Chinese Role in Mideast Will Focus on Palestinian, Arab Struggles

Diplomatic sources here suggested today that China might not join the Big Four on grounds that she cannot accept Security Council Resolution 242. While it was uncertain what effect such a decision would have on Middle East peace progress, diplomats suggested that the effect could be adverse which-ever way Peking went.

They noted that People’s Republic membership in a Big Five would increase the “anti-Israel” forces in the quintet from three to four; but they also noted that the Big Four is a largely ineffective peacemaking forum and that China could further her pro-Palestinian efforts more effectively outside that forum by attracting “third world” support from her arch-enemy, the Soviet Union.

Since all the members of the Big Four endorse Resolution 242, though with differing interpretations, diplomats saw special significance in one passage in yesterday’s maiden General Assembly speech by Peking’s ambassador, Chiao Kuan-hua. In it Chiao declared: “The Chinese government maintains that all countries and peoples that love peace and uphold justice have the obligation to support the struggle of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples, and no one has the right to engage in political deals behind their backs, bartering away their right to existence and their national interest.”

ISRAEL’S EXISTENCE NOT QUESTIONED

The phrase “political deals” was seen by Israeli sources as a reference to the Council resolution of Nov. 22, 1967, which calls, in part, for “a just settlement of the refugee problem” but makes no mention of the Palestinian movement to eradicate the State of Israel. The two major Arab countries, Egypt and Jordan, while endorsing Palestinian “rights,” have endorsed the Council measure, but Chiao referred to the struggle of the Palestinians and other Arab “peoples,” not “states.” The Peking regime has been a staunch friend–and military supplier–of the Palestinian guerrillas.

Chiao also scored the “aggression against the Palestinian and other Arab peoples by Israeli Zionism with the support and connivance of the superpowers.” This reference to “superpowers”–which by implication includes the Soviet Union–could also indicate a Chinese decision to make an issue of acceptance of Resolution 242, Peking, like the Palestinians, has never accepted the resolution, but heretofore it took that position as an outsider. Now it is an official member of the world community.

On the positive side, Chiao’s speech reinforced the impression of a break by Peking with the Palestinians over the basic question of Israel’s right to exist. Until recent days, Peking had denied Israel’s right to existence, just as the Palestinians have. Then, in a Nov. 6 interview with a Japanese newspaper, Premier Chou En-lai mentioned Israel by name, condemned “Zionist-imperialists” but not “Israelis,” and indicated that his government could recognize Israel if she renounced the fruits of her “aggression.” In the Assembly yesterday, Ambassador Chiao condemned “Israeli Zionism” but stopped short of rejecting Israeli sovereignty.

Israel, which voted for the Assembly seating of Peking, was not among the more than 50 delegations that offered spoken welcome to the Maoists yesterday. Israeli sources noted that the original plan–derailed by the lure of the bandwagon–had been for remarks by the chairmen of the African, Asian, Eastern European, Latin American and Western European regional entitles.

“We voted for the Albanian resolution (to replace Taiwan with mainland China): we don’t have to make a speech,” an Israeli diplomat commented. “Don’t forget,” he added, “there were more than 70 members who didn’t speak.” The unscheduled deluge of speeches, he remarked, represented “ridiculous inflation.”