Israelis See Further Action by Jarring As Dependent on Egyptian Change

The peace-seeking mission of U.N. envoy Ambassador Gunnar Jarring has clearly entered the doldrums and, while not suspended, is unlikely to pick up momentum unless Egypt has a change of heart on negotiations with Israel, diplomatic circles here indicated tonight.

In face of Egypt’s categorical rejection of negotiations on Cyprus along the lines of the Rhodes armistice talks of 1949, Dr. Jarring is not expected to make any further suggestions at this time, these sources said. Rather, it is believed, he will wait until Egypt softens its stand, which may occur if Nasser is convinced that there is no other way, save through negotiations, to regain the territory he lost in last June’s war with Israel. The sources here believe that Ambassador Jarring will discontinue his frequent visits to Israel and Arab capitals but he will always “be on call” should any changes develop. Dr. Jarring is expected to go to Amman tomorrow.

(The Washington Post quoted “authoritative diplomatic sources” at the United Nations as the source for assertions that Israel was to blame for collapse of the Jarring plan to bring Israel and Egypt together on Cyprus for peace talks. These sources asserted that Israel, by announcing that the occupied territories were no longer considered “enemy territory,” had given President Nasser of Egypt a pretext to reject peace proposals. Some sources said, the paper reported, that the Israeli action had “tilted the balance by causing Arab Governments to lose face.”)

(The London Financial Times said today that many independent and reliable observers of the Middle East scene believe that if left to himself President Nasser of Egypt would like to reach a settlement with Israel even if it meant abandoning Jerusalem and Jordan to their own fates. But, the paper said, Nasser is adjusting himself to the new realities and is trying to maintain a balance between opinion at home and abroad. He can be expected, therefore, “to give full vent to all the anti-Israel shibboleths and to stress the inevitability of a military solution.”)