Behind the Headlines U.S. ‘middle East Doctrine’ Downgrades Israel As an Asset

President Catter’s foreign policy aides are reported framing a “Middle East Doctrine” designed to contain the Soviet threat to the Near East and South Asia and to assure the region’s oil-producing states of American support against upheavals like that in Iran. The “doctrine,” if carried out as tentatively understood in its preliminary stages, would mean the start toward ending the power balance system between Israel and her Arab neighbors.

Moscow’s armed intervention in Afghanistan has touched off alarm signals in the Administration and Carter is expected to outline his strategic plan in a major policy speech soon, perhaps in the State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress next week.

From preliminary soundings, it appears that the doctrine — similar in intent to the Truman Doctrine of 1947 directed against Soviet penetration into Greece and Turkey — will establish Egypt as the anchor in the west and Pakistan in the east with Israel sidelined because of Arab sensitivity over an important role for the Jewish State. China also is expected to have a major part in the coordination efforts, it was said. The cost of the doctrine, however, may prove prohibitive unless the oil-producing countries contributed. Pakistan has already notified the U.S. it wants long-term aid with its military cooperation. Egypt has not been shy in seeking economic and military aid.

With President Anwar Sadat of Egypt having mode it clear that his government will not grant bases to any foreign country on Egyptian soil but will allow its “facilities” to be used the Carter Doctrine is expected to center on U.S. pledges of support and the visitations of American warships and aircraft in various countries at various times in accordance with a general plan of cautious preparedness.

UPGRADING EGYPT’S ROLE

Egypt’s pivotal role has long been forecast in Washington in defense of the oil fields and a massive military aid program for Egypt has been broached to Congress. A series of developments has enhanced the prospect of Egypt’s key role and Israel’s downgrading as a strategic asset. Among them are the talks between Israel Premier Menachem Begin and Sadat in Aswan last week and Washington’s coolness towards Israel’s offers of assistance to American military forces in case of need.

Egyptian Vice President Hosni Mubarak’s meetings this week with Carter, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, Defense Secretary Harold Brown and Pentagon experts is understood to be related to the doctrine, along with the five-state tour by Jordan’s King Hussein and Pakistan Foreign Affairs Advisor Agah Shahi’s Washington visit over the weekend with Carter, Vance and U.S. military officials.

Hussein was in Saudi Arabia last Sunday to begin his consultations with five Arab states for talks on the strategic implications for the area caused by the Iranian upheaval and the Soviet’s entry into Afghanistan. His tour came two weeks before the meeting in Islambad of Moslem foreign ministers called by Pakistan.

ISRAEL’S ROLE MINIMIZED

With Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other “moderate” Arab states intransigently opposed to the Comp David accords and the Egyptian-Israeli treaty, Washington strategists are seeking an accommodation with them by keeping Israel in a minor role in the doctrine’s overall planning. As in the case of Egypt, according to information here, the Arab states will allow use of their facilities for American equipment but not grant any base rights. Thus, the U.S. will depend first on Arab resistance to Soviet encroachment with American might in readiness to enter when and it necessary.

Although Israel has offered support to the U.S. Washington is reluctant to give any show of acceptance to avoid Arab excuses against collaboration with the American strategists. Israel, it has been pointed out, has helped Egypt, Jordan and other “moderate” Arab states in the past with its intelligence operations and, in Hussein’s case, with military activity when Syria threatened to invade Jordan in 1970 during the uprising against Hussein by Palestinian Arabs.

Now, however, Israel, for the present period, appears to be largely left out of the U.S. calculations in the joint overall strategy although it will continue to be a bastion of strength in its own defense. Egypt is using the Palestinian issue to ward off any overtures for Israel to be part of the overall preparation.

Egyptian Defense Minister Kamal Hassan Ali indicated this when he rejected Israel’s offer of strategic cooperation. Ali said “as long as we do not solve the Palestinian issue there will be no strategic cooperation between our two countries.” In addition, according to information here, Egypt rejected Israel’s offer of exchange of information between Israeli and Egyptian intelligence services.

EGYPT’S PAST IGNORED

Egypt is being pictured here as becoming the region’s most reliable ally of the U.S. and the past association of Egyptian politicians and military with the Soviet Union is not being recalled. Instead, reports emphasize joint American-Egyptian aerial exercises with U.S. aircraft using the air bases near Cairo and Kina airbase near Luxor.

Egyptians also are reported training and supplying Afghan rebels fighting Soviet forces and Egyptian commando officers in Oman and North Yemen to train local units to oppose revolutionaries. In addition, Cairo is said to be supplying weapons to Morocco that is opposing the Polisario rebels backed by pro-Soviet Algeria.

“There is strategic cooperation in the Middle East, but Menachem Begin and Israel’s intelligence are left out of it,” according to one report. This, however, may be at least somewhat off the mark. Israeli intelligence and military craftsmanship continue qualitatively to be the Middle East’s best and analysts consider Washington is unlikely to neglect them completely.

What is being suggested is that Washington is hoping that Moslem reaction against Moscow will be helped by the U.S. down-playing Israel and thereby shatter the anti-American mood of the countries opposing the Camp David accords. In this vein, the Carter Administration is being advised by analysts to move “with sensitivity and discrimination” and thus possibly induce even Soviet friends like Syria, Libya and the PLO to condemn the Soviets for entering Afghanistan.