Israel Seems to Be Softening Its Position on Security Arrangements in South Lebanon

Israel appeared today to have softened its position on security arrangements in