My second question is this: do you not believe that the psychology of a besieged fortress in Israel, which, in the past, was a driving force behind its foreign policy, now has much less justification, because the threat posed by what are becoming democratic regimes is very much less and also because democracies do not go to war against each other?
A doua întrebare: nu credeți că psihologia de cetate asediată, care în trecut constituia forța motrice a politicii externe a Israelului, nu-și prea mai găsește justificarea în prezent, deoarece amenințarea presupusă de regimurile care devin democratice este mult mai redusă, iar democrațiile nu duc războaie una împotriva celeilalte?