Behind the Headlines March’s Failure is August’s Success

What Henry Kissinger did not get from Israel and give to Egypt in March he is getting and giving in August. Leaving Washington tomorrow on precisely the schedule he himself reportedly had envisioned three weeks ago, Kissinger will be making his 11th trip to the Middle East since becoming Secretary of State 23 months ago.

Unlike his March disaster when Israel refused to concede the Mitla and Gidi Passes and the Abu Rodeis oilfields without a pledge of non-belligerence from Israel. Kissinger this time has Israel’s agreement to retreat without the Egyptian pledge. Five months of pressures and promises from Washington have caused the Rabin government to understand that in the present circumstances of U.S. oil policy and strategic interests, Israel must take second place at least to American appeasement of Egypt.

Israel had once insisted on face-to-face negotiations with the Arabs; then it offered, at U.S. insistence, to cede to Egypt “a piece of land for a piece of peace,” and only a few months ago was prepared to give “a piece of land for a piece of time,”

But Egyptian President Sadat, knowing Washington’s desire for his friendship, has refused to budge, although he has swayed slightly. While none of the parts of the second stage agreement worked out by Washington with Cairo and Jerusalem has been officially made public here (although part of it has been disclosed in Jerusalem), it is understood Egypt will not press for removal of the United Nations force in the Sinai for a year and perhaps not for three years.

How good Sadat’s word is can be questioned. He also pledged through Washington on the first stage agreement that Israeli cargoes could transit the Suez Canal. Three months ago the Suez was opened and as far as is known no Israeli cargoes have passed.

FORD ADMINISTRATION PLEDGES

On its part, the Ford Administration, in a separate agreement with Israel, has pledged to back Israel in international forums where it is being attacked or cast out by the Arab-led bloc in which Egypt has been playing a major role. It has also promised to present to Congress “after the political round has been completed.” a program of military and economic credits and grants.

Israel reportedly asked last week in Washington meetings for $3.2 billion for the current fiscal year, taking into account inflation and greater needs as a result of its second retreat in the Sinai. But the U.S. Administration is understood to be willing to ask less than two-thirds of that amount.

In addition, cosmetic treatment to make the second stage withdrawal more palatable to Israelis is a move to put American civilians in warning stations in the Sinai; support moves for a mixed Egyptian-Israeli commission to discuss Sinai differences; and also back action for a buffer force of some kind should the UN presence be removed.

These latter measures were leaked to media friendly to the Administration virtually on the eve of Kissinger’s departure for Tel Aviv. To observers here, they looked like palliatives to heal the rising clamor in Israel against the agreement that provides no pledge of peace from Cairo. Significantly, a dozen American Jewish community leaders met yesterday with Kissinger for 90 minutes, the day before his departure. Afterwards they reported they would support what the Israeli government accepted. Kissinger reportedly told the Jewish leaders that the new accord would be beneficial to Israel.

Considering Israel’s international and financial circumstances, it was hard for observers here to see what alternative the Rabin government has but to accept the Kissinger arrangements. Although it was shocked by Sadat’s July 23 remarks that Israel is “a dagger in Egypt’s side and to the heart of the Arab nation,” it seems to have no choice but to accept what crumbs it can obtain. Only the U.S. is helping Israel; Jerusalem cannot afford to challenge President Ford and Kissinger a second time.

‘NEW REALITIES’ IN THE OFFING

The Ford-Kissinger policy of winning the Arabs from the Soviet embrace entails, as has long been seen, Israel’s withdrawal from areas it had won in the Six-Day War. How far and when is uncertain, but the fact that Kissinger is to visit Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia on his current journey that is to sew up a second Egyptian-Israeli accord implies that manipulations in the Mideast will include an Israeli retirement in the Golan Heights too and soon, as part of the “new realities” Washington helps to create.

Thus, Israel’s fate hinges on Washington thinking and American national interests as Ford has repeatedly indicated. The new agreement with its emphasis on even greater Israeli reliance on American support means Jerusalem is even more closely bound to Washington’s policy than before.

The question Israel must face, some observers here believe, is whether in the evolution of diplomacy the closer the U.S. and the Arab governments get together, will Israel be safer or subject to more torment and strife with Washington deciding when and how to help Israel in the “new realities,”