safeguard our honor and the honor of all future generations,
this meeting, at this place, in this manner and on this day, must, in addition to the
great meanings, embody a great inspiration emphasizing the values and principles of
these meanings. This inspiration emphasizes to us that unity of the nation is the basis,
that continuity of the nation is the guarantee, that the village and the factory are
at the same time a stronghold and a gun. [applause] It also emphasizes that the role
of peasants and workers is on the frontline of the struggle, regardless of its nature:
economic, social or defensive. It also emphasizes to us that the road to the future
and to hope has only one key--work. [applause]
Finally, it affirms to us that nations and peoples face moments of decision and fate
in which it becomes inevitable that they carry their destinies in their hands and face
what God willed them to face. Brothers, I tell you simply at this meeting, at this
place, on this day and under these circumstances, that I have resigned to my fate as
God willed and as the political and constitutional responsibilities, I have shouldered
require. [applause] I even say that I have resigned to my fate as required by my
feelings as a citizen, as a man who lives on this land, and as a man who is bound to
this land by loyalty and who offers his soul to defend its freedom out of belief that
right is on its side, that victory is for it and that sacrifices will be cheap on
the path of victory and for victory. [applause and slogans]
Brothers, I want all of you to be in the picture with me because you will all be in
the comprehensive confrontation with me. This is because the comprehensive confrontation
is not only the fighting lines but it something different and more difficult. As I
have already told you, every village is a bastion and every factory is a gun. Everyone
should be under arms because everyone will be under fire. I want you all to be in the
picture because you are all in the comprehensive confrontation. [applause]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
K.K.
V. 2 May 73
G 2
EGYPT
This is why I find it necessary for me to put before you a complete picture of the
situation today. It is your right, you who represent the workers of Egypt, it is the
right of all the Egyptian people and the right of the whole Arab nation to live these
moments with us while we are reviewing the line of progress of our issue since the
cease-fire until now.
As you know, the first cease-fire was to end in November 1970. The Egyptian foreign
minister went to the United Nations and J resolution was issued by the UN General
Assembly asking us to extend the cease-fire. As you know, at that time we needed
to arrange our domestic affairs and so we extended the cease-fire. The extension was
to expire on 5 February 1971. Before the end of the second cease-fire on 5 February 1971,
we met at all levels. The National Defense Council and the ASU Higher Committee met
with the Central Committee. We discussed all our affairs. We also met with the armed
forces and with all the commanders. At the last meeting before the end of the second
cease-fire on 5 February, it was fully obvious that the Rogers initiative of 1970 which
we--President Jamal, may God bless his soul--approved in August, had become worthless.
We all know that during the first cease-fire Israel claimed that Egypt moved its
missiles and that Egypt violated the cease-fire. The United States supported Israel's
claims Since then it has been obvious that the main objective Israel and the United
States have been working toward is to maintain the current cease-fire, as will become
clear to you from analyzing the entire stage. Why? Because this serves Israeli and
U.S. interests in the short and long run.
Before I went to the People's Assembly on 4 February 1971 and declared my initiative,
we decided that the Rogers initiative had ended and that we were no longer committed to it.
The initiative included two points providing for a 90-day cease-fire and for Israel's
withdrawal. As I have told you, Israel tampered with it and was supported by the United
States. The object was to retreat from their commitment to withdraw and to keep only
the cease-fire in force, a matter which they are trying to keep up until today.
Before I announced my initiative on 4 February in the People's Assembly, as I have
told you, we adopted a decision considering the 1970 Rogers initiative as null. This
initiative became worthless because it became clear that its only purpose was to enforce
a cease-fire. Under the conditions of the cease-fire, Israel would be able to do as it
wished; it would be able to change the features of the Arab land. Conditions would
continue in a manner that would lead our societies to explode from within or would lead
us to corrode from within. With the passage of time, the issue would face a fait
accompli. This is the aim they have been intent on so far.
On 4 February 1971, you announced the Egyptian initiative at the People's Assembly.
What was this initiative? We must pay attention here as well because we will see later
how the United States is trying to exploit and twist it to realize Israeli aims. What
was the initiative?
I sent the first letter to U.S. President Nixon on 24 December 1970. It was in answer
to a letter which he sent to me through then Prime Minister Dr Fawzi. When Dr Fawzi
submitted the letter to me, I immediately answered it. In the first contact in December,
24 December 1970 to be precise, I told the U.S. President that any initiative and any
step forward by the United States would be countered by a step forward by us as well
and that every positive measure by the United States would be countered by a positíve
reaction and measure by Egypt.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
KK
V. 2 May 73
G
was
ECYPT
but
[applause] Likewise, any negative action or any measure which might harm Egypt would
have the same reaction from Egypt against the United States. In other words, we will
respond to anyone seeking. rapprochement with us and will alienate anyone who seeks
to alienate us. Therefore, I told him: I am answering your letter directly. We have
not died and 'Egypt has not died. We have not capitulated and will not capitulate.
But we seek a peaceful solution, if it is possible There is no hostility between us
and the United States. All there is between us and the United States is the problem
of Israel and the U.S. siding with and supporting the Israeli aggression. The United
XXX
States has not only supported this aggression, The plan of the 1967 aggression against
us was approved by U.S. President Johnson. It 0 submitted to him and he approved.
On 24 December I wrote to President Nixon telling him that every good initiative would
be met with an immediate reply from.us and that we would answer every evil initiative
in the same manner. [applause]
What was the initiative which I announced on 4 February at the People's Assembly? I
wrote to President Nixon telling him that I consider my- initiative a test of peace.
You maintain that you want peace. Israel tells the world that it wants peace but
that the Arabs do not want peace. Well, we want peace, but there is a test which I
am submitting. I say we are prepared for à peace agreement. I say for the first
time that we are prepared for a peace agreement, but where does the test lie? If
there is a true and sincere intention by the United States and Israel to realize peace,
then let Israel withdraw to within Sinai as a first stage in the comprehensive plan
and let our Egyptian forces cross [the canal] immediately. Let Jarring and the United
Nations handle the matter. We will give a 6-month period of grace. If no final
solution is realized in 6 months, then our forces that made the crossing will be
entitled to complete the liberation of the land. [applause and cheers]
This was the initiative. This does not mean at all that it included [sentence left
incomplete] But as I said and wrote to President Nixon, it was a test of peace. It
was a test of the intentions of peace, Is the talk about peace genuine or is it merely
a fog spread to mislead the world as is the case now? The United States welcomed this.
