Tzipi Livni tells 'Post' ahead of next week's Kadima primary: "I'll fight the enemy, but in my way."
By GIL STERN STERN HOFFMANLivni china 224 88(photo credit: AP)
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni clearly cannot wait for the Kadima leadership race to end next Wednesday. She has campaigned across the country, but privately, she admits that she does not enjoy it.
For her, the primary is just a means to an end of capturing the premiership, capping her fast rise that began when she was first elected to the Knesset in 1999.
Livni has managed to keep her squeaky-clean image in a campaign in which her main competition, Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, has highlighted all her ostensible missteps and weaknesses.
While the polls give her a significant edge over Mofaz, Livni knows she must succeed in getting her supporters out to the polling stations, where the results matter.
Livni spoke to The Jerusalem Post at her Tel Aviv office, making time in her tight schedule following an interview with the Saudi-based Al-Arabiya network. After eating a chocolate bar for a sugar rush, she tells the Post why having a prime minister with clean hands would not harm Israel in a region where its enemies often do not fight fair.
Your top asset is having clean hands, but can't that be a detriment for a prime minister in a bad neighborhood where our enemies don't play by the rules?
Corruption is internal weakness. To maintain clean behavior in the current political situation in Israel requires strength. That means standing up to central committee members and millionaires. Israel's values are what keep the country going. But [how I handle myself politically] says nothing about how I would handle external threats. None of our enemies think that I'm not ready. I will fight the bad guys but in my way. And my way has been proven effective. I've been in politics less than a decade, and I'm already a realistic candidate for prime minister.
Hizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said when the Second Lebanon War began that he started it because he wanted to test Israel's weak leadership. Are you concerned that he will try to test you if you become prime minister out of a misconception that you, as a woman, would be a weak leader?
The fact that I'm a woman doesn't make me a weak leader. Nasrallah said after the war that had he known that Israel would have fought back the way we did, he wouldn't have started the war. I would like to think that generals also think twice when they make decisions, just like I do. It's not that generals pull the trigger and women don't. I have no problem pulling the trigger when necessary. I was of the opinion that we needed to initiate an operation on July 12. In the Arab world, they know perfectly well when I can be tough and when I can be more compromising. There is no room for compromise with Hizbullah and certainly not with Iran that operates Hizbullah in Lebanon.
Do you feel ready to make a weighty decision about a military strike on Iran?
I agree that the prime minister has to make difficult decisions. In the past three-and-a-half years, I have made many difficult decisions.
Yes, I'm ready. The only thing I won't do is say in advance what I would do. Headlines on this issue hurt more than they help.
Are Ehud Olmert's political problems hindering the negotiations with the Palestinians?
No.
Is Olmert pressuring to reach an agreement before he leaves or to publish what has already been agreed?
There is no way of reaching an agreement now. I don't think Olmert can do it, because there are two sides. Political pressure can lead to one of two unacceptable outcomes: concessions where it should be forbidden to make concessions or a blowup in the talks.
How can we know what your views are on the negotiations with the Palestinians when the guidelines you set with your Palestinian counterpart rule out anything from being leaked and say that there is no deal on anything until there is a deal on everything? How can Kadima members who are against concessions in Jerusalem confidently vote for you?
I can say my red lines and principles. I can't say how far the negotiations have gone. I think we need a diplomatic process based on two states for two peoples; I rule out the return of Palestinian refugees to our borders; and I have red lines on security, which include demilitarization and other things. We need borders based on security, maintaining holy places and where the Jews live in major population centers. The public understands it when I speak of two states for two peoples without saying the exact border. Most of the public wants to evacuate as few people as possible, while retaining our assets and holy sites.
I don't understand why you would not agree to stay in Kadima if you lost the race. Isn't that a sore loser's attitude?
I was asked if I would stay at any price, and I said no. I'm in politics for ideology and not the other way around. Imagine what you would be telling me afterward if I left without saying in advance that I could. I also refused to make such a commitment when I was in the Likud and people were demanding it.
I'm for the Annapolis process. Mofaz voted against it, and he is also against negotiations about the Golan.
How can you form a government without surrendering to Shas on child allotments, and how can you maintain your clean image if you do?
There is a coalition agreement. Noting has changed. It will be in my hands to decide whether to do something that might tarnish my image.
How do you respond to our readers abroad who thought that one of the reasons we were not more successful in the Second Lebanon War was that the foreign minister did not give interviews to the foreign press in a war largely fought on the battleground of international PR?
Hasbara, for me, is more than talking heads. During the war, I had to be advancing the diplomatic exit. I had to talk to all the world leaders and foreign ministers so they would make right decisions. That is no less important than talking on TV. The fact that I sent other ministers and people to talk on TV proves that I am not worried about my ego and I don't have a problem with letting others grab screen time. I don't ascribe to myself supernatural powers that would have allowed me to persuade people more than others did. There are bad pictures in war. Even with Shimon Peres speaking on our behalf, when half the screen is an Israeli and the other is dead kids, the side that is weaker or seen that way will always win.
But there was a feeling that the war changed dramatically on the day of Kafr Kanna when Israel didn't get out pictures in time showing where the fault really was.
The IDF gave what it could at a later stage. Until then, we were fighting on television with no weapons. The war didn't end the way it did because the world stopped liking us in the middle. The war ended because we decided that it was right for us to end it. A foreign minister's job is not to get the world off our backs so we could buy time for the IDF. We changed that mindset. The problem in the war wasn't time. More time wouldn't have helped.
How can you be satisfied with the outcome of UN Resolution 1701 when it has not empowered UNIFIL enough to prevent Syria from rearming Hizbullah?
The resolution changed the situation in that the Lebanese army is in south Lebanon. The border between Syria and Lebanon was never in our hands, and that wasn't the goal of the war. The embargo made arms smuggling over the border illegal. I'm not happy that weapons get through. But because it's not on our border and no one thinks we should send troops, the least we can do is have an embargo, and I can work to make sure it's enforced.
Do you trust Syrian President Bashar Assad?
If the question is does he want peace or international legitimacy, I have not received a satisfactory answer yet.•
if(catID != 151){
var cont = `Take Israel home with the new Jerusalem Post Store
