American Jewish leaders were unequivocal in their praise of Vice President Dan Quayle’s speech on Friday, in which he affirmed America’s lasting commitment to Israel’s security and the Bush administration’s deep suspicion of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Their statements, however, took no notice of his assertion, with reference to Palestinian casualties in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, that Israel must be judged by higher standards than prevail in the region, and that the status quo in the territories is “clearly unacceptable.”
The vice president spoke here at a meeting of the national executive committee of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.
Burton Levinson, the ADL’s national chairman, called his speech “an early statement by the Bush administration of continuing U.S. commitment to the long-standing principles of American Middle East policy.”
Seymour Reich, chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said, “We welcome Vice President Quayle’s unequivocal affirmation of support for Israel. We support his statement on American policy toward the PLO.”
The speech was Quayle’s maiden appearance before a major Jewish group since his swearing-in on Jan. 20.
He dwelt on the most immediate aspects of the Middle East situation — the Palestinian uprising and the U.S. dialogue with the PLO.
“Those who believe that American policy is about to undergo a basic shift merely because we have begun to talk with the PLO are completely mistaken,” Quayle said.
He said there “are many reasons for looking long and hard” at PLO chief Yasir Arafat’s acceptance of American conditions for initiating the dialogue, “before drawing any firm conclusions.
“We need more than press conference statements and semantics. We need to see real evidence of concrete actions by the PLO — actions for peace and against terrorism — before changing our fundamental attitude toward the PLO,” Quayle said.
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.