Israel began playing its trick on the United States.
On 1 May 1971 we announced in Hulwan that the U.S. secretary of state had asked to
visit Egypt. I said we would welcome him in Egypt. We annoünced our initiative
and said that it was a test of peace.
x
We are not shunning anyone who wants to talk with us. We areprepared to talk to
anybody because we know what we want. We are afraid of nothing. Let him come forward.
On 2 May 1971 I said in Hulwan before Hulwan workers: "Let him come forward. = But
I will meet him [whoever wants to talk to me while bearing in mind my sons the workers
who died in the Abu Za'bal factory. [applause] I will meet him and talk to him also
while bearing in mind my sons the children who died in the Bahr al-Baqar school, because
the bombs were American, the planes were American and some of the pilots were American
too. Some of the pilot prisoners I have [that is, who are in Egypt] include those
who have dual nationality American and Israeli.
We have no complexes. We are prepared to talk and to discuss but on the basis of peace
founded on justice and-not on piracy or the usurpation of peoples' rights.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
K.K.
V. 2 May 73
G 4
EGYPT
When U.S. Secretary of State. Rogers came, I asked him a straight question: What do
you want after our initiative? I have said that this is a test for peace. Show me
if you can pass this test or not, both you and Israel. After leaving here, he went to
Israel. But Israel has been able to influence their thinking, exactly as we see
happening today. This is also because the Americans have interests that have now
become evident in the energy crisis. They have interests and policies in this area.
Thus, both of them agreed and completeły ignored the test and the initiative. The
year 1971 went by.
Meanwhile, because of the circumstances then [sentence left incomplete] As you know,
the corrective movement took place on 14 May. Our friends in the Soviet Union believed
that this movement might somehow affect the friendship between us. Later in the
summer the Sudan events occurred. Our stand toward these events was based on the
principles we believe in. Thus, the relations became strained. As a matter of fact,
when I went to the Soviet Union on 11 October 1971 and met with the Soviet leaders,
we were able to remove this cloud entirely and to agree on future steps. As I have
said before, my first meeting with the Soviet leaders after the people honored me by
electing me [as president] took place on 1 and 2 March 1971. During this meeting
I actually expounded what we would face in this area in the coming stage. This was
stated in the official minutes. When I was not convinced [presumably with the Soviet
views], as I have said before, I told them that I was not convinced. We must state in
the minutes that we disagree. There is no doubt that we are friends and it is not a
shame if friends disagree. I insisted because we had our own views. The Soviet
Union's viewpoint was that peaceful solution was the only solution. In the meantime,
of course, the Soviet Union would take into consideration the strengthening of our
defense capability. I said that leaving the situation as it was on 1 March 1971 would
enable Israel to play havoc in the areà and would enable the United States to achieve
its aims and those of Israel.
My estimate has been--since 1 March 1971 and up to this day and tomorrow--and still is,
as events have proved, that, with the psychological warfare which the United States
and Israel are waging on us and the unlimited arms supplies and assistance that Israel
receives from the United States, the day will come when we see Israel playing havoc.
This is what happened when Israel raided southern Lebanon, then struck Syria and later
carried out the recent operation in Beirut.
If the recent operation in Beirut proves anything at all it is that Israel thinks that
with the protection and absolute support of the United States 1t can do anything in the
area, even breaking into houses and killing civilians and women inside their apartments
and houses in the heart of Beirut. This aggression is not just an aggression against
apartments in Beirut. I am addressing the whole Arab nation. This aggression is against
every Arab capital, every Arab house, every Arab dignity, every Arab prestige, every
Arab honor.
This attack and this wanton action by Israel, which is backed by the United States, is
not an attack on Beirut apartments, but an attack on everyone of us. The wife of.
Abu Yusuf an-Najjar, who died while defending her husband in her apartment, is my
mother and sister and your mother and sister. She represents everything that we live
for as well as the Arab honor and dignity that we defend. What happened in Beirut
I had discussed in 1971.
Now we come to the present situation. What is the situation today? The United States
and Israel, of course, want the cease-fire to continue. Why? Under the shadow of
the cease-fire and the present state of calm, Israel is changing the face of the land.
They It is boas absolutely and Reproduced at the by DECLASSIFIED Richard Nixon Presidential and settlements Library in Sharm ash-Shaykh.
This
has
been
de
document
reviewed
pulsuantis
Securive
been
determined
to
be
declassified
V. 2 May 73
a
EGYPT
They are also building tourist offices, hotels and so forth in the Golan, the
West Bank, Gaza, Sinai and everywhere. They want time because, as time goes on,
they will build cities and settlements and change the face of the land.
Because of this, we always hear, as we did 1 or 2 days ago, that the United States
announces that its basic aim is to maintain the cease-fire. Why? Because this
will achieve its interests, both for the United States and Israel. As time goes on,
we here, inside our societies and inside our countries, become nervous as a result
of the wound, the bitterness and pain caused by the defeat. One day we would blow
ourselves up and Israel would not need to fire one single shot. It will have im-
posed a fait accompli in Sinai, Gaza, the Golan, the West Bank, Jerusalem and
everywhere. The question will end up in a fait accompli. Because of this, and as I
have said, the United States wants the cease-fire to continue. This is its
officially declared policy. This was reiterated just 1 or 2 days ago, and it will
continue to declare it. The same goes for Israel.
Why did I mention the March 1971 meeting? There are no differences between us and
the Soviet Union today, except over one thing. Our Soviet friends must know, as I
speak on May Day before the workers of Egypt, and within earshot of the workers of the
Confederationorof Arab Republics in Syria and in Libya and Arab workers in every Arab
country, that continuation of the cease-fire is a U.S. policy. Continuation of the
cease-fire serves Israel and serves U.S. aims in the end.
Regarding a peaceful solution, our friends in the Soviet Union must know the true
feelings of our people. From the first moment, we believed that what was taken by
force can be regained only through force. [applause] Our friends in the Soviet
Union must know that the peaceful solution, which the United States has been talking
about is a deception and a mirage.
about, is fictitious. The peaceful solution which the United States has been talking
Hafiz Isma 'il was there in February; as you know, we follow an openminded policy
toward the whole world. Isma'il went to the Soviet Union, to England, to Germany,
to Washington and to the United States. The foreign minister visited China. Hafiz
Isma'il will go to Paris next month, God willing. Thus, we will have contacted all
the big-five powers in our intensive diplomatic campaign which you have heard about
and which, as you see, is still going on today.
