King Hussein of Jordan declared today that Syrian military intervention in Lebanon was the only “feasible” means to “restore law and order” in that country and accused Israel of blocking such a move. He warned that “If Israel moves forces into Lebanon to counter Syrian intervention, it will lead to an eruption in the entire area and perhaps cause a general war” which “would be disastrous for all concerned.”
The Jordanian ruler rejected a proposal by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat several days ago that a multi-national force of Arab countries intervene to end Lebanon’s civil strife and insisted that the “Syrians are the ones best able to help halt the disaster that has beset Lebanon because of their objectives and the trust they have in Lebanon.”
Hussein made his remarks to a group of leading American newspaper columnists and commentators and other media representatives invited to a special breakfast press conference at Blair House where the King and Queen Alia are staying during their official visit to Washington. Hussein is known to have made the same points with respect to Lebanon in his talks here with President Ford and Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger and with leaders of both houses of Congress.
He intimated as much when he told the gathering at Blair House that “We have brought the facts to the attention of Washington and I believe Washington has sent able people to verify the facts.” This was apparently a reference to President Ford’s dispatch of former Ambassador G. Dean Brown to Lebanon March 30 as a special envoy to examine the situation there. Brown is presently director of the Middle East Institute of Washington.
SEEN AS SYRIA’S SPOKESMAN
The Jordanian ruler’s open call for Syrian intervention in Lebanon indicated to many observers here that he was serving as Syria’s spokesman on his visit to Washington, a role in keeping with the new Syrian -Jordanian rapprochement. Some noted that Hussein seemed favorably disposed toward reported Syrian ambitions to incorporate the Lebanese state into a “Greater Syria.”
He said he supported “to the fullest Syria’s attempts to bring an end to the madness in Lebanon” and contended that “many Lebanese at all levels have asked Syria to intervene because normal forces for law and order have disintegrated.” He did not identify the “many Lebanese” and he dodged a question as to whether the U.S. was seeking to persuade Israel not to intervene in Lebanon even if Syrian forces entered that country.
However, Hussein charged that “Israel is threatening to intervene but I don’t see why or to what end. A country is threatened with destruction and the re-establishment of law and order in Lebanon should be in everybody’s interest.”
In brushing aside Sadat’s suggestion to Arab League leaders on March 29 that Arab countries supply security force to restore order in Lebanon. Hussein told the media representatives that “a multi-Arab force is neither feasible nor possible” and that “an international force is not feasible.” He said that “Syria would not venture into Lebanon unless it was necessary to separate the warring factions to give Lebanon time to reorganize.”
REACTIONS BY ISRAEL, U.S.
Israeli sources here, informed of Hussein’s statements, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that Ambassador Simcha Dinitz is in daily contact with U.S. authorities on the Lebanese situation. The sources reiterated Israel’s position that it would not interfere in Lebanon. But should Syrian military forces intervene, a new situation would be created on Israel’s northern border and Israel would have to weigh the course of action if a security threat developed on the border as a result of unilateral Syrian intervention, the sources said.
The U.S. position was reiterated in a prepared statement issued March 30 declaring American opposition to “unilateral” intervention in Lebanon. A State Department spokesman said, as on previous occasions, that this warning applied to both Syria and Israel.
Hussein’s claim today that Syrian intervention was necessary to end Lebanon’s civil war drew an emphatic response from the State Department. Department spokesman Robert Funseth told news men that the U.S. continues to oppose military intervention by any outside party in Lebanon. “We believe it is very dangerous” and “that position is well understood” by King Hussein, he said.
PONDERING HUSSEIN’S REMARKS
Observers here, pondering Hussein’s remarks in light of repeated U.S. warnings against “unilateral” or “outside” intervention in Lebanon, suggested that while the U.S. has not given Syria a green light to move into Lebanon, it may yet do so if certain conditions are obtained. According to these observers, the conditions could include a Syrian pledge to renew the mandate of the United Nations Disengagement Observer. Force (UNDOF) on the Golan Heights which expires May 31, and a further pledge that Syrian forces would not approach the Lebanese-Israeli frontier.
At the same time, the U.S. may seek to restrain Israel from responding to Syrian intervention in Lebanon by pledging Israel more military equipment to offset the added danger to its security, the observers said.
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.
