Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday, 14 January 2016), at the GPO Annual New Year's Toast, met with the foreign media. Following is a transcript of his remarks.
 
Prime Minister Netanyahu: "First let me say that I spoke this morning to Shimon Peres. He sounded terrific. I sent him my own best wishes, my wife's and the people of Israel, and I'm sure all of you, for a speedy recovery.
 
Last week the Knesset commemorated 40 years since the infamous Zionism-racism resolution. Now, that resolution was repealed, but unfortunately, systematic bias against Israel at the UN wasn't repealed, still lives on.
 
There are 20 resolutions every year at the UN General Assembly against Israel, one on Iran. The majority of country resolutions that the United Nations Human Rights Council are directed against Israel, more than all the other countries combined, in the world. Syria, Iran, North Korea, you name it…
 
That unfortunately has not changed. What also hasn't changed in the last 40 years is the endemic Palestinian rejection of the Jewish state and the incitement to violence. Palestinians rejected a Jewish state in 1937, and then in 1947, even though the UN resolution allowed them and called for them having their own state.
 
The Jews accepted the partition resolution, the Palestinian rejected it. They again rejected their own state at Camp David at 2000, and then in 2008, and since then, they have deigned to negotiate with me in seven years six hours, basically refusing to negotiate something that they claim they want, which is a political resolution of this conflict.
 
The real core of the conflict is the rejection of a Jewish state, a nation state for the Jewish people, in any borders. That has unfortunately remained with us.
 
I think that we all understand that this must change and I hope it does. Israel has faced many fronts. Those fronts are now confronting many other countries. They challenge our security and our future. The primary threats that we face today are from militant Islam, from the Sunni branch led by ISIS and from the Shi'ite branch led by Iran. They both, they all perpetrate terror of one sort or another. And terror is always evil whether it's in Jakarta or Istanbul or anywhere else.
 
So this is obviously something that brings the negativity, shall I say, in the Middle East and in the world to the fore. But there have been positive changes in the last 40 years.
 
Here are some numbers: First of all in demography, we were three and a half million people in Israel in 1975, today we're over eight million. We enjoyed the waves of immigration from the former Soviet Union and from Ethiopia of course. Today Jews are coming to Israel from France and the Ukraine and other countries.
 
In the economy, we created a high-tech revolution here, which has changed the face of Israel globally. Our GDP was, here's a number - 12.3 billion dollars in 1975; today, it's over 300 billion dollars. The GDP per capita was 3,500 dollars. Today, it's ten times that.  Our GDP per capita grew ten times in 40 years. That's a tremendous achievement.
 
But the one I want to concentrate on is this. It's diplomacy. In 1975 Israel basically had diplomatic relations with two sets of countries - the countries of North America, the United States and Canada of course, that was the anchor of our relationship and still is. Our relationship with the United States is tremendously important. And of course the countries of Western Europe.
 
Today, we have relations with the countries of Asia, of Africa, of Central and Eastern Europe, and there is something very big that's taken place. I described to you the negative trends at the UN. That's true. That's mirrored also in a negative trend in certain other institutions which I'll touch upon later, in global institutions or in multination institutions.
 
But when you look at our relations with individual nations, that is changing dramatically. We have now very close relations with some small countries in the world, like China, India, Japan, Russia, just about every country, just about every country in Africa, countries in Latin America, well, except one. That too. And increasingly with the Arab countries. We have of course the two great peace treaties that we have with Egypt and Jordan. But we have growing and expanding relations with many of the Arab countries in the Middle East.
 
And the question is why is this happening? Because obviously, this is a very… When you look at it over the perspective of time, you see this vast change. Why is that happening. It's happening for two big reasons. The first is what I mentioned earlier - the rise of militant Islam. And the accompanying terror that afflicts just about every country on earth.
 
And when those countries look around and they say who can help us with that? Who's got the intelligence? I don't mean this, I mean military intelligence, or anti-terror intelligence, and the experience of fighting these militants and the experience of fighting terror. They naturally come to Israel.
 