The latest development in this connection has been the Security Council resolution.
We asked the Security, Council to make a statement of accounts to the world so that
the world could hear through the Security Council a statement of account from
STET
Jarring, the representative of the secretary general. Enough deception and bluffing!
Let [applause] the world hear what has been done regarding the question over the past 6 years.
The U.S. peaceful solution is a fallacy and deception. Hafiz Isma'il, as I told you,
went there. He spoke with them. He met with President Nixon, Rogers at the State
Department and Kissinger. What is required? What is the peaceful solution wanted by
the United States? What are the U.S. thoughts? Legitimacy! It is that we should
announce the legitimacy of Israel's existence, meaning that we should recognize
Israel. But at what price? Just to reactivate the issue, not solve it, but just to
reactivate it.
Legitimacy and the same old pretext they have been clinging to; namely, secure borders.
What does secure borders mean? It means that Israel will take the land which it feels
will secure its borders.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
Kf
V. 2 May 73
0 6
EGYPT
We should be ready to give Israel security guarantees in favor of Israel and against
our own interests so that Israel may make peace. Everything in the words of the United
States and in the U.S. peaceful solution, the fable, makes requests for Israel. We
should reassure Israel, give Israel secure borders, give rights and land to Israel.
Everything for Israel. This is surprising. It is as if we are the aggressors and as
if we launched the war, seized and occupied the land, and are changing the character of
the land. There is nothing about our security or about [sentence incomplete]
This is the U.S. concept of the peaceful solution. This is why I speak today to make
our friends in the Soviet Union hear that the U.S. peaceful solution is a fable,
deception, a mirage. The United States wants to achieve for Israel through negotiations
what Israel failed to achieve in 1967 after the defeat of our armies. Israel did not
manage to achieve anything through the 1967 defeat. Nothing at all. It is true that
it occupied land, but it did not defeat our determination and did not make us surrender.
It has not even got a signature from us acknowledging anything, anything at all.
[applause]
Now, the U.S. peaceful solution is only a new fable. Why? Because it wants to achieve
for Israel through negotiations what Israel could not achieve through the military
battle.
NEI
X
This is exactly like what happened in 1957. The 1956 aggression was launched against us
and trie ther Israel nor France nor England managed to achieve anything at that time.
Mr Dulles, then U . S. secretary of state, thought he could achieve for England, France
and Israel what they failed to achieve through their abortive military battle. He
attempted through what he then termed the domestic invasion against us at the beginning
of 1957 to achieve for them what they could not; but he could not achieve it either.
It was supposed that Egypt would be isolated in the end, but those who were actually
isolated in 1957 were the allies of the United States and not Egypt.
Today the same myth is being repeated. The United States is talking about a peaceful
solution. I want our friends in the Soviet Union to hear the warning I am declaring
before you. Beware of the U.S. peaceful solution, the myth and the deception. [slogans]
We notice that, to complete the concoction and the operation, the United States and
Israel have been carrying out the severest psychological campaign against us and against
the Arab nation since the beginning of 1972. It is true that this campaign has been
going on since the war and since the defeat but it has been concentrated since the
beginning of 1972 and until today. The gist of this psychological campaign is: It
is no use, 0 Arabs. Rest assured that you will not be able to confront Israel. U.S.
support is behind Israel forever. U.S. aid is flowing to Israel like a flood. Arabs,
you are no match for Israel. There is no solution other than negotiations before you.
Negotiate with Israel while it is occupying our land.
Only yesterday U.S. Secretary of State Rogers announced that the issue should begin with
a partial settlement. Let the Suez Canal be opened. I have told you that they have
taken my initiative and twisted it in the interest of Israel. Instead of its being a
test of peace, as I wrote to U.S. President Nixon, for Nixon, for the United States,
and for Israel, they want to turn it into a trap in which we may be caught. It is as
if we will be happy to open the Suez Canal and let Israel take whatever it wants and
let the issue end at this.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
God
V. 2 May 73
G 7
EGYPT
Rogers stands and calls for a partial solution beginning with opening the Suez Canal.
Why? Because he is addressing Western Europe. Western Europe suffers from an oil
crisis. Opening the Suez Canal would definitely solve Western Europe's problem.
It is I who offered to open the Suez Canal in 1971. It was a test for peace. If
Israel and the United States truly want peace and not to dominate and dictate terms,
then as a first stage Israel would withdraw. I said that during this stage, when
Jarring assumes his mission for 6 months, we will clear the canal. It was I who
offered this. Now this offer is made to me. It is a pitfall for us instead of
being a test of peace for them. We will not be happy to open the Suez Canal and
lose the cause. Our attitude should be clear to them so that so much talk and so
much prattle will stop. There will be no partial solution. There will be no
separate solution with Egypt alone. There will never be negotiations. Our attitude
is clear. When we offered the initiative, the offer was a test for peace and stage
for completing the final solution in 6 months. It never was meant for a phasal
solution or a partial solution. It never was an objective in itself.
What I said was: Show me your intentions by making Israel withdraw partially to
prove to me that it will complete the withdrawal and by fixing a date for the final
withdrawal. I would then clear the canal, but I will not do so now. The whole
talk now is concentrated on the activation of the issue. How will it be activated?
It will be activated by a partial solution beginning with Egypt, which will open
the Suez Canal. Naturally, this is a matter we will have to negotiate with Israel
directly or through a third party as the United States says. I repeat: There will
be no partial solution; there will be no interim solution. There will be no separate
solution and there will be no negotiations. 'Our stand is clear,
As I have told you, they have been waging a ferocious psychological warfare against
us the Arabs since the beginning of 1972 to make us despair. Golda Meir visited
the United States this year. After her visit, the U.S. press reported the new
transaction of Phantom planes and other weapons. Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban,
who has become the U.S. secretary of state and the U.S. spokesman, declared that the
United States has deliberately leaked the news of the aid and the quantity of the
Phantom planes and other weapons that Israel was speaking about to deter the Arabs.
In other words, it did so to make us afraid.
How strange. This happened when they were speaking about the peaceful solution and the
U.S. President was speaking about the peaceful solution, and when they were saying
that he was giving precedence to the Middle East after solving the Vietnamese issue.
It was at this time that the Israeli foreign minister, who, as I told you, is actually
the secretary of state of the United States, speaking in its name, came out to say
that the U.S. Government leaked reports of the new transaction it concluded with Golda
Meir to deter and scare the Arabs. There was no denial from the United States.
