Jewish Policy Review Group Critical of Kissinger Diplomacy

United States policy in the Middle East is based on an illusory detente with the Soviet, Union, an important policy evaluation committee of Boston’s Jewish community charged in the first of a series of Mideast study papers prepared for the Joint Mideast Policy Committee of the Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston and the Jewish Community Council of Metropolitan Boston.

The group charged that U.S. political investment in detente requires a quick resolution of the Arab-Israel conflict to avoid further Soviet-American confrontation. “All other policy considerations, including the matter of Israel’s security and the pursuit of a true and lasting peace in the Middle East have been devalued to protect the investment in detente,” the policy paper claims.

Openly critical of Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger’s diplomatic moves, the policy paper accused Kissinger of making an understanding with President Sadat of Egypt to secure an Israeli withdrawal from occupied territory without direct substantive negotiations between the belligerents, without true peace or recognition by the Arab states of Israel’s sovereign rights.

“Dr. Kissinger’s diplomacy, combined with the effectiveness of the oil weapon and the Arabs own temporary and limited success during the war, far from reconciling the Arabs to Israel’s existence, has strengthened their belief in Israel’s ultimate destruction….”, the policy paper contended.

SUPER POWERS MUST SHOW RESTRAINT

“The Secretary of State’s diplomatic style is one of ambiguities, secret understandings and closed summits–capable in his hands of achieving some spectacular short-term results. But it is not a diplomacy which builds genuine public understanding of the issues–without which a democracy like America cannot exercise the power at its command, nor conduct an effective long-term foreign policy,” the paper declared.

The paper presented a grim outlook for the Geneva negotiations, claiming, “The present outlook allows little optimism for the Geneva negotiations, if they do in fact take place. While Israel wants a secure and permanent settlement with her neighbors, the Arab states regard the Geneva proceedings primarily as the political continuation of the October War. Russia is completely committed to backing all Arab demands while the U.S. is primarily concerned with detente, or at least its illusion.”

The policy paper noted that for the Geneva talks to serve the cause of peace the USSR “must abandon (its) deliberate policy of maintaining and promoting Mideast tensions; neither the U.S. nor the Soviet Union should intrude, either as advocates or adversaries into the peacemaking process; the U.S. and the Soviet Union should jointly reaffirm, in an open, public declaration, their agreement that neither will commit any combat forces or nuclear weapons into the Middle East. If the two superpowers can “demonstrate true mutual restraint” Geneva could mark a turning point in Mideast history and also “mark a new beginning for the battered spirit of detente,” the policy paper declared.