Dr. Jarring Completes First Round of Exploratory Talks on Resumption of Peace Mission

Ambassador Gunnar V. Jarring completed his first round of exploratory talks here Friday with the mission heads of Israel and the Arab states and was to report to Secretary General U Thant this weekend on what the talks had revealed as to the possibilities of a resumption of his peace-seeking efforts. UN sources were insistent in their assertions that without some new basis or considerable new encouragement Dr. Jarring would not return to the Middle East to journey from capital to capital. They indicated however that if any possibilities did open up, Dr. Jarring would resume his mission here in New York at the outset, making contact with each of the governments involved through his mission here. There were no indications this weekend what success Dr. Jarring met with in his first exploratory talks.

(The New York Times said in an editorial today that the return of the United Nations special Mideast peace envoy, Dr. Gunnar V. Jarring to an active role in the crisis was a “hopeful sign.” But, according to the Times, “A major obstacle to Ambassador Jarring’s new effort is the absence of a bona fide spokesman for one of the central parties to the Arab-Israeli dispute–the Palestinians.” The editorial observed “If the Palestinians continue to allow a handful of uncompromising extremists to be the sole spokesman for Palestine, they will find their legitimate aspirations once more frustrated,” the Times said. The editorial added, however, “Unless the Palestinians themselves are brought into peace discussions, no settlement reached between Israel and the leaders of existing Arab states is likely to endure.”)

Dr. Jarring’s talks here coincided with the thirtieth meeting of the Four Powers who have been trying with complete lack of success since early last year to establish new “guidelines” for his mission. Yakov Malik, the Soviet Ambassador, reported Friday to Mr. Thant on the meeting Thursday. American sources said that absolutely no progress had been made at that meeting and that what had been described as a “positive development” at the previous meeting had all but vanished.