What is worse is that 3 or 4 days ago, and this is something I consider most serious
and want our friends in the USSR to hear, is that Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban
said that during the Moscow meeting between Nixon and Brezhnev, the latter insisted
that the Middle East should take priority in the discussions but Nixon refused. We
hope, Eban said, that when Brezhnev goes to Washington, Nixon will adopt the same
stand as that in Moscow. In other words, Nixon should not give priority to the
Middle East question if Brezhnev requests that.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 2 May 73
G 8
EGY PT
What is surprising indeed is that Eban should get inside information about the
discussions held last May between Brezhnev and Nixon--leaders of the two big states
in the world--in'a closed room, that Eban should say that Brezhnev asked Nixon that
priority be given to the Middle East but that Nixon refused and that Eban should tell
Nixon: When Brezhnev comes to Washington, I hope you will adopt the same stand as
that in Moscow.
How could the news of the leaders at such a level be leaked unless Israel is the
United States and the United States is Israel. This is a sad and disgraceful thing;
furthermore, there has been no denial from the United States. Israel says and
declares everything very openly. There has been no comment at all on Abba Eban's
statement. I say this so that bur friends in the Soviet Union should hear. Even
the news of the special meeting between' Brezhnev and Nixon leaked to Israel. Our
friends in the Soviet Union continue to believe in the forthcoming process of the
peaceful solution.
The psychological warfare continues. It has spread to the entire Arab homeland.
It has, regrettably, spread to some here in our country. They are, regrettably,
not workers, peasants or soldiers. The main base of the revolution--the main base
of this people--and their armed forces are 100 percent sound. We are entering the
sixth year [after the war] but as humans we must not enter it feeling wounded. All
of us must be prepared. There are deficiencies in many services in the state.
Nobody denies this and I do not deny it. There is a deficiency. Why? It is because
for the last 6 years we have been spending an average of 700 million pounds on
the armed forcęs other than the additional allocations. There is a deficiency.
There might be a deficiency in the telephones, communications and housing. Our
networks might be overloaded All this possible, and we will tolerate it.
In circumstances like ours when we feel wounded in our hearts and when we live in
a period of anxiety and a period when we see developments among the great and small
in this world in support of our cause, "it would naturally be possible and most easy
for anyone to come and complain about the state of communications, supplies and the
telephone network and to say that the sewers have overflowed. This is all possible
but we are not living under normal conditions. As I have told you, we have been
spending 700 million pounds for the past 6 years. The budget of the armed forces
was not supposed to be more than 200 or 250 million pounds. In other words, more
than 450 million pounds was supposed to be invested annually in construction and
development. But we, are deducting this sum that we are earning by our sweat and
struggle to allocate it to our armed forces to rebuild and strengthen them. We
do so to rebuild our armed forces in the best and most complete manner.
Here in your presence, on your day, in your name and on behalf of all the people,
we convey our thanks to all members of our armed forces on the frontline. They are
enduring heat, rain and cold while awaiting the signal. They are anxiously awaiting
the order. I'assure you about them. I assure you about your brothers. All that we
spent in the previous phase of 6 years, which we deducted from our livelihood, from
our sweat, from our services and from development for our generations, was not wasted.
It is there along the canal for you to see. It is honor, dignity, steadfastness,
pride, glory, and complete preparedness at any moment. All that exists.
However, the psychological campaign I told you about has succeeded in affecting
certain people. Some.people say: Let us sit down and lock ourselves inside and build.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
July
V. 2 May 73
a 9.
EGYPT
We will liberate Sinai later. That is all the United States and Israel desire. They
desire to maintain the present situation, calmness and cease-fire. This is what they
desire. The United States says so everyday. The United States and Israel would be
very pleased if the situation remains as it is at present. During this time Israel
would have built settlements, towns, changed things, prepared the area it seeks to
take from Egypt and prepared the area it seeks to take in the Golan while Arab
Jerusalem would be completely surrounded. Israel would have also seized the land it
could not seize before. In Gaza, Israel has changed and is changing the landmarks and
in Sinai it builds settlements similar to those established in Sharm ash-Shaykh and
other places. This is what Israel desires.
It is desired that we should remain silent. What does it mean to remain silent? It
means that we will exhaust ourselves from within. We will explode from within because
our spírits are wounded. Nobody could remain silent. How could we build and in which
way if there was a complete blockade around us?
h
In the recent Mirage affair about which you have heard, Israel claims that Libyan/Mirage
planes came to Egypt. Israel is launching a violent campaign against France to Varm
our relations with France and Libya's relations with France. This is as though the
area was under Israel's trusteeship. I told our brother Soviet leaders in March 1971,
about 2 and 1/2 years ago, that we would reach this stage. Israel wants to control
what goes to this country and what should not go to another country while they go and
strike southern Lebanon, Sidon, Beirut and Syria and while they come and strike Egypt.
while nobody says a thing. Isn't this what is happening today? They claimed that. the
planes came to Egypt. How could this happen and an uproar raised since Israel does
not allow this as the trustee in the area.
The United States supports and backs Israel 100 percent. This is a strange thing.
The psychological campaign affected certain people here. Well, if Israel has been
exercising this role in the area with the full support and backing of the United States,
how could we build here while the blockade exists?
Western Europe has interests connected with the United States and cannot give thing:
to us. Our friend the Soviet Union can reach a specific limit with us, as I told
you before. How could I build then? I wish I could.
Everyday that passes on the cease-fire is harmful to the cause at present because it
gives our enemy an opportunity to impose the fait accompli. This is what the enemy
desires.
The psychological campaign has affected certain people here. Instead of turning the
wound in our hearts and the bitter hatred we feel as a result of the defeat into fire
and rancor for our enemy, they want us to turn them on ourselves. This would be a big
calamity. No. As I am telling you, the outcome was that, in the previous phase, the
spirit of some people here was shaken. It was also shaken in the psychological cam-
paign. It does not bother me when we read in the newspapers of certain Arab countries'
defeatist and capitulationist writings intended to dishearten the Arabs' efforts and
spread defeat in their hearts. This is because I am aware of how they publish this
and what the publishers do. This does not bother be much. What concerns me here
is our country. By our national unity, only by our national unity as a base, we
have always confronted all difficulties and all battles. We have triumphed, by God's
help, in all battles we entered with our national unity. [applause]
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
KK.