And the other reason that they're coming is not merely to fight the forces that want to take humanity to a terrible past of religious wars and early Medievalism. It's because they also want to seize the benefits of the future. And when they look at Israel they see the growth of our technology. And the three reasons they come here are technology, technology, technology. And Israel's technological prowess, whether it's in recycling water, or in agriculture, or in health, or in IT, or in cyber, in any area, in making sensors for cars, or in making surgeon helmets for micro-surgery, in anything. Those countries come here because they want to have... to partake the promise of the future.
 
So when countries look around, big countries, small-sized countries and anything in between and they ask, whose feet are planted one foot in fighting terror and militant Islam that is now a global affliction, and the other is how do we get our hand on the capabilities of innovation, and how do we translate what has happened in Israel to our own benefit? And each country differs in what they want, but they all want, virtually every one of them, every one of them wants these two things.
 
And they look around and they see here's a country who is solidly placed to meet these two challenges, the challenges of those who want to take us to the past, the challenge of those who want to go into the future. And Israel is uniquely placed. So there's a tremendous revolution taking place here. It is often obfuscated by BDS, and often obfuscated by the international forums, but many countries have reached that conclusion.
 
And since I'm the foreign minister, I can tell you, those people who talk about isolation, how about giving us a minute of isolation. Because I'm flooded with requests for visits, either ministers or leaders who want to come here, or the request that we go there. This is what is happening in the world. It's a big change, and it's one that I think augurs great promise for Israel.
 
So despite the threats facing us, we've achieved much over the last 40 years, and I have every confidence that we'll continue to succeed over the next 40 years. Now, I don't know if I'll be here in the next 40 years, but you're all welcome to come here again and we'll trust that assumption. But I think that we've achieved a lot and we intend to achieve a lot more. Thank you very much."

 
Question: "Prime Minister, in recent days the Swedish Foreign Minister has suggested that Israel has used excessive force in its efforts to suppress the violence that Palestinians have been perpetrating over the last three or four months, and said there should be an international investigation. Now your, a member of your security cabinet, the Energy Minister has accused her of anti-Semitism. I wonder whether you think it's appropriate to accuse the Foreign Minister of a friendly country, accounted by you as a Foreign Minister of such a charge, and whether, if I may finish the question, and whether… How you respond to those who accuse Israel of behaving in a way that it's above criticism and can't be reined in?"
 
Prime Minister: "Israel is not above criticism, but it should be held to the same standard that everyone else is being held to. I think what the Swedish Foreign Minister said is outrageous, I think it's immoral, it's unjust, it's just wrong. I mean, people are defending themselves against assailants wielding knives who are about to stab them to death, and they shoot the people, and that's extra-judicial killings? So why is San Bernardino not extra-judicial killings, and the other day in Paris, a knife wielding terrorist was shot to death, is that extra-judicial killings? Does the Swedish Foreign Minister suggest that there be examinations of what happened there, in Paris, or in the United States? This is definitely wrong and it singles out Israel in an absurd way. This… I don't know if this is, I don't want to call it by other names, I'll just say this is an absurdity. And it's outrageous."
 
Question:"But anti-Semitic?"
 
Prime Minister:"I haven't examined the motives of this or that minister. I just tell you, it's outrageous, it's immoral and it's stupid."
 
Question: "First Korean daily newspaper. Jo San. My first question is what is your stance, Mr. Prime Minister, on NGO transparency bill promoted by Justice Minister Shaked?"
 
Prime Minister: "Well, I fail to understand how greater transparency is anti-democratic. I mean, how does divulging foreign government's funding anti-democratic? I think it's the most obvious request in any democracy. Now, just… It's not just my view alone, because I have here House Resolution Number Five, in the House of Representatives of the US, January 6, 2015, so that's a year ago. “The disclosure of foreign payments to witnesses in the House of Representatives,” okay? “In the case of a witness appearing in a non-governmental capacity, a written statement of proposed testimony shall include a curricula vitae and a disclosure of any federal grants or contracts or contracts of payments originating with a foreign government received during the current calendar year or either of the two previous calendar years by the witness.”
 
