Special to the JTA Rogers on Rogers

For several years every mention of “withdrawals” by Israel from the Judaean-Samarian administered areas were immediately branded as “only a revival of the objectionable Rogers plan” hoisted by the State Department. Now former Secretary of State William P. Rogers can make the claim that what had previously horrified Israel’s supporters as destructive is now actually used as a basis for negotiations, for an obvious reason, as he contends: that his plan called for negotiations on the basis of UN Resolution 242 and all the demands now, especially on the Pal- estine Liberation Organization, are for adherence to 242.

Rogers was in Detroit last evening as a participant in the annual dinner of the Metropolitan Detroit B’nai B’rith held at Fairlane Manor, at which the 1977 International B’nai B’rith Humanitarian Award was presented to William G. Meese, chairman of the board and chief executive of Detroit Edison. Rogers addressed the dinner in Meese’s honor.

Chatting with this correspondent on the dais, Rogers retained confidence in the practicality of what had become notorious as the “Rogers Plan.” What he aimed at, he said, was adherence to Resolution 242, with withdrawals from occupied territory to be gradual and based on the negotiations now sought by Israel and the United States. And he anxiously emphasized that he “did not propose” a Palestinian homeland. His emphasis was made with a conviction that it was neither desirable nor workable.

Does he believe the Sadat sensation about a visit to Israel to address the Knesset could materialize? He thought it might because he considers President Anwar Sadat of Egypt a more practical and abler statesman than was his predecessor, Gamal Abdel Nasser. He expressed this view based on his knowledge of both Egyptian leaders with whom he dealt in his capacity first as an Undersecretary of State and then as Secretary of State.