V. 2 May 73
a 10
EGYPT
A psychological warfare has been waged against us. I thank God, however, that the
main base of our people--of the alliance of the working people's forces--is sound,
firm and faithful as it has always been throughout history. It has not been shaken.
They call it the 6-day war. It has been going on now for 6 years; it is no longer
6 days. We will never surrender to Israel or the United States. We will never abandon
a single inch of our territory. We will not compromise the rights of the Palestinian
people. The United States will never. be able to crush our will. It was not able to
crush the will of a commando people--the Vietnamese people. We will not give in.
We might have suffered. a military defeat in 1967, but our power was not crushed and will
never be crushed, God willing. We are a pious, unyielding and noble people, who know
X
how to resist. Throughout our history we confronted many invasions, much bigger than
the U.S. -supported invasion of the dwarfs sp[al-aqzam]@
In view of this, recently, as you know, and in view of the things going on around us,
I announced that the present stage is the beginning of the all-out confrontation stage.
What does this mean? It is no longer a question of just a battle on the frontline.
The matter is much bigger than this. It is a question of whether we will continue to
live in this country, whether later generations will find a place in this country
and whether we will remain independent and a people of free will. It is no longer
a question of just a battle. The plan is broader than that. The outlines of this
plan are clearer today. Israel not only wants to take the land, but also wants to
control our destiny. Labor is cheap here. It wants to become the center of industry;
it wants to be the side that will provide employment, make profit and exploit. It
wants the entire area to come under its sphere of influence.
In the United States, hidden things have surfaced--the energy crisis. The United
States has another aim. There is an oil crisis, an energy crisis, in the United States
today. They have announced the closure of many service stations. They have announced
that many companies have closed their agencies, and so forth. Why? Because there is
an energy crisis. Sixty percent of the entire world energy reserve lies in the Arab
world. Production is in the hands of American and western companies. The United
States has its own plan. The chairman of the energy commission, 10 days ago, said
that should 1t become necessary, they would come and occupy the oil sources to
guarantee that the oil flow will not be interrupted.
The plan has become clear. It provides that Israel would take whatever it wishes to
take, control and exploit the area and that the United States would take what it also
wishes. Hence, today I address all our Arab brothers from here. Perhaps someone
might ask me: Well, what is the Arab position today?
I would say: The Arab position is today improving day-by-day. As I said before
the joint session of the ASU Central Committee and the People's Assembly, there are
negative aspects in the Arab position, but there are also positive aspects in the
Arab position. Our stand today is that we should not treat matters nervously.
There is no place for nervousness, because it is a matter of future and destiny.
Everything must be studied considerately with understanding of the dimensions of each
problem. The Arab position, as I have said, has negative aspects, but there are also
positive aspects in it. It is improving daily. The positive aspects must eventually
triumph over the negative aspects.
The first point in the Arab position, the principal base on which we depend, is the
tripartite Confederation, or the Confederation of Arab Republics between us, Syria
and Libya.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 2 May 73
G 11
EGYPT
As I said before, and as the government stated in its policy statement before the
People's Assembly, It suffices that the Confederation of Arab Republics--consisting
of Egypt, Syria and Libya, which together represent almost half the Arab nation--has
been established through the dust and smoke of the defeat and the battle. We were
defeated in 1967. The U.S. strategy seeks, among other things, to end the cause of
Arab unity forever in preparation for destroying the progressive regimes; thus ending
the problems of the United States in the area.
an the contrary, however, and through the dust of defeat, three Arab states for the
X
forst time formed a Confederation of Arab Republics comprising Egypt, Syria and Libya.
The Confederation has already formed allits institutions--ministerial council,
Confederation National Assembly and Confederation ministers. True, slow steps are
being taken, but they are firm and definite steps on the road. This is the principal
base built through the dust of defeat, and it is on this base that we depend.
fiN
Between us and Syria, as you know, there is a unified command regarding our armed
forces and a complete understanding on everything. Between us and Libya, as you
have heard, the measures and studies concerned with the establishment of complete
unity between Egypt and Libya this year are undęrway. We are proceeding and not
stopping. What our enemies were expecting was the opposite: That we at this phase
we
would be negligent, and that the question of Arab unity, or the Arab solidarity or
the ties between one state and another would dnfally end. Today, I am glad to
declare before you that Iraq has begun to perform its national role in the battle.
[applause] Commander in chief General Isma'il, who as you know is on a tour, is in
Iraq today. Iraq now performs its respónsibilities on the national level. There
is no doubt that all of us welcome Iraq at this phase.
W
With regard to Saudi Arabia, maybe you have heard the [Saudi oil minister's
statement in the United States. There are bilateral contacts between us and Saudi
Arabia. Saudi Arabia stands and supports us. We, as I have said and as I shall
always say: We will not ask from any Arab brother more than we ourselves will give.
First we will set the example ourselves. We shall move and shall break the present
inactivity and silence. After that, every brother has to carry out this responsibility
and role. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria and a number of brothers have carried out
their role in the battle. Morocco, despite the great distance, Has also begun to
participate. As I say, there are negative aspects but there are bositive aspects also.
Positive aspects will absolutely prevail and it is our duty to make them more in
number than negative ,ones. I am full of optimism, particularly because I have
decided and say before you, so that all our Arab brothers will hear, that we do not
ask an Arab brother to act until he sees us begin. We do not ask anything from any-
one unless he sees us working. Briefly, and my estimation the Arab stand is
improving. However, the Arab stand will not yield better than what it has unless
we ourselves begin to move. [cheers] While we are talking about the Arab stand,
I must say something important about the situation in Palestine whether inside the
occupied territories or outside. The enemy is trying to intensify his campaign
inside the occupied territories in order to create coexistence. I think it has become
clear to the enemy after the Beirut incident that all that he has built has been
built on sand. It is important for me to say before you now chile. they in the
occupied territories are listening that I have contacted them in the past years
and asked them to stand fast. The night. will not continue for long. [applause]
I told them frankly, and I repeat my frank words so that they hear them. We will
not allow any bargaining over the rights of the Palestinian people. We will
absolutely not allow the Palestinian issue to be forsaken under any slogan or by any
Arab official.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 2 May 73
G 12
EGYPT
I informed them of all this. I repeat it again before you. It is important for me
to speak about an extremely important point. Today, we see from outside the occupied
territories that Israel is savagely and forcefully chasing the Palestinians. The
attack which took place in Beirut on peaceful, tranquil and civilian homes. Israel,
which is a member of the United Nations, then declares that as a state, it has
committed murder intentionally. As I have said earlier: What has taken place in
Beirut is really against every Arab be he a ruler or one of the governed, and against
the honor of every Arab, and the home of every Arab be he a ruler or one of the
governed. Here in Egypt, we are not ashamed to say this. We say this and repeat
it so that this wantonness and all this talk may stop and an end be put to it.
