White House Explains Reagan’s Statement on Guaranteeing Israel’s Northern Border with Lebanon

President Reagan’s statement that his Administration is prepared to “guarantee the security of Israel’s northern border” is not a new offer by the U.S. but an “underscoring” of the “long standing commitment” by the U.S. to Israel’s security, the White House maintained today.

“The President was underscoring U.S. concerns in the context of the negotiations to achieve the withdrawal of all foreign forces” from Lebanon, White House deputy spokesman Larry Speakes said. “As we have emphasized all along, the security of Israel’s northern border is one of the principal goals which the U.S. believes the negotiations must attain,” he said. Speakes added that “these negotiations will produce the guarantee.”

Speakes appeared to be trying to play down the effect of Reagan’s statement to the American Legion today, although hours before he delivered the speech, the White House had released excerpts which included the sentence guaranteeing Israel’s northern border once the Israeli army with draws from Lebanon. Reagan’s speech was believed to be the first time the U.S. used the word “guarantee” with respect to the security of northern Israel.

RESTATEMENT OF ONE OF THREE GOALS

Speakes said Reagan’s discussion of a guarantee was nothing more than a re-stating of one of the three goals he has emphasized since the negotiations in Lebanon began, all of which were addressed in the American Legion speech. The other goals are the restoration of Lebanon’s sovereignty over all of its territory and the withdrawal of Israeli, Syrian and PLO forces from that country.

The President’s remarks were a restatement of the U.S. commitment to Israel’s security, Speakes said. Mort Allin, another White House press officer, said Reagan has declared that northern Israel should no longer be subjected to the “terrorist attacks” as it was prior to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon.

Both Speakes and Allin denied that Reagan’s statement implied the “unilateral” use of American troops in south Lebanon. They stressed that the President has said that he would consider the expansion of the U.S. marine force on Lebanon in the context of the multinational force now in Beirut if that was the “essential element” for withdrawal. They also noted that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) could also be used in south Lebanon.

VAGUE ON SPECIFIC NATURE OF SECURITY

But Allin stressed that with negotiations now in progress it was “too early” to be specific on how Israel’s security would be guaranteed. Speakes pointed out that U.S. participation in the negotiations “will guarantee” that the agreement reached in Lebanon will ensure the security of Israel’s northern border as one of its principles.

Speakes refused to say whether an offer to expand the marine force was one of the proposals U.S. special envoy Philip Habib brought back with him to the Middle East. Reagan, at his press conference last week, said it was not.