Dobrynin and Rogers Meet to Set Stage for Projected Bilateral Talks Next Month

Soviet Ambassador Anatoly F. Dobrynin met today with Secretary of State Rogers at the latter’s request in a prelude to projected bilateral negotiations between Mr. Dobrynin and Joseph Sisco, United States Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. The Dobrynin-Robers meeting was put back from this morning because of Mr. Rogers’ consultations at the White House. State Department spokesman Robert McCloskey said today’s discussion “may provide a basis for determining the utility of restarting the bilateral talks between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., which had reached what we called an extended pause towards the end of the year (1969).” Sources said their meeting was an immediate follow-up to Secretary Rogers’ announcement Monday that the sale of more warplanes to Israel was being held in abeyance.” The bilateral talks were suspended last December after Moscow rejected the latest U.S. initiatives. Mr. Rogers said Monday that there were no signs at the moment that the Russians have budged from their position.

Secretary Rogers invited Ambassador Dobrynin to today’s confab, but only after the Russians had approached the Nixon Administration seeking a Two Power talk resumption. The implication, according to sources, was that the Kremlin had decided to be flexible. This belief was strengthened by Mr. McKloskey’s disclosure today that Dobrynin and Rogers had met on March 11 for a half-hour discussion of Middle East problems. But said he did not consider himself “at liberty” to reveal the specific subjects tackled. It was reliably learned that the recent Soviet shipment of SAM-3 anti-aircraft missiles to Egypt was not one of them. Mr. Rogers’ agenda for Mr. Dobrynin this afternoon was the four points he listed at his Monday press conference. Under the four points, the U.S. would “encourage” both the Arabs and the Israelis to “adhere fully” to the United Nations cease-fires; call on them to “re-appraise positions which have become roadblocks to peace”; urge them to assist the negotiation mission of Ambassador Gunnar V. Jarring, and “engage the other major suppliers to the Middle East in early arms limitation talks.”

Mr. McCloskey recalled that last October the U.S. wrote the Kremlin insisting that the bilateral talks were suffering from Soviet Inflexibility. Last December, the Soviet reply was described by the White House as “retrogressive,” and there were subsequent letters by Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin on January 31 and by President Nixon on February 5. It is believed by some observers that Mr. Nixon’s decision against immediate new weaponry to Israel has led the Soviets to be more amenable to bilateral meetings, this despite “no new Soviet proposals,” which was an American condition for Two Power negotiation resumption. (Official quarters in Jerusalem expressed doubt today that anything useful will come of the U.S.-Soviet bi-lateral talks on the Mideast which are expected to be resumed in Washington next month. The consensus here is that the Americans and Russians are as far apart as they were last December. They say that the basic American aim is to bring the Arabs and Israelis together eventually to negotiate details of a peace agreement. But, according to the Israelis, the Soviets are not interested in peace and continue to insist on complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Arab territories. Israeli circles believe the Russian position has hardened since December.) (In New York, the Four Power meeting on the Middle East scheduled for tomorrow has been postponed until next Tuesday at the request of Lord Caradon, the British representative, it was announced today. Lord Caradon gave a speaking engagement as the reason for his request. Observers here said the four powers thought it advisable to defer their further talks in light of the meeting in Washington today between Mr. Rogers and Ambassador Dobrynin.)