As we finish with the Arab position, it is of interest to me that we learn the
rest of the positions. Regarding the nonalined states, as you know I went to
Brioni and met with President Tito. President Tito sent messages to the nonalined
states and also to all the big powers. He got the replies and communicated them to
me. He was surprised by the replies of some of the big powers like the United States.
As for the recent debate at the United Nations, as I have told you, I regard what
took place in Beirut as an affront to the honor and dignity of every Arab, both ruler
and ruled, including us particularly. We are ashamed to say this because an end must
be put to all this.
Dr az-Zayyat has formally requested that the world hear a report about the problem from
the time Resolution No 242 was issued and up to this date, to hear a report by the
secretary general's representative so that the United Nations will determine its stand
toward its own resolutions and toward Israel which is defying the whole world. Israel
is defying the will of the international community and the UN resolutions. It
defies and shows contempt toward the Security Council resolutions. It is showing
contempt to everything. All this now. with the protection and backing of the United
States. We have asked that all this be put before the world because there has been
enough nonsense. All the world must listen.
A furious press campaign was waged against us in the past. Some of this campaign
still persists today in America and Europe. The aim of this campaign is to distort
our stand completely. We are attacked as if we were the aggressors and not the ones
against whom aggression was committed; as if we are the ones who show contempt for
the world and the UN resolutions and commit murders in daylight in the name of the
state as Israel does. This press campaign has been going on in Europe and in America.
We have asked the Security Council to meet so that the facts of the entire case will
be to the world and the world press. Let the facts be disclosed about when Jarring
contacted us and when he contacted Israel; what he told us and what we replied;
what he told Israel and what Israel replied. This is the thing that they have
always avoided. We want to make everything clear. Why? This is a vital and basic
part of our future diplomatic activity; however, no one should ever think that this
is the end of our diplomatic activity. I have said that our diplomatic activity is
continuing and will continue before, during and after the battle. Diplomatic
activity does not stop, but there are landmarks on the road. The purpose of the
forthcoming Security Council meeting is to place the details of the entire case
before the world which they are now trying to misrepresent with the malicious and
deliberate campaign they are waging in Europe and America. We will put these
details before the entire world while we are proceeding on our course. The pre-
paration for the battle and the diplomatic campaign 80 hand-in-hand.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V. 2 May 73
G .13
EGYPT
As I told you, Israel is trying to create an estrangement between France and us and
between France and Libya. Israel is acting as if it were the legitimate guardian of
the area. It says this country should receive planes, this should receive tanks
and that should receive nothing.
Britain still adheres to its stand. I am glad on this occasion, while speaking before
you for the first time since the Security Council meeting, to express thanks to France
and Britain for their recent stands at the Security. Council. [applause] The resolution
that should have been adopted was not adopted. But France and Britain adopted an
honorable stand in support of right and justice. I would have been very glad, and we
all would have been very glad had the United States used its veto right so that the
rest of its friends in the world, if it has any, will know what the United States is
today, and so that after the Beirut incident they will know exactly what the United
States is today.
With regard to Italy's stang, last week we were surprised by something strange. It
was
X
said Italian Premier Andreotti submitted a plan providing for a solution to the problem.
Andreotti wanted to contribute to the solution of the problem on the grounds that
Italy is one of the countries that has many economic interests with us. It is also
interested in the opening of the Suez Canal because it is suffering from the olosure of
the canal more than any other country. He was trying to exert some effort. The
Italian foreign minister visited Egypt 2 months ago. I met with him, and he talked
to me. He said Italy is prepared to exert efforts. I told him that we have no
objections. We welcome anybody who wants to make an effort. But our stand is known to
all of us. They wanted to create discord between us and Italy as well. They said that
Andreotti submitted a plan for a new Suez Canal in which Israeli would participate.
What was the story? In the summer of 1968 we were surprised by a Somali minister
X
coming to us with an urgent message from the former Somali President Scermarch. The
minister said he had an important message for President Jamal, God bless his soul. I
was there with the president. What was the message? The minister said President Scermarc
of Somalia contacted him from the United States and considers this an important message.
For this reason he sent the minister. President Scermarche was himself going to come
[to Egypt] but thought that probably the time was not suitable for us; hence he urgently
sent the minister. What was the message? They said that the problem is going to be
solved in a very simple manner and without a battle. A Panamanian company is said to
have submitted a plan proposing to take a straight line [for digging a canal] from the
Suez Gulf in Sinai to the Mediterranean instead of the existing zigzagging Suez
Canal. The canal would follow a straight line directly from the Suez gulf to the Mediter-
ranean. With the use of modern digging equipment, the new canal would not take more
X
than 18 months to complete. This canal would be two-way and have free trade zones on
both banks, with 5-kms wide on each side. It was proposed that Egypt would lease the
canal to the said company for 99 years, just like the previous Suez Canal.
As I told you, the project was not proposed by a Panamanian company or anything of the
sort. It was known that it was the United States [which proposed it]. It was also
known that the whole operation was American. This was as if we had finished with the
old Suez Canal only to face a new Suez Canal. This would also be a barrier between us
and Israel. or course the matter was not subject to consideration and was rejected
totally. This, however, was revived this week. It has been said Italian Premier
X
Andreotti has submitted this plan to us. I state be foreyou and before the whole world
that nothing of this kind was submitted to us by Italy or by anyone else. If anybody
contemplates submitting such a plan, after hearing what I said, then, it is rejected in
concept and in form. [applause] It is useless. They insist on driving a wedge between
us and Italy just as they have been trying to drive a wedge between us and France.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V.
2 May 73
G 14
EGYPT
Regarding the foreign situation, regarding our friends in the USSR, I hope that my
remarks about them or about Egyptian-Soviet relations is not considered a campaign or
anything. I think it has become clear from our pause last summer that we do not
operate with two faces or two polities. We operate with one policy and one face. Our
decisions are patriotic. Our decisions are not according to an agreement with someone
to strike another.
