Note to Jarring Calls for Negotiations in Concrete Manner Without Prior Conditions

Accusing Egypt of repeatedly violating the principles of quiet diplomacy by publishing “selective and prejudicial parts” of Israeli notes conveyed to Cairo through United Nations special envoy, Dr. Gunnar V. Jarring, Israel released today the full text of its latest note to Egypt. The note was presented to Jarring Feb. 26 by Israel’s UN Ambassador Yosef Tekoah for transmission to Cairo. It contains the broad terms of the peace settlement Israel is prepared to offer Egypt and the terms Israel would accept from Egypt in return. The note stated at the outset that “Israel views favorably the expression by the UAR of its readiness to enter into a peace agreement with Israel and reiterates that it is prepared for meaningful negotiations on all subjects relevant to a peace agreement between the two countries.” It stated in conclusion, that having presented their basic proposals, both parties “should now pursue their negotiations in a detailed and concrete manner without prior conditions so as to cover all the points listed in their respective documents with a view to concluding a peace agreement.”

The point in the Israeli document which aroused Cairo’s ire and brought Israel criticism from UN Secretary General U Thant and several Western diplomats last week was the flat statement that “Israel will not withdraw to the pre-June 5, 1967 lines.” That statement followed an expression of willingness by Israel to terminate “all claims and states of war and acts of hostility or belligerency between Israel and Egypt” and to respect “the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the UAR.” Another sore point covered in the Israeli note was the Palestinian refugee problem and the related claims of both parties. The note said, “In this connection Israel is prepared to negotiate with the governments directly involved on (A) the payment of compensation for abandoned lands and property and (B) participation in the planning of the rehabilitation of the refugees in the region.” The proviso continued: “Once the obligations of the parties toward the settlement of the refugee issue have been agreed, neither party shall be under claim from the other inconsistent with its sovereignty.”

The Israeli note also promised that a peace agreement would embody pledges by Israel not to permit acts of violence committed on its soil against the population, armed forces or property of the UAR; that it will not interfere in the domestic affairs of the UAR and will not participate in alliances against the UAR or permit the stationing of troops or other parties which maintain a state of belligerence against the UAR. What Israel demanded from Egypt was similar to what Israel offered. It asked the termination of states of war, hostility and belligerency, respect and acknowledgment of Israel’s sover- eignty and territorial integrity and its right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. It also asked Egypt to terminate “economic warfare in all its manifestations, including boycott and interference in the normal international relations of Israel.” It asked for “an explicit undertaking to guarantee free passage for Israeli ships and cargoes through the Suez Canal.” In addition, the note stated, “The UAR and Israel should enter into a peace treaty with each other to be expressed in a binding treaty in accordance with normal international law and precedent containing the above undertakings.”