Plain Talk from Golda Meir

IN her brief two months as Premier of Israel, Mrs. Golda Meir has proved a forceful and formidable public defender of Israel's interests as she sees them. She has never been more popular among Israelis, who admire her iron will, zest for long hours and hard work at the age of 71, and her blunt manner of speech. Those qualities were amply demonstrated in a recent interview with TIME Inc. Editor in Chief Hedley Donovan and TIME Managing Editor Henry Grunwald:

How do you read President Nasser's mood?

We don't find any difference, really. The only time he said anything new was immediately after the war, that great speech of his, when for a moment, I think, he was prepared to take the blame on himself. But I must say to his credit, he recovered very quickly and became true to himself again.

How close is the Middle East to another round of war?

Let us differentiate between two things. You know our position is that war is not imminent. But we have to be prepared also in case we misjudge. We can't risk it. Many people have lost wars in history and many people's countries have been occupied by foreign powers. Our history is much more tragic. Hitler took care of 6,000,000 Jews. If we lose a war, for us that is the last war. Then we are not here any more. If one doesn't understand this, then one doesn't understand our obstinacy.

Speaking of the 6,000,000, the Arabs were not responsible for their fate. It is often said by Arabs that history is taking it out on them, by having so many Arabs displaced from this country 20 years ago, and more recently.

The Arabs created a refugee problem. This is the truth. We didn't throw them out. In 1949, immediately after the war, the Cabinet of Israel decided that within a peace settlement with the Arab countries, we will take back about 100,-000 refugees. The Arabs wouldn't listen. For 20 years the refugees were kept in camps. The textbooks printed with the money of the United Nations were full of hatred toward Israel, with wonderful arithmetic examples of how there were five Israelis, we killed three, how many are left? Now the little boy who was five is now 25. He is maybe Fatah [an Arab commando] now. Now we are asked to give them a free choice to come back. This is a fifth column that we are asked to take.

Do you really feel that the refugee problem, socalled, is entirely created by the Arabs themselves?

One hundred per cent.

Does it disturb you that the American public, from having been 99% pro-Israel and enormously enthusiastic about the results of the June war, now seems slightly vexed with Israel?

If I am to choose a good press in the world with many good things about an Israel that isn't here any more, or unfair criticism of an Israel that is still in existence, then I choose the latter. We were the people who were attacked. The attacked won the war. Certainly we would be much happier if the U.S., and other countries in the world, would see the situation as we do. I am convinced that every one of these countries in our position would act exactly as we are. I understand American interests. Not only as citizens of Israel, but as citizens of the world, we are vitally interested that there should be an understanding between America and the Soviet Union. But, to say it very bluntly, not at our expense.

How do you visualize a settlement?

Agreed, secure boundaries. Both adjectives have equal importance.

What would such be, from your point of view?

We don't draw maps. Why should I create a Jewish war before there is any hope whatsoever of peace with the Arabs? What do I mean? There are differences of opinion among this people. When the day comes when we sit with Nasser, and he will say here, and we will say here, and the negotiators representing Israel will think, well, maybe not exactly this, maybe here, maybe there. They will bring it to the Cabinet, and the Cabinet will have to discuss it and take a position. The Cabinet will break up. We will go to the Knesset and have new elections. But why should I do it now?

We say, come and negotiate with us for secure and agreed borders. Now, I say 'secure' because we have lived with those borders for 20 years. Anybody that tells us that we should step down so that the Syrians again can put their guns in position and to say to our people down below, don't budge, stay there --I want to see that hero. It is not moral. It is not decent.

What will you do if the Big Four agree on a Middle East settlement that Israel does not like?

I have no illusions. The U.N. Security Council will say, of course, this is wonderful: the big powers agree. It doesn't happen twice a week that the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. are in agreement. And we will say no. Then it will go to the Assembly, and maybe a special assembly--and we will say no. It won't be easy.

You have mentioned Arab perfidy several times. What makes you think they will keep any signed agreement? Isn't there a paradox here?

That's why we said 'secure borders.' When I say secure borders, I mean one thing: no natural advantage to our neighbors in the borders, because we have had all that. Because if Hussein's army, without crossing the border, can shell Tel Aviv--it wasn't so serious, one or two shells--but there can come more. And if Natanya, in the middle of the country, with only twelve miles between the sea and the former border, if that is cut, we are also through. On that I'm prepared to stand for elections--that this cannot happen, that these twelve miles can't be any more, and that the Golan Heights can't be any more. And I am not prepared that anybody should safeguard for me the free shipping through the Straits of Tiran.

I have reasons to envy Mr. Eban as Foreign Minister for many things. But I envy him more for one thing: namely, he will never have to do what I had to do in 1957: to stand before the United Nations and say, we will withdraw. I did it on behalf of the government, but that was not my greatest hour.

So you visualize the secure border as something that is self-enforcing, that is not, in fact, enforced by a signed treaty, but that the border itself enforces?

Yes, but with a signed treaty. But since signed treaties have not always prevented war--why do all countries who have peace treaties with their neighbors still guard their borders?--borders also mean something. What we ask our friends is, to my mind, a very simple thing: tell Nasser and Hussein, sit down with the Israelis, negotiate peace with them. For 20 years, we have tried everything. Now it is your responsibility, not the Soviet Union, not the United States, not France, not England. Mr. Nasser, it is your responsibility. You are responsible for the war. You must take the responsibility for peace.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.