No, our decisions are made here in Egypt in the interest of Egypt. They are patriotic
decisions, I believe that the summer decisions were clear to our brothers and friends,
the Soviet leaders. They were not a game behind their back through an agreement with
the Americans or anyone else. We are honest people, We appreciate the stand of our
friend. We might differ with him, but We do so honestly, not through treason, or
treachery, Never. I believe that this has become clear from our attitude.
I am addressing myself today to our Soviet friends. What I want to say to our friends,
to Soviet leaders, today, workers day and their day, is that the peaceful solution
ffered by the United States is a mirage, a deception, and is misleading. What I want
to say to our friends in the USSR is that we are friends. We do not sell friendship
or adopt two-faced stands or two policies. We have one face and one policy. What I
want to tell our friends in the USSR is that our desire to preserve this friendship
prompts us to say: We should be careful about what is be ing planned for this area,
Perhaps in our contacts we will continue the discourse on this subject, because it.
X
us not in anyone's interest for talks about friends to be conducted in public.
conclude one thing, from all of this:
After seeing the situation, the psychological warfare, the U.S. attitude vis-a vis
Israel and after hearing about the stands of all states in the East and the West and
the nonalined states, we must realize that nobody in this world works for the interest
of someone else without first knowing where his interest lies. We must know first
where our interest lies in order to make the world understand these interests.
The owners of any cause must take the cause in their hands. As has already been made
clear to you, Israel and the United States want to freeze the situation as it is. If
we have to accept the challenge, then we must change the status quo and foil all
attempts to freeze the situation. I believe we all agree on this conclusion.
Therefore, we will enter the stage of all-out confrontation. What are the tasks
required from us in the stage of all-out confrontation? As I have already tokd you,
in the stage of all-out confrontation, which is inevitable in order to accept the
challenge and break the freeze which Israel and the United States want to impose on us,
we have, I believe, three tasks. The first task is the liberation of the land, the
second the rebuilding of the society, and third the establishment of peace based on
Justice in the area.
As I have already told you, the liberation cannot wait for the rebuilding, nor can the
rebuilding wait for liberation. The two must go together. The liberation and
rebuilding must go together. I have alrady cited to you the example of the USSR.
When the Germans struck in 1941 and reached 15 kilometers from Moscow, the Russians
began their battle not only to liberate their land but also to rebuild themselves
and their state. After 30 years, they became one of the two major powers in the world.
That is why I say: Let the 1967 defeat be a starting point for reconstruction. I say
defeat and admit that we were defeated in 1967.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
V.
2 May 73
G 15
EGYPT
But let the defeat be a starting point for reconstruction; not just to build the state
and liberate land but also to build the man, the citizen, the homeland, the will, all
that is needed by our future generations in order to live in a free, respectable, noble
and brave homeland. [applause]
Before concluding my speech, I should tell you that as you have witnessed in the past
period, and in the coming periods, I visited and will visit the armed forces. As you
know, I spent some of my life in the armed forces. Today, I am living with them. I
want you to have full confidence in your armed forces, because they are confident and
have complete faith in their people and their objectives, I want to be sure of their
faith, consciousness, training, culture and planning. Have complete confidence.
Because everytime I meet with them--they hear me now--I tell them: Your people's honor
hangs on your necks. They appreciate this. The price they are paying to honor this
confidence is their lives. They are not asking anything else. They are not baržaining
or clowning at all. They are seeking to sacrifice and to give their lives as a price
for the confidence of their people in them. Therefore, I want you to be confident and
reassured about your sons and their efficiency as well as their training and planning.
Brothers: God willing, the moment will come when we will all be called to assume the
responsibility of our destinies. I know that none of us will hesitate. This homeland
has not known hesitation in its life. It has not hesitated with regard to its Arab
national commitments or its national liberation commitments. It has not hesitated
in its social progressive commitments and it has not hesitated before sacrifices.
It has faithfully assumed its responsibility through the Arab military experience with
all its horrors. It has safeguarded its mission, despite the severe blow, without
déspairing or retreating. Today it is assuming the responsibility of its destiny and
marching forward confident in itself, its nation and principles and placing its faith
in God. Whoever places his faith in God. God will help him. God's will shall prevail.
God's peace and mercy be with you. [applause]
0
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
MEMORANDUM
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
INFORMATION
2468
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
May 3, 1973
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DR. KISSINGER
FROM:
HAROLD H. SAUNDERS
WILLIAM B. QUANDT
SUBJECT:
President Sadat's Remarks on the US
and USSR
You will want to be aware of Sadat's May Day speech before your talks
in Moscow. Sadat is pressing Moscow to put the Middle East high on
the Summit agenda.
In his lengthy speech, President Sadat devoted most of his remarks to
foreign policy, in particular to relations with the United States and the
Soviet Union. Several themes stand out against the background of
Sadat's typical rhetoric on such occasions:
The US objective in working to maintain the cease fire is to
allow Israel to strengthen its presence in the occupied areas,
to force Egypt to make concessions, and to weaken Arab solidarity.
Sadat refers to this repeatedly as "psychological warfare" aimed
at creating despair among the Arabs.
Sadat is clearly concerned that the US and USSR have reached
an agreement on preserving the status quo in the Middle East. He
refers to his disagreement with the Soviet view that the peaceful
solution is the only solution. He seems to be worried that the
Soviets have bought the line that the US is pressing for a settlement
and therefore the Soviets need not raise the issue in future Summit
talks. Sadat warns his "Soviet friends" that the continuation of
the ceasefire is a US policy that serves US and Israeli interests.
The peaceful solution, which the US talks about, is fictitious, a
deception, a mirage.
-Referring to Hafez Ismail's talks in Washington, Sadat questions
the US position that Egypt must first recognize Israel's legitimacy.
He asks, at what price are we asked to recognize Israel? "Just to
reactivate the issue, not to solve it, but just to reactivate it. 11 Sadat
also made disparaging remarks about Secretary Rogers' statements
on a partial settlement.
CONFIDENTIAL Recordsced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
- 2 -
-Sadat again refers to Israeli Foreign Minister Eban's
alleged statement that the US deliberately leaked news of
aid to Israel in order to deter the Arabs. He then adds a
new theme, tying it again to alleged statements of Eban,
whom he refers to as the new US Secretary of State.
Addressing the Soviets, Sadat says that Eban claimed that
in Moscow last May Brezhnev had wanted to give priority
to the Middle East, but President Nixon refused. Eban
goes on to say that he hopes Nixon will adopt the same
position at the next Summit if Brezhnev raises the Middle
East issue.
