The Reagan Administration’s attitude toward the Israel-Lebanon May 17 accord appeared to be schizophrenic this week as President Reagan and Secretary of State George Shultz offered diametrically opposed views.
Reagan, at a question-and-answer session yesterday with reporters at a White House breakfast, was asked if his Administration would be willing to accept abrogation of the accord if that were a condition for the survival of President Amin Gemayel’s government in Lebanon. The President replied:
“I have to say with regard to the agreement, since we’re not a party to it, we did help and encourage the development of it; we’re not a party to it, so there’s no way that we should have a position one way or the other on whether it is abrogated or not. That is up to the parties involved. And, no, it would not change our position that as long as there’s a chance for peace there we’re going to keep striving.”
Shultz, at a hastily called press conference at the State Department later in the day, told reporters, “We continue to support the May 17 agreement. Those who would dispense with this agreement must bear responsibility to find alternative formulas for Israeli withdrawal” from Lebanon.
Help ensure Jewish news remains accessible to all. Your donation to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency powers the trusted journalism that has connected Jewish communities worldwide for more than 100 years. With your help, JTA can continue to deliver vital news and insights. Donate today.
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.
