Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger predicted today that “good progress” would be made in the Israeli-Egyptian disengagement talks in Geneva though he would not set a “time-table on the separation of forces.” Addressing reporters at a press conference in San Clemente, California, where he has been meeting with President Nixon for the past two days on foreign policy matters, particularly the Middle East, Kissinger said, “Unless there has been a basic change of views, which I don’t believe, I believe good progress can be made along Suez.”
Kissinger said the results of Monday’s elections in Israel “won’t have any affect on the current talks” on disengagement. He said that “The broad consensus in Israel is that the talks will proceed even before a new government is formed.” He added, however, that “what the affect will be of the elections on an ultimate settlement will depend on the composition of the Cabinet and on negotiations now going on between the (Israeli) parties.” He said it was “premature to offer an opinion.”
Kissinger stated he had no time-table for a separation of forces, because a great deal depends on the Arab states and Israel. “It was always understood that after the Israeli elections the talks might accelerate.” he said, but he was “not predicting a solution in January.” (See P. 3 for separate story from Geneva)
ARABS WELCOME U.S. OBJECTIVE
Kissinger, referring to his meeting in Washington tomorrow with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, said that after the meeting and after the disengagement talks resume in Geneva next week “we will see how much progress is possible and how much can be done.” He responded sharply to a reporter who, referring to Dayan’s visit, asked if it was proper for the U.S. “to be tied” to Israeli policy on the separation of forces.
“We have conducted our Middle East policy by talking at great length with all parties.” Kissinger said, adding that the talks were on “exactly the same terms with all parties concerned.” He said that every Arab country knows of Dayan’s visit and “they welcome” the U.S. objective on separation of forces and “don’t see it in the light you have indicated,” he told the reporter.
Asked what were the most hopeful signs in the Middle East, Kissinger said: “There is a good possibility for progress on the separation of forces, and this would create very positive conditions for similar progress on other fronts and it will be a good bridge into the general peace talks that of course will continue.” He noted that President Nixon has said “and it has been our policy and our conviction that the chances for peace (in the Middle East) are the best in 25 years. This does not mean that negotiations won’t be extremely painful and extremely difficult.”
Kissinger also responded sharply in reply to a reporter’s question on the U.S. policy in the Middle East in view of the Arab oil embargo. He said it was not appropriate for the Arab states to discriminate against the U.S. which adhered to Resolution 242 and is the principal country negotiating for a peace settlement in the Mideast.
He said the U.S., however, was not negotiating to get the oil embargo lifted and would not make its foreign policy dependent on Arab oil. “We have talked to Israel and to the Arabs and we will not link our talks to the embargo,” he stated. The energy problem is endemic and would exist with or without the oil embargo, Kissinger observed.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