In brief, Sadat seems to want to convey two messages. To the United
States he is saying that he wants more consideration of Egyptian interests
in any settlement effort. Thus far the emphasis has been primarily on
Israeli security and recognition of her legitimacy. What is there in this
for Egypt? To the Soviets he is saying that the Summit should be used
as an occasion to press the United States on the Middle East crisis. He
warns the Soviets not to be put off by US assurances that efforts are
underway to bring about a settlement.
Sadat refers in passing to the battle and the all-out confrontation, but the
bulk of his speech seems more concerned with urging the US and USSR
to become more actively involved in solving the Arab-Israel conflict.
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
Expering
MEMORANDUM
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL INFORMATION
1812
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
April 2, 1973
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DR. KISSINGER
FROM:
HAROLD H. SAUNDERS
Hal
SUBJECT:
Comment on Sadat's Interview with
de Borchgrave
The most troublesome operational problem created by Sadat's inter-
view with de Borchgrave is somewhat reduced by the fact that
Newsweek dropped from its published text the part about the four
questions he put to the US before Ismail's visit and the change in
the second US reply forty-eight hours after the first. However, the
Arabic text released by the Egyptian domestic news service includes
the questions. But this operational question will be handled separately.
Any comment on Sadat's talk with de Borchgrave is quite subjective
because the interview is more significant in what it reveals of Sadat's
present attitude than in substance. The following are some impressions:
1. Sadat is disappointed with the results of the Ismail visit.
He engages in considerable exaggeration both in describing
the prelude to the visit and in what he says about the "ridicu-
lous" US positions taken during the visit. "Complete failure
and despair sums it up. " There are two possible interpretations:
-This may reflect genuine feeling that he cannot pay the
price of increased flexibility that he feels we are asking.
De Borchgrave seems inclined to this view. He cites both
Ghorbal and Heikal as feeling Sadat is "ignoring all moderate
counsels. " Sadat himself may realize that we are asking for
considerable additional flexibility and may feel he cannot go
that far.
--There is also the possibility that, even though he may be
genuinely disappointed, he has not foreclosed additional
diplomatic dialogue and is taking a negative line now to pave
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
- 2 -
the way for a less flexible response than we are hoping
for. One must couple his comments with the fact that
his March 26 speech centered all its critical comments
on Secretary Rogers -- none on the White House. He
may still want to engage the President, but he may have
been disturbed that the President's apparent price for
involvement, if any, seems to be an Egyptian flexibility
which Sadat had not envisioned. So whether he is partly
posturing or not, a settlement has not become much easier.
The test of which of these interpretations is more valid will be
whether or not there is further serious dialogue. Sadat may
have judged that he cannot afford to accept the frame of reference
we are talking about.
2. Sadat talks quite openly about willingness to make peace
with Israel. He talks about "a complete solution and a vision
of the future for the area for decades to come. 11 He says,
"Yes, T want a peace agreement with Israel!' All of this is on
the assumption that full not just nominal -- Egyptian SOV=
ereignty is restored in the Sinai. He regrets that "the fact
that we want a new era of peace with Israel after they give up
their occupation hasn't made a dent" in Israeli attitudes.
3. Sadat, in his speech and here, seems to understand what
we mean by shifting the discussion to Egyptian sovereignty
and Israeli security. He says, "Washington is talking about
nominal Egyptian sovereignty over Sinai. He does not like
this, nor does he acknowledge that this would be the starting
point, not necessarily the end of the process. He appears to
be grappling with what this formulation requires of him. On
Sharm al-Shaikh, he is willing to consider "any formula" the
international community thinks desirable, except Israeli occupa-
tion. The issue is whether he can accept the concept of restricted
Egyptian sovereignty as a framework for discussion. At the
moment, he is talking as if he sees this as capitulation to the
Israeli position, although he has not ruled it out.
4. Sadat seems here to show less interest than in his speech
in a diplomatic effort. As in the past, he talks much mo re about
the military route being the only way out. However, since he
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
- 3 -
carefully left the door open in his speech, he may have
felt free here to be more negative for tactical purposes.
He does say, however, that once the battle begins he
would not hesitate to engage in direct negotiations with
Israel. Diplomacy would continue.
5. Sadat's references to the resumption of fighting suggest
that he may seriously be considering initiating a limited
military engagement along the Suez Canal. He seems to
realize that Egypt will not achieve its goal of recovering
Sinai by military means, but that an end to the ceasefire
might stimulate outside powers to press harder for a
settlement. He appears to be saying, however, that even if
fighting resumes, he does not want to end his contacts with
Washington.
6. In his own words, Sadat has no new ideas for a settlement.
He hopes that the US will revert to his interpretation of the
"Rogers Plan", but instead sees a new US position emerging
that substitutes the concept of sovereignty for withdrawal.
This is a step backward from what he has hoped for, but might
seem better than an indefinite continuation of the status quo.
By taking a firm stand now, Sadat probably is hoping to move
us toward a position closer to his idea of full sovereignty. He
may well realize, however, that the range for further discussion
lies somewhere between "full sovereignty" and "nominal sovereignty. 11
If this assessment of Sadat's position is accurate, he is probably willing
to continue a dialogue with us, but his opening position will be quite
tough. He is seeking to inject the prospect of imminent hostilities into
the picture as a way of advancing the dialogue. At this point it would
appear that if Sadat is to be engaged in a useful exchange of views he
will have to be convinced that a formula balancing Egyptian sovereignty
and Israeli security could include provisions that would progressively
extend the scope of Egypt's sovereignty, but that this process would
not be unconditional. It is this conditional link that he still refuses to
acknowledge as a valid part of the peace making process.
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
- 4 -
Comment: It may be worth noting that our initial reports of Ismail's
reactions to his visit here indicated that he was favorably impressed.
One report indicated that he told the British Ambassador to the UN
that he thought President Nixon was beginning to give attention to the
question of a Middle East settlement. He expressed the view that
President Nixon will take into consideration all points of view, not
just the Israeli one. Ismail subsequently commented to David Rockefeller
that he found you to be "a skillful and imaginative man."
These comments may suggest that Ismail was less disillusioned with
his visit here than Sadat has suggested. This could represent a real
difference of view between the two men; a re-evaluation of the US
position after Mrs. Meir's trip and the news stories on aircraft; or
a tactical position adopted by Sadat that may leave Ismail free to pursue
the ideas he heard in Washington.
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS)
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library
DECLASSIFIED
This document has been reviewed pursuant to Executive Order 13526 and has been determined to be declassified