Focus on Issues Three Candidates Woo Jewish Voters

In their appearances before the B’nai B’rith International convention last week, in the closest resemblance of a debate this election campaign, the three major Presidential candidates experienced even-handedness in respect, attention and cordiality.

The 1400 men and women from across America and Canada and also representing many of the Jewish service organization’s branches in 40 other countries gave no indication of partiality towards Republican Ronald Reagan, Independent John Anderson and Democrat Jimmy Carter, who spoke in that order within 26 hours. Each received standing ovations before and after their speeches; each was praised from the podium; each received numerous bursts of applause during the course of their speeches.

In general appraisals, Reagan appeared to be talking directly to the American Jewish community and directly to the Soviets and the Arab enemies of Israel. Anderson’s thesis was a warning to Americans in general and Jewish voters in particular “not to be taken in” this election year by his rival candidates. Carter seemed to address Jewish voters in particular but he also seemed to be telling the world he continues on the course they have come to know. “There will not be one policy for an election year and another after the election,” he said.

All three candidates pledged they will not allow the imposition of a decision by outsiders on Israel; they oppose a Palestinian state; they will continue U.S. aid to Israel. None of them touched on Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Both Carter and Reagan spoke out strongly in support of Soviet Jewry.

While Reagan and Anderson hit hard at the U.S. abstention on anti-Israel resolutions in the UN Security Council, Carter did not attempt to rebut those challenges. Anderson’s remarks were more general than substantive–he had made his positions earlier in the campaign. Analysis of the candidates’ statements, therefore, was mainly focused on what Reagan had said and Carter’s expressions on the some subjects.

ISRAEL IS STRATEGIC ASSET

In essence, Reagan said “Israel is a major strategic asset to America,” while Carter reiterated his commitment to “a secure Israel.” Reagan said the Palestine Liberation Organization must not only accept Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the PLO must also prove that it truly represents the Palestinians because, he said, the PLO kills off its Arab opponents. Reagan called the PLO “terrorist.” Carter reiterated he would not recognize the PLO until it accepts Security Council Resolution 242. He said “terrorism” must end but did not say who commits it.

Reagan said “Jerusalem is now and will continue to be one city, undivided.” Carter said Jerusalem “should remain forever undivided.” Carter did not mention Palestinian refugees. Reagan said they left Israel because they thought in 1948 that Israel would be wiped out in a few days by Arab forces. One solution for the refugees, Reagan suggested, would be their assimilation in Jordan.

While Carter spoke of Egypt and Israel negotiating autonomy for the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Reagan said that Jordan and Israel should negotiate the settlement since they are “primary” to the West Bank. In this regard, he did not include Egypt although he acknowledged the virtue of the Camp David accords.

POWER OF ‘POLITICAL OIL’

Anderson warned against “the power of political oil,” saying it “warps our principles” and “clouds our judgment.” He cautioned that “too many times” during this election “solemn promises will be issued” and “too many times those commitments will prove to be empty.” In general, he leaned more heavily against Carter than Reagan who, he intimated, “discovered Israel in 1980.”

Carter alluded to U.S. aid given to Israel–almost half of all of it during Israel’s lifetime come during his Administration. Anderson had anticipated his statement and reminded him of the share in it by the Congress, including Republican members.