Israel Television Channel 1 Network in Hebrew 1630 GMT 7 Jan 99 [Studio interview with
Uri Lubrani, coordinator of Israeli government activities in Lebanon, by Shlomo Ganor and Eli
Kahil, on the "Encounter" program; in Hebrew with Arabic subtitles, translated from the
Hebrew]

[Ganor] Mr. Lubrani, the Israeli Government has decided on a new policy against Lebanon.
The question is that while you are trying to keep the decision somewhat ambiguous, what is
new in this policy?

[Lubrani] First, I wish to state that it is not a new policy. It is anchored in a situation that has
existed for a long time, which comes up for discussion from time to time. You know that
extended discussions have been held on the Lebanese problem, which is a very important
issue for us that has set off an internal Israeli dispute, which is legitimate in a free state.
Everybody can say what he thinks and wants. The inner cabinet reached the conclusion that
there will be no unilateral withdrawal. To the inner cabinet and those responsible for security
in the north, it is perfectly clear that a unilateral withdrawal is a recipe for much more serious
problems and many more lives lost than in the existing situation. That is the background. In
addition, it was decided that Israel will not be able to sit idly by when it is attacked. I will
naturally not tell you precisely what the State of Israel plans to do, but there is no doubt that
we are currently living under the Grapes of Wrath understandings, which are far from perfect,
but we are sticking to them unequivocally. We are searching for every possible way not to
violate these understandings, but it is very difficult because we are facing problems on a daily
basis. Under all those pressures, there are sometimes human errors and technical hitches in
our ability to respond, which can lead to casualties. We have always believed that we must
avoid such a situation as far as possible, but things happen, and we must make sure that the
understandings are not eroded. We believe that these understandings are being eroded by
Hizballah because, if you recall, they contain a very important clause: Under no
circumstances [last three words in English] will katyushas be fired on settlements in the north.
That has been violated several times by Hizballah. We must make sure that these
understandings are upheld. We will uphold them, and the other side must do the same. When
there is a complaint, no matter how serious, it must first be addressed to the monitoring
committee for a ruling.

[Ganor] In order to preempt the possibility of katyusha shelling, it was decided that Israel
would respond by hitting targets inside Lebanon while trying to prevent harm to civilians. The
question is what you mean by that? Will you destroy infrastructures?

[Lubrani] Do you think I will now present you with a list of targets and objectives? Obviously I
will not do that. What have we done up to now? What happened over the past week? We
reacted by hitting Hizballah. This is a continuation of the existing policy. It will be more
disciplined and tougher because we feel that the understandings are being eroded by
Hizballah and we must make it clear that when this happens we must be in a situation of
knowing how to respond.

[Kahil] Do you expect Hizballah to honor the new rules of the game in Lebanon?

[Lubrani] Hizballah does not live in a vacuum. It must know that Israel will not sit idly by if it
operates from and stores its weapons in an inhabited area where it believes it is immune from
an Israeli reaction. We are aware of this and we very, very much do not like it, but what can
we do? That is the situation. We try to act with caution, but there can be various reactions,
and we stress that there will be responses.

[Ganor] The inner cabinet decision points an accusing finger at the Lebanese Government. I
am quoting from the decision in which the Israeli Government says it regards the Lebanese
Government directly responsible for what is happening in south Lebanon. It is naive to think
that the Lebanese Government can do what it wants in the south and control it. How do you
explain that contradiction?

[Lubrani] First, the Lebanese Government is responsible for what is happening in the area
under its control. If a sovereign government claims sovereignty then where else should we
send our message?

[Ganor] To the Syrians, for example.

[Lubrani] There is definitely a Syrian angle, and I believe that nobody has any doubt that
Syrian control in Lebanon is total and decisive.

[Ganor] So why not say so?

[Lubrani] We do not hide the fact that Syria controls Lebanon, but we have business with the
Lebanese Government. When the late Prime Minister Rabin negotiated with Syria he
intended to bring the Lebanese angle into the negotiations. We know what happened and
that the negotiations have stopped. There is no active Israeli-Syrian track, and Hizballah
continues to operate and to try to harm us there and our ability to uphold our security in the
north.

What should be noted is that while the Syrian track is frozen, we took the initiative and came
up with Security Council Resolution 425, which we had not agreed to implement for one
simple reason, and that is that it does not provide what we want, peace with Syria and
Lebanon. Resolution 425 does not give us that and deals only with security problems.
However, since there are no negotiations on the Syrian track, we proposed implementing
Resolution 425, which is between us and the Lebanese Government.

[Ganor] Although a year has passed, the Resolution 425 initiative has not taken off.

[Lubrani] For a simple reason, because Lebanon is not free to make such decisions, which
are made in Damascus. That is obvious, but we will continue trying to convince even the
Syrians that it is in their interest to have security on both sides of the border and that lives will
thus be saved. We can start negotiations tomorrow.

[Kahil] You spoke about the Syrians, and Lebanon is now the responsibility of Bishshar
al-Asad. Are you finding any change in the Syrian approach and policy toward Lebanon?

[Lubrani] I do not live in Lebanon. I can only say that there is a new situation in Syrian control
in Lebanon.

[Ganor] For better or worse?

[Lubrani] It is still hard to say. I think al-Asad is preparing his son to succeed him, and among
the other important things that Syria is involved in, is Lebanon. There is no doubt that the
person being prepared for the highest position in Syria must have experience on Lebanon.
That is the reason, I believe, that President al-Asad has decided to transfer the Lebanon
issue to Bashshar.

[Kahil] Will Syria's policy toward Lebanon over the past 20 years continue or do you already
find signs of a change?

[Lubrani] First, I find that following the changes in the Lebanese Government -- the election of
a new president and the appointment of a new prime minister -- I see a Syrian move aimed at
making it easier and simpler for Syria to control Lebanon.

[Ganor] An example of that it is the Lebanese president's remarks on 6 January rejecting any
possibility of entering into negotiations with Israel although you said a few minutes ago that
Israel is ready to start negotiations.

[Lubrani] That was also the position of the previous president. It is not a new position. I think
that what is more important from a Lebanese point of view is that the Syrians are not
immersed in daily problems in Lebanon because their emissaries in the Lebanese
Government will do it for them without requiring daily Syrian advice.

[Kahil] I understand that a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon has been dropped from the
agenda despite the public debate.

[Lubrani] I said that a public debate exists. The inner cabinet decided unequivocally that there
will not be a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon not because we are digging into that
position, but because after weighing all the options and hearing the experts' views, we have
decided that any other solution would lead to a much worse situation. That is the only reason.

[Ganor] Do you think Hizballah will honor the Israeli rules?

[Lubrani] I cannot speak for Hizballah. Hizballah is not free to make its own decisions. There
are things that Iran and Syria dictate to it. Hizballah must know that we will not sit idly by and
let them harm us without finding a way to respond.

[Ganor] You referred to Iran, which is yet another factor in the complex Lebanese puzzle. In
view of the rivalry between President Khatami and spiritual leader Khamene'i, the question is
how it will influence the Lebanese issue. You are also an expert on Iran; you served there.

[Lubrani] Yes, I served in Iran for many years. I have a soft spot for Iran. I am very close to Iran
and I loved my stay there. I have great respect for Iranian culture and the Iranian people.
Therefore, I take this opportunity to say: Iran is undergoing a process, which I believe is
irreversible. The fervor and dynamics of the Iranian revolutionary have been extinguished. At
present there is a power struggle between extremists and more moderates. I cannot say when
this struggle will be resolved. I want to merely give you a hint. Some 70 percent of those who
do not want the existing Iranian regime, chose President Khatami and expected many things
from him. They were disappointed, but those 70 percent still exist and want democracy,
freedom, openness to the world, and not to be frisked on suspicion of being terrorists when
they enter a foreign country. These people want a totally different system of government. That
will happen, but I cannot say when. When it does, it will also have an impact on Hizballah,
which currently relies on the support and financial aid of the existing Iranian regime, which
uses that to gain control in Lebanon. Hizballah is the only militia in Lebanon permitted to bear
arms.

[Ganor] In view of your rich diplomatic experience in Iran and how you see the situation, is
there any chance that the Iranian authorities will change their attitude toward Israel?

[Lubrani] I do not believe that the current regime will want to change its attitude toward Israel.
It is incapable of doing so. It is even incapable of changing its attitude toward the United
States although it is in its interest to do so. It is even incapable of lifting the fatwa on Salman
Rushdie. It is a fossilized regime sticking to a bankrupted ideology. Therefore, I definitely do
not think they will change toward Israel.

[Kahil] What lies behind the SLA [South Lebanon Army] decision to pull out of two bases in
the Jazzin sector?

[Lubrani] You know that the Jazzin sector has a special status. It is not part of the security
zone. The IDF [Israel Defense Forces] is not deployed there. Only the SLA [South Lebanon
Army] is there. General Lahd is exclusively responsible for that sector and the decision to
evacuate the two strongholds was his for his own reasons. I suppose he knew what he was
doing.

[Ganor] Will it have repercussions on the security situation in the security zone?

[Lubrani] I do not think it is linked in any way. As I said, the Jazzin enclave has its own status,
and the security zone where the IDF operates has its status. I do not think it will have any
impact.

[Kahil] Are residents of the security zone still loyal to the idea of a free Lebanon inside the
security zone?

[Lubrani] I believe that the inhabitants of the security zone always saw themselves as patriotic
Lebanese and saw what is happening in the north. There is no doubt that the residents of the
security zone totally identify with the north, and we encourage that. They are Lebanese
citizens. They see themselves that way and so do we. They have set up the SLA from among
themselves and it is made up only of Lebanese, and they view it as the army that defends
them in the area in which they live. All the SLA soldiers came from the villages inside the
security zone.

[Ganor] Are there desertions from SLA ranks?

[Lubrani] Nothing beyond the norm. We must first stress that the SLA is an army made up of
volunteers.

[Ganor] Volunteers, but is it professional?

[Lubrani] We are making every effort to see that it is professional both in personnel and
equipment, but if an SLA soldier wants to leave he can. There are, of course, pressures by
the village and the family, but there is no way to force an SLA soldier to stay. That is the first
thing. Second, from time to time, somebody crosses to the other side. Sometimes somebody
decides that he is sick and tired and crosses over. That happens, but it is not more frequent
this year than it was in previous years, and I do not think that will become more frequent
because the SLA is a militia with its own objective, to look after the security of its home. There
is no reason why they should do anything that harms their homes.

[Kahil] Sometimes there are those who play down the value of the SLA in upholding security.
For instance, does the SLA play an active part in discovering Hizballah roadside bombs and
in defending our northern settlements?

[Lubrani] On many occasions the SLA uncovered roadside bombs and weapons meant to kill
not only its soldiers but also IDF soldiers. These weapons are brought in from abroad and
planted, and they were discovered by the SLA. It did an outstanding job and deserves to be
applauded.

[Ganor] Can you say anything about the chief of staff's remarks? You participated in the chief
of staff's news conference in which he disclosed the killing of the senior Hizballah
commander.

[Lubrani] I have nothing to add to what the chief of staff said.

[Kahil] Since we have spoken about south Lebanon, can you tell us what Lahd's condition is?

[Lubrani] General Lahd had an intestinal problem. I visited him in Rambam Hospital
yesterday. His condition is good and I believe he is now on his way to Marj 'Uyun.

[Ganor] You have recently been holding parties for the senior SLA echelon, and the question
is what aid are you providing to the residents of the south?

[Lubrani] We extend any aid that enables them to live a normal life and which gives them a
modicum of better conditions than what exists in the north. We invest a great deal of money
and resources for that purpose, and that will continue.

[Ganor] In that are you competing with Hizballah and the other organizations in the north?

[Lubrani] I have not heard about Hizballah contributing anything to the security zone beside
katyushas, roadside bombs, and ambushes. The Lebanese Government operates inside the
security zone, but in every area where we think they are not doing what they should we move
in.

[Ganor] The main question, Mr. Lubrani, is how long will the Israeli presence in the security
zone continue and how long will south Lebanon be considered a severed section of
Lebanon?

[Lubrani] That is a good question, but the answer is not so simple. I cannot say until when. I
can only say that the moment there are political negotiations that lead to arrangements that
enable the IDF to leave -- since the issue does not have a military solution, only a political
one -- there will be no reason for Israel to remain there. We have stepped a rung and have
said: forget peace and normalization, only security arrangements within the framework of
Resolution 425. That would be enough for us to leave.

[Ganor] Will the Israeli decision to bring the elections forward have an impact on the policy
toward south Lebanon?

[Lubrani] I am not a politician. I have served under all the prime ministers and defense
ministers since 1983 and I would like to hope that any government that is elected in Israel will
see as one of its main objectives the need to renew the negotiations along the Syrian track in
order to resolve the Lebanese issue.

[Ganor] At the outset of the new year, the question is whether you see that as a real
possibility.

[Lubrani] I can only express my deep hope. I would like to take this opportunity to wish all the
viewers -- Muslims, Christians, and others -- a good year in 1999, one that gives us peace
and security.