— The Reagan Administration said today that it is reviewing “the entire policy” of the U.S. toward the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the issue of Jewish settlements on the West Bank and the attitude toward the Palestine Liberation Organization.
This disclosure was made at the State Department in response to questions as to whether the Reagan Administration was considering the announcement by the Israeli government in Jerusalem that it will build 10 more settlements on the West Bank in the next five months before Israel’s parliamentary elections.
State Department spokesman William Dyess replied, without referring to the legality or illegality of the settlements, that “While we were aware of plans which were previously announced, we do not consider the carrying out of these plans to be helpful.”
He added that “The new Administration is reviewing the entire policy to this vital region.” He said the State Department is “taking the lead” in this review but declined to say who is involved in it. He insisted that the review does not mean a change in U.S. policy.
NOT AN AGONIZING REAPPRAISAL
“it is wrong to infer that there will be or will not be changes,” Dyess said. “I don’t mean to imply it either way. It is not an agonizing reappraisal–something like that. That is not what is intended. What we are simply doing is to review the policy as it now exists to see whether or not we wish in all respects to continue the policy or whether or not in some respects we wish to change it.” He observed that “the study should be expected as normal by any new Administration.”
Dyess said the Administration will be undertaking reviews of other issues in other parts of the world and that the Middle East review is “not one of the more important decisions facing the Administration.” He said that “in good time all major issues and areas will be reviewed.”
The policy reviews will be conducted “in the foreign policy establishment and will not be done in a hurried fashion, “he said. The foreign policy establishment includes the State Department, the National Security Council at the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA.
Asked if the review would include the U.S. position toward the PLO, Dyess referred to Secretary of State Alexander Haig’s statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at his confirmation hearing that the PLO is “an umbrella organization.” The State Department spokesman reported Haig as having said that the PLO “includes many groups, some of them are terrorist organizations and openly avow terrorist acts.”
Dyess was reminded that President Reagan, at his first press conference after his election November 4, had replied, “yes” when asked if the PLO is a terrorist organization. One reporter remarked that Haig’s statement, as reported by Dyess,
differs from the Reagan statement. Dyess was asked then if this was a change of perspective by the Administration.
“No, absolutely not,” Dyess replied. “I don’t see any discrepancy there. I’ll try to get a clarification. It would be unfortunate to see a difference.” The Carter Administration’s policy was not to recognize or negotiate with the PLO unless it accepted Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. When Dyess was asked if the Carter Administration’s policy is “constant or under review,” he replied, “I don’t want to comment. Anything I say can be misunderstood.”
Asked about Reagan’s campaign promises in support of Israel, Dyess said, “I’m sure any statements by the President were made seriously” and are “very important” to the purposes of the review. He noted that the Administration will take into consideration Reagan’s campaign statements but added that it has “also a responsibility to take into account what has happened. There are many considerations.”
Dyess was questioned about the statement made by the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, John West, in a recent interview in which he was reported to have said that he feels “very strongly” about” our failure to even want to talk or listen to the PLO or to engage in any dialogue.” West, a former Governor of South Carolina who has been in Saudi Arabia almost four years, said in the interview that U.S. policy toward the PLO “is very difficult to explain or justify to Saudi Arabia or other Arabs.”
Asked if West was speaking for the Reagan Administration, Dyess replied, “No, no. West clearly was speaking personally and not for this Administration.”
Meanwhile, in reports reaching here from Cairo, Egyptian Foreign Minister Kamal Hassan Ali today called for a dialogue between the PLO and the Reagan Administration. “The time has come for the PLO to start adopting peaceful methods to solve the Palestinian issue…and to start a dialogue with the American Administration,” he was quoted as saying. A dialogue could lead to mutual recognition between the PLO and the new Administration, Ali said.
VIEW OF SAUDI ARABIA
Asked to comment on Saudi Arabia’s King Khalid’s statements to the Islamic summit meeting in Taif, Saudi Arabia, which included a call for all Islamic nations to unite in a holy war against Israel to recover Jerusalem, Dyess noted that “from press reports” the Khalid call would include money, men and even arms and that such statements had been made previously on other special Islamic occasions. “For our part,” he said, the U.S. position is for all to avoid positions which “complicate” the search for a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
Dyess was asked if the new Administration intended to have special ambassadors to the Middle East such as Sol Linowitz and Robert Strauss in the Carter Administration. He replied that “it would be premature” to say if special ambassadors would be continued.
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.