Not 50%. Any percent. A dollar, or a shekel. A dollar from any government has to be disclosed if you're going to go to the American Knesset, okay? And then it says, “The disclosure referred to shall include the amount and country of origin of any payment or contract related to the subject matter of the leader of the hearing originating with a foreign government.” Normally I would say “I rest my case.” The proposed rule in Israel on disclosure of NGOs is not anti-democratic. It's transparency, which is the heart of democracy. It is something that is practiced in other countries as I've just showed you. I think when you hear of the use and abuse of NGOs here, that's the least that we want, is transparency, and I think that it's much warranted. I think it's just common sense. And again, I think that Israel is being held to a different standard, once again. For universal standards that's fine. For a double standard, or in the case of Israel, a triple standard, not fine. Not acceptable."
 
Question: "One other question is, recently in North Korea had a nuclear bomb test, even though international community had applied a sanction against country, and South Korea tried to make an effort to let them stop the nuclear developments and made effort to be unification. But I want to know your opinion on the nuclearization and unification in Korean peninsula."
 
Prime Minister: "Well, my response to the recent nuclear test is that we condemn it. It's a clear violation of all the commitments that North Korea has undertaken and it obviously is a great cause of concern for North Korea's neighbors and I think for the entire world."
 
Question: "Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister, I'll ask two questions too, then. Do you consider that Jews are no longer safe on the streets of Europe, and what do you make of [unclear] among other things in France for them to leave their kipas at home?"
 
Prime Minister: "I think that every Jew anywhere should be able to live safely and to enjoy the protection of the authorities. And I commend the government of France and other governments in Europe for taking a forceful stance on this issue. At the same time, every Jew should know that they have a home in Israel, and that's a choice that each one of them makes, but I think they should have a right to live there safely, and they have a right to live here safely if they so choose. As far as wearing a kipa, it's the same thing. I think they have a right, should have a right and enjoy the right to wear a kipa. That's something that the principle that has been said very forcefully by President Holland and Prime Minister Valls. Again, I commend them for it. But as far as the specific choice, that is an individual choice. That is something that each individual decides for himself or for their children."
 
Question: "I wanted to ask you Mr. President, Mr, Prime Minister, sorry, the relationship between Israel and the European Union is not its best moment. I would like to know how do you see that evolving in the short term; and also if you think peace process with the Palestinians could be brought forward without the involvement of the European Union. Thank you."
 
Prime Minister: "Thank you. Let me make first a distinction between the EU and the European states, and I draw that distinction.
 
Next week, I will go to Cyprus to a tripartite meeting with the President of Cyprus and the Prime Minister of Greece. Okay? A few weeks later I'll go to Berlin for a G2G meeting with Chancellor Merkel who, by the way, I thanked again for helping us with our defenses, as you know. In Haifa we accepted the fifth Israeli submarine that travelled from Kiel to Israel. And of course we expressed our condolences to the victims of terror from that horrible attack in Istanbul.
 
A few months ago I visited with Prime Minister Cameron. I had a very, very productive discussion on all the matters that I described to you in my opening remarks. A few weeks ago I was in the summit in the Climate Conference in Paris. Met with President Hollande again and discussed everything that I just spoke to you about now. Before that I visited Italy, at the invitation of Prime Minister Renzi, and we had superb discussions on everything that I discussed with you now. I don't go into the details, but everyone, all these meetings in one way or the other touched on that. I had visits of course from the heads of state of Lithuania, and… I can't remember… Wait, the list goes on… It goes on. I'll keep you busy. Okay? So this is by way of explaining, this is just now. And of course I'm going to have meetings as well, and met others in Paris, many. We just didn't have time for all these meetings. And all those discussions were not pro forma. They're not shaking hands and mouthing pleasantries. We're talking about the growing cooperation that these states have with Israel on two big matters: security and technology.  There are some other issues often involved too, but they're always these two issues.
 
