U.S. Group Warns of Soviet Threat to Israel; Suggests American Action

A warning of the Soviet threat to Israel and charges of United States appeasement of the Arabs at Israel’s expense were contained in an extensive new report by the Public Affairs Institute of Washington.

The Institute–which was founded in 1947 by 54 American leaders who felt the need of a non-partisan, non-profit organization in the nation’s Capital doing original research and promoting wider public knowledge of important problems–urged a new Middle East regional resources development agency, capitalized at $1, 000, 000 as the cornerstone of a dynamic U.S. policy. The development agency would be financed jointly by the royalties of oil-rich states, the oil companies, member states, and the United States. Membership would be open to Israel and the undertaking is envisaged as a force for Arab-Israel peace.

The report urged abandonment of what it termed the present U.S. policy of “ambivalence, uncertainty, appeasement and parsimony. ” It called for priority to the needs of the peoples of the region through a long-range development plan, a final settlement of the Arab-Israel conflict, and the resettlement of Arab refugees in Arab lands.

Inadequacies-in the Eisenhower Doctrine were charged and alarm over continuing Soviet success in penetrating the region. The Institute warned that the Kremlin is ready “to engage the force of its arms in support of the Arab states “to destroy Israel to advance Communist ends in the Moslem world. It said “Soviet acquiescence in the elimination of Israel as a state is a price the Kremlin is prepared to pay if thereby it can further entrench itself in the Middle East with Arab support. “

REPORT CHARGES WASHINGTON ADMINISTRATION WITH PRO-ARAB BIAS

Israel’s Sinai campaign was described by the Institute as a legitimate act of self-defense. Israel’s efforts to obtain help from America when Russia joined the Arabs were fruitless the report indicated. The institute charted that “especially after 1952″ the U. S. Administration policy was characterized by appeasement of the Arabs “at the expense of our allies, at the expense of the Arab people, of Israel, and, in the final analysis, of our primary interests–without achieving the end objective–security. “

According to the report, “a cornerstone of the appeasement policy was the effort to lull the Arab governments into forgetting Western approval of the creation of Israel. To this effort, principle and practicality alike were sacrificed–without winning over the Arab world. ” The institute openly stated that the Republican Administration’s “pro-Arab bias was underscored with the exclusion of Israel from all military pact discussions while the concentration continued to secure Arab acquiescence. “

It was charged that the Administration took no action to halt the Arab League’s anti-Israel boycott despite boycott threats to American firms. The institute also reported that “the U.S. submitted to Saudi Arabian insistence on the right to bar Jews from serving with American armed forces sent to Saudi Arabia.”

Stressing the fact that “at no time” did the United States register a formal complaint in Arab capitals against Arab threats of a second round against Israel, the report stated: “This lack of reaction has only encouraged the Arabs to believe that no price was too high to demand from the United States. ” The report questioned the policy of President Eisenhower at the time of the Sinai-Suez events. “The turning of that defeat into political victory for the Egyptian dictator, was not in the interests of peace or stability for the area Yet this was precisely the result produced by the policy of the United States, ” the institute said.

Findings of the institute’s study revealed that the Arab refugee problem “would not exist had not the Arab states launched a war to prevent implementation of the Palestine partition resolution of Nov. 29, 1947 and to destroy the State of Israel in its infancy. “The resettlement of the Arab refugees in Arab lands was recommended. Iraq and Syria were recommended as places where the refugees could be resettled.

NEXT STORY