While the Israeli-Egyptian peace talks do not face a crisis, there are still major outstanding problems and therefore they are unlikely to be concluded this week — despite earlier more hasty prognoses. This is the informed assessment in official circles here after latest reports from Washington were analyzed at a lengthy special Cabinet session last evening.
Defense Minister Ezer Weizman had said Monday on television, in a filmed conversation with Egyptian Defense Minister Kamal Hassan Ali, that the talks could be over by Wednesday (today). But now it seems that they will go on at least another week. One central issue still unresolved is that of “linkage” between the Israel-Egypt treaty and progress on the West Bank.
The Israeli position is that there should not be a tight linkage between the two complexes. In other words, there should not be a clause in the treaty with Egypt specifying linkage to progress on the West Bank autonomy, so that if that progress is for some reason slowed or disrupted Egypt could claim non-fulfillment of the treaty and suspend the normalization clauses in return.
At the same time, Israeli negotiators are aware that Egypt needs some form of linkage between the treaty with Israel and the eventual “comprehensive settlement” between Israel and all the Arab states. Cairo requires this to “protect its flank” from criticism by Arab hardliners that it is abandoning — or even betraying — the Palestinian cause.
One Israeli proposal is for an exchange of letters, to accompany the treaty, in which the linkage would be spelled out in mutually acceptable language. But Egypt is considered unlikely to agree to this. President Carter is understood to have personally attempted to tackle this problem in his meetings yesterday with the two delegations.
A SURPRISE EGYPTIAN DEMAND
One of the main problems holding up the peace talks is a surprise Egyptian demand that the peace treaty be reviewed after five years. This demand, introduced this week, caught the Israeli side completely unawares, according to informed sources here.
Israel’s position is that the peace treaty is to be open-ended — and that the open-endedness be spelled out specifically. Any renegotiation which either side might wish to do at a later stage would have to be done by mutual agreement and not by dint of any clause in the treaty limiting its validity to a certain number of years and calling for a review after that period.
Another issue still in dispute is the pace at which full diplomatic relations are to be established. Egypt does not want to set up ties at full ambassadorial level immediately following the interim Israeli pullback (nine months hence), but rather seeks to establish low-level ties first and then gradually upgrade them to coincide with Israel’s final withdrawal from Sinai. Israel’s position is that under the Camp David framework full diplomatic relations are to be established after the interim withdrawal.
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.
