Foreign Minister Abba Eban indicated here last night that the next two or three weeks will be a period of intensive deliberation within the Israeli government to come up with a formula that will permit Israel to return to the Jarring peace talks. Mr. Eban said these deliberations would be paralleled by continuing discussions between Israel and the United States on the subject. The Israeli Foreign Minister spoke to newsmen after a 45 minute meeting with Secretary of State William P. Rogers, his second in ten days. The meeting was also attended by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Joseph J. Sisco and Israel’s Ambassador to Washington, Gen. Yitzhak Rabin. Mr. Eban later took off for London where he will stop over briefly. He is expected to be back in Israel in time for Sunday’s cabinet meeting. Mr. Eban made it clear that his government has not yet decided on the conditions necessary for reactivation of the Jarring talks and could not say “how or when” they will be created. He said the U.S. and Israel were in complete agreement that Egypt had indeed violated the standstill cease-fire but noted that “nothing has been done so far to correct” the violations. He said Israel was prepared to continue the cease-fire beyond its expiration date.
The Foreign Minister admitted that Israel sought more definite assurances from the U.S. on the form final boundaries would take. He referred to President Nixon’s 1969 remarks on Israel’s need for “defensible borders.” Informed sources here said the U.S. has not abandoned Secretary Rogers’ 1969 boundary proposals which would have Israel withdraw to virtually the same lines that existed before the June, 1967 war–lines that Israel does not consider “defensible.” The same sources said however that the U.S. was not reiterating these proposals, not pressing them on Israel and would not impose them. Mr. Eban told newsmen, “We don’t want those proposals to hover over negotiations. We want the negotiations to be free and we have legitimate proposals.” State Department spokesman Robert J. McCloskey said today that last night’s consultation between Secretary of State William P. Rogers and Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban “neither advances nor sets back the prospects for political talks.” He added that “We understand that the government of Israel will be considering its over-all position when Eban returns,” and that meanwhile U.S.–Israeli “contact” on the peace-talk deadlock continues. Asked to elaborate on the American position on defensible borders and related matters, Mr. McCloskey reiterated that “We want to avoid public discussions of these matters.” He said he had “no information” on additional Egyptian missile violations or on the continuation of American reconnaissance over the Suez Canal standstill cease-fire zone.
Sources here said an Israeli decision on the Jarring talks would take into consideration the fact that Egyptian truce violations have not been rectified, that the Soviet Union has assured Egypt of its support for territorial claims and military development and what the U.S. is prepared to do with regard to Israel’s insistence on a “very precise” formula for peace. The sources said Israel has been assured that the U.S. would not permit the Mideast military balance to be altered to Israel’s detriment. But there was not much hope that Egyptian truce violations will be corrected. Informed sources said the U.S. has received “with great lack of enthusiasm” a plan attributed to Israel’s Defense Minister, Moshe Dayan, calling for the mutual withdrawal of Egyptian and Israeli forces 10-20 miles from the banks of the Suez Canal. Such a move could lead to the re-opening of the waterway, a development the U.S. does not particularly favor at this time because it would give the Soviet Navy easy access to the Indian Ocean.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
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.