Exclusive Interview With

Israeli Statesman

Moreover, what Mr. Sharett had to say was of particular merit for he had been an architect of Israel's foreign policy since the creation of the state in 1948 and was also for a short time her Prime Minister. Though holding no official position in cabinet now, he is still obviously a force in the mai government party (the government of Israel being a coalition of left of centre parties) and should Mr Ben Gurion choose to retire again Mr. Sharett is an obvious aspirant for the post of Israel's chief minister.

Uppermost in our minds of course, was the November crisis and events thereafter and Mr. Sharett explained that they have both helped and hindered the chances of a general settlement between Israel and her Arab neighbours. "The Arabs will increasingly realise" he said. "the utter destructive futility of their present attempt and determination to perpetuate a state of war against Israel, wasting their resource on constant disarmament instead of devoting them to constructive purposes."

Meanwhile it was difficult to draw a balance. He felt that peace in the Middle-east was inconceivable unless Isreal's security was effectively safeguarded, that recent events had removed an imminent threat to Israel's survival and at the same time shattered Arab dreams that Israel could be eliminated by force. He pointed out that while East-West rivalry had not created the present conflict it had certainly aggravated it especially, he felt, "the extravagant military aid accorded by the Soviet Bloc to Egypt." This had only served to inflame Nasser's ambition to dominate the Arab world and bring about the speedy annihilation of Israel. "Ambitions which have met with the resounding failure they so abundantly deserved."

He was equally definite when we asked him about the suggested collusion between Israel and the Anglo-French governments. He explained that at the time he was not a member of the government and in fact was out of Israel at the time. But he did say that he was absolutely convinced that when the Sinai campaign was launched "Israel alone was responsible for the action it took and that it was responsible only for That action."

Emphatically he denied that Israel bore any responsibility for the plight of the Arab refugees. "The Arab exodus from Israel was the direct outcome of a war' of aggression launched against Israel by the Arab States around her. The one who started the war must bear full responsibility for its results." He went on to demolish what he termed "the fallacy" of the contradictory promises made to the Arab and the Jews by the British government after the 1914-18 war, which Mr. Nehru for one has declared to be the foundation of the Arab-Israel dispute. The theory had been demolished time and time again and was now obsolete for when the question went before the United Nations in 1947. both sides had presented a case based not not on "promises" but on "natural and historical rights." Undoubtedly the strongest influence on the world community, he thought, was that while the Arabs were secure in their national existence and political independence over an area of 1,500,000 square miles, the land of Israel today only consisted of 8,000 square miles and was the only spot on the map which the Jewish people could call home.

Finally we asked Mr. Sharett about Israel's relations with Asia, and we quote him in full: "Israel is most vitally interested in developing relations of mutual understanding and assistance with the Asian countries which have of late regained their independence and are now striving to develop their resources to uplift the material and cultural levels of their people, to strengthen within them the principles and practice of democracy and to make their own contribution.

"Israel hopes that the concern so acutely felt in those countries lest any international conflagration should hamper their peaceful progress and imperil their independence will lead them to exert their influence on behalf of a freely negotiated peaceful settlement in the Middle-East.

It was with some diffidence that we had asked Mr. Sharett for an interview. Obviously he had been plagued with reporters both in Australia and here, nevertheless one of his first comments was that he regretted not having had the opportunity to speak at the University as he had done in Melbourne and by the end of the interview we shared his regret for he would have made a most engaging speaker.—Zeke.