Definition of Non-belligerency Will Require a Process of Clarification

Government sources disclosed today some of the conditions under which the United States and Israel will probe Arab attitudes toward an agreement of non-belligerency with Israel. The Cabinet assented Sunday to such an initiative being undertaken by the U.S., a decision which raised a storm of criticism against the government from hardliners and moderates alike in the Knesset. (See separate story.)

But the government sources explained today that the initiative will first undergo a “clarification” process that could take weeks or months. They said Israeli and American legal experts would have to agree on a precise definition of end-of-war or non-belligerency and that such definition would be subject to the Cabinet’s approval. Only then would the U.S. begin to explore the Arab position on non-belligerency as a diplomatic goal in the Middle East, the sources said.

Opponents of such a course claim that it would seriously if not fatally undermine Israel’s long sought goal of a final, formal peace pact with its neighbors. The American initiative would be aimed at the three confrontation states bordering Israel–Syria, Egypt and Jordan.

WAR WITH SYRIA CAN’T BE RULED OUT

A radio broadcast today quoted a highly placed source as saying that war with Syria this year cannot be ruled out if Syria refuses to extend the mandate of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) on the Golan Heights beyond its May 31 expiration date. The source charged that Syria is playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship and apparently intends to continue it right up to the UNDOF deadline. Such a situation could easily get out of hand, just as the late Egyptian President

PEACE SELL-OUT SEEN

Shmuel Tamir, of Likud, immediately attacked the broadcast as an attempt by the government to rationalize its decision to “sell-out on peace” by approving the American end-of-war initiative. Opponents of that initiative, including former Foreign Minister Abba Eban, have warned that the Arabs would demand as much for non belligerence as they would for a formal peace pact, leaving Israel nothing to bargain with in future peace negotiations.

Egyptian newspapers have already responded to the Cabinet decision by observing this week that end-of-war amounts to peace and that Egypt insists in that case on Israel’s withdrawal from all occupied territories and the restoration of “Palestinian rights.”

Cabinet ministers and other officials have avoided discussing publicly what Israel would offer for non-belligerence. Privately, however, officials recalled that last year Israel offered to return two-thirds of the Sinai territory–from El Arish to Ras Muhammed–to Egypt in exchange for an undertaking of non-belligerence from Cairo. Officials said today they were not disturbed by the Egyptian press reaction and preferred to await the results of the American initiative.

Sources said that an understanding was reached with the U.S. during Premier Yitzhak Rabin’s visit to Washington last month that Israel would not cede as much for non-belligerence as it would for a full-fledged peace pact and would not return to anything approximating the pre-June, 1967 lines. The sources said that if the Arabs demanded total withdrawal, Israel would regard that as a negative response to the American initiative.