So our relationship with, and our cooperation with the European states, just about across the board, has been intensifying and growing, as it is with other countries in the world. Here's the exception: The exception is not with the individual countries, by and large, except one or two, and I don't fail to mention it. Okay? It is in fact the multinational organizations, like the UN, or like the UN Human Rights Council, or unfortunately like the EU. Because bureaucracies or set patterns entrench themselves, and then we get the absurdity of the EU in Brussels, from European soil labeling the products of Israeli citizens, of Jews. And the last time that was done on the soil of Europe was over 70 years ago. No other places; there are some 200 conflicts in the world with questions of territory. No other place is labeled except those of the Jewish state of Israel. I find that abhorrent. We have a real issue here. I think it's a moral issue, it's unacceptable, and I made it very clear. We have many European friends, many, many. And many of them, by the way, are opposed to this policy. But this is something that is going in the wrong direction. And when I see something that I think is unjust and something that is patently wrong, and when I see a double or triple standard apply to Israel, I speak out, which we did.
 
And I think that there's another thing and that is the illegal construction that is taking place in the territories by the EU. They're building without authorization, against the accepted rules, and there's a clear attempt to create political realities there. And when we take down this illegal construction we're then, again, condemned, so it's a catch-22 here. I think we have to reset our relationship with the EU. I hope we can do this on better terms. I saw Mrs. Mogherini briefly in Paris, and I said that we have to figure out a way to resolve this and set things on the right course. But I think there's a natural tendency, this is what I see; just as there's a natural tendency in the UN, there's a natural tendency in the EU establishment to single out Israel and treat it in ways that other countries are not being dealt with and especially other democracies are not being treated… are not treated. And I think that's wrong.  I think it should be corrected."
 
Question: "Pinchas Inbari of Kyoto News of Japan. Mr. Amano is about to publish his report about Iran compliance with the agreement with United States. What do you expect of this report? And maybe you can tell us whether Israel did anything about to influence the report or to convince Mr. Amano to explain Israeli point of view?"
 
Prime Minister: "To explain the Israeli point of view? I don't think he needs to in any way express the Israeli point of view. I think he just has to tell the truth."
 
Question: "What do you expect him to report?"
 
Prime Minister: "The truth. The truth. The facts. Look, the Iran deal was not something we agreed to. I opposed it for obvious reasons because I thought it places a great threat to Israel. That is a path to the acquisition or the development of nuclear weapons by a regime that is committed to our destruction. We've learned in our history that when people promise to destroy you, you'd better take them seriously. And when they are seeking to develop the weapons of mass death, take them even more seriously. So obviously we oppose this deal. Now that it's signed, I think there are three things, and I said this at my speech at the UN.
 
The first thing is you've got to keep Iran's feet to the fire. Make sure that they keep, they fulfill their obligations. Whether they're the ones that Mr. Amano is inspecting, or other obligations under the treaty. That's number one. Number two is Iran continues its regional aggression with great force and with renewed vigour and that has to be resisted too, and the way to do that, as I said to our American friends, is support your allies. And the biggest ally, and the strongest ally of the United States in a very wide radius is Israel. And by the way, we're discussing, we're discussing now perhaps in advance stages the completion of a memorandum of understanding between my government and President Obama's administration of support, American support for Israel's security for the next ten years. Remember all those predictions about the collapse of the Israel-America relationship? You know the only thing that's collapsed is the predictions of collapse. That alliance is very, very strong. And I hope that we'll complete this in a short time.
 
So the second… The first thing is keep Iran's feet to the fire; the second is strengthen your allies; and the third is dismantle Iran's global terror network. Because outside the Middle East, Iran either directly or through its proxy Hezbollah is adding a terror cell every few weeks or once every six weeks roughly, throughout the eastern hemisphere and the western hemisphere. These three things should be done, and Mr. Amano falls into the first category. Have… Make Iran fulfill its obligations, tell the truth."
 
Question: "From al Hurra TV. My question is about, this is the last year of Mr. President Obama in power. What do you think he will fulfill this year of all his promises to Israel? And what Israel is really waiting from the coming president of the United States?"
 
