Israel Not Entirely Surprised by Reagan’s Decision to Withdraw the Marines from Beirut

Israel had no official reaction today to President Reagan’s decision to withdraw the U.S. marines from Beirut. The Cabinet met this morning in what was described as an informal session to discuss the latest developments. It is expected to devote its next regular session on Sunday to the issue.

Reagan’s move did not take the Israelis entirely by surprise. U.S. Ambassador Samuel Lewis reportedly informed Premier Yitzbak Shamir and Defense Minister Moshe Arens of the President’s intentions yesterday. Reagan issued a statement in California yesterday announcing that he has ordered the 1,400 marines dug in for the last 18 months around Beirut airport, to retire to ships of the U.S. Sixth Fleet off the Lebanese coast, in a phased redeployment.

At the same time, the President authorized intensified naval and air action against Lebanese elements firing into Beirut, including those in Syrian-occupied areas of the country. Until now, U.S. naval and air power was restricted to opening fire only when American positions came under fire.

Reagan’s announcement represented a major departure from the policy Administration spokesman said only yesterday morning would undergo “no change.” It is expected to hasten the withdrawal of the British, Italian and French contingents of the multinational force from Beirut.

MOOD IS PESSIMISTIC

While there was no official comment here today, unofficially the mood was pessimistic, especially as regards the prospects for a quick resolution of the problems in south Lebanon. These now concern Israel the most and the view here is that any settlement depends on Shiite Moslems.

The tougher the Shiite leadership stands in Beirut, the less likely it seems that the large Shiite population in south Lebanon — about 400,000– will show the necessary flexibility to allow for a further withdrawal of Israeli forces in the area.

A scenario suggested only a few days ago had the Israel Defense Force pull back to artillery range of Israel’s northern border. It would thereby end its policing role in urban centers such as Sidon and reduce the risk of casualties among Israeli soldiers which has been an almost daily occurence.

A pullback by the IDF would be contingent on arrangements with local armed forces, mainly the Shiites, to assume responsibility for security in the south. Israel has been working toward such an arrangement in recent weeks but events of the past 24 hours may have reduced the chances for agreement.

There is mounting public and political pressure on the government to withdraw the IDF from Lebanon entirely. Minister of Science Yuval Neeman, leader of the ultra-nationalist Tehiya Party, is opposed to this. He said today that the de facto partition of Lebanon now seems inevitable and suggested that the IDF would have to stay in south Lebanon indefinitely and possibly permanently.

But former Premier Yitzhak Rabin of the Labor Party sharply criticized the government today for keeping the IDF in Lebanon. He urged a complete pullout in a matter of weeks.

Israeli sources, meanwhile, reiterated that Israel would not intervene to save the government of President Amin Gemayel. Gemayel reportedly sent an emissary to Jerusalem appealing for help. The Israelis say the U.S. has not asked Israel to take any action in Lebanon.

Chief of Staff Gen. Moshe Levy told the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Security Committee yesterday that Shiite power in Beirut was growing stronger “from day to day” since they joined other Lebanese factions bent on the overthrow of Gemayel’s regime.