He knew that a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt would be a historic turning point and, although he wavered along the way, he made far-reaching concessions in order to remove Egypt from the cycle of war — including full withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula and the dismantling of the Israeli settlements there.
It is clear from where we stand today that the Israel-Egypt peace treaty is of vital importance and no one would sensibly suggest it should be revoked.
But this was not the case 40 years ago. Then, there were those who said that Israel must stand firm, that to strike a deal with an implacable enemy would be to give in. Sound familiar?
The necessity of peace, and the sacrifice it required, eventually became clear even to the most hawkish figures in Israel. Even the one-eyed hero, Moshe Dayan, the revered military leader who was Israel’s Foreign Minister at the time and who did not initially support the agreement, eventually concluded “the opponents of the agreement have no real alternative”.
Despite such support, many still protested after the agreement was signed, claiming that Israel was showing weakness and even seeding lands of our forefathers.
Ultimately, the greatness of leaders is measured by their ability to see beyond short-term party political rhetoric and make decisions that can change the course of history for the better.
Camp David was undoubtedly one of those moments, when Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin and Jimmy Carter together decided to choose peace. Today, both Israel and Egypt value their peace agreement as a strategic asset of the highest order, even though it still does not elicit warmth toward either side.
In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Begin said: “Peace is the beauty of life. It is sunshine. It is the smile of a child, the love of a mother, the joy of a father, the togetherness of a family. It is the advancement of man, the victory of a just cause, the triumph of truth. Peace is all of these and more and more”.
40 years on, there are still those who argue that peace is impossible. They say now what was said then: that they are in favour of peace in principle but that now is not the right time, that there is no real partner, that the status quo may even be better.
Begin shared such concerns and acknowledged that the fight for peace is not an easy one, that there are difficulties in pursuing peace and there are also victims of peace — but “all these are preferred to the victims of war”.
He knew then, as is the case now, that Israel would continue to need a strong military and advanced weaponry to help protect itself, but nonetheless the journey to true security could only be achieved by walking the road to peace and reconciliation together with a decades-old foe.
Yachad believes that Begin’s fight for peace is the essence of Zionism: a proactive approach, in which the Jewish people take their future into their own hands.
As proud Zionists who support Israel and desire its future security and prosperity, we believe Israel’s leaders must do all they can to support peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
The first step is a small one, but maybe the most vital: to simply embrace a different way of thinking, which recognises that, no matter the noise of fear that comes from those around them, and no matter how lonely the road, peace only comes from working together with their foes on strategic compromise, as modelled by Begin.
Simon Sadie is the new chair of Yachad