Prime Minister: "Well, look, we have this extraordinary relationship. It doesn't mean we see eye-to-eye on everything. We don't. But we see eye-to-eye on the big things, and our quest for peace and security go hand in hand. I think that without security there isn't a prospect for peace. I think there is a big… The big question I think is not what will happen over there, but what will happen over here. Will there be a change in the PA in the sense of a change of policy? Will they come down? Come and sit. You can't negotiate peace unless you negotiate peace. It doesn't come from the air. And there's been a resolute decision by the Palestinian Authority not to negotiate, to try to go through basically a diktat, an international diktat on Israel that was supposed to be supported by the United States. Well, that hasn't happened and I trust it won't happen. We need to sit down and negotiate a genuine peace. Peace with security. That was and remains my position. And I hope that it becomes a Palestinian position. I know it's the American position as well."
 
Question: "Oren Lieberman from CNN. Back to Iran for a moment. First, what is your reaction to Iran taking American sailors? And second, switching to the Russia-Iran angle, it looks like Russia is about to transfer S300s, which Israel said was a red line, as well as possibly Sukhoi-30s, which would challenge Israel's, the Israeli Air Force's global dominance over the region. What's your next move here, if that happens, especially since you talked about the relation with Russia?"
 
Prime Minister: "Well, on the American sailors, I'm glad that they're back home safe. I think everyone is as well. On the question of Russia. Look, when I saw that Russia's placing military forces, air power, some ground power, and anti-aircraft weapons in Syria, I decided that the wisest thing to do was to go and speak to Mr. Putin directly. And I said, look, you have your interests in Syria, and we have our interest, which is not to be attacked by Iran and its proxies from the soil of Syria either directly or through the provision of offensive weapons, very deadly weapons that are filtered through Syria into Lebanon to a warfront that Iran is building in Lebanon. And we will continue to take action against those threats and those attacks. And the most important thing I think is to make sure that we understand each other and that we don't shoot down each other's planes. And we decided to do what is called in this awful jargon deconfliction, which means not shooting each other. And we established a mechanism to do that, and that mechanism holds secure.
 
I think that we both respect the fact that we have our special interests and that we want to make sure that this coordination, or this lack of confrontation continues. That's what I can tell you. That's what we're doing. And these are our interests in Lebanon. We have maintained, since the Russian entry into Syria, the Russian military entry into Syria, we have not changed in any way the goals that I just described to you. Not only have we not changed our goals, we implement them. We implement them.
 
Alongside, by the way, a humanitarian effort that goes on, which is to have this field hospital right next to the Syrian border. We've takin in thousands of Syrians, in some cases tragic cases of children without limbs and women, men who are horribly mutilated. We take care of them, bring them into our own hospitals as necessary, and then enable them to go back home, unless they were photographed. If they were photographed, and their photo was publicized, they'll be executed on the spot when they get back into Syria, so we are facilitating that too. And I'm very proud of that humanitarian effort. But at the same time, we're very clear about our security requirements. The commander of Hezbollah is named Qasem Soleimani. That's a wholly owned Iranian operation, and we will not tolerate the passing of deadly weapons from Syria to Hezbollah, and when we can and we see them, we take action."
 
Question: "It's been four months this indecision about what to do with the Israeli ambassador in Brazil now. There's no ambassador in Brazil. Have you reached a conclusion what you're going to do, who you're going to send? Quick question: You mentioned one country that you don't have good relations in Brazil, in Latin America? Was it Brazil you were talking about?"
 
Prime Minister: "No. I want to keep you guessing. Actually, we have growing relations with Brazil, for the same reasons that I described. We'll say economic reasons, and you know that's the case with many countries, by the way, that we… more countries than you think. Even those we don't have relations with, we have growing economic ties, because Israel is, has something to offer in the global economy. It's very clear. And the same is true, I'm happy to say of Brazil. And I hope that we can strengthen those relations. I believe that Danny Dayan is an exceptionally qualified candidate. He received praise from across the board of the Israeli spectrum from, not only from the government but also from the opposition, except the far fringes, except for the far fringes. And he remains my candidate. I think that labeling people is the next stage after labeling products, and I don't want to label anyone, accept to tell you he's a great candidate. He's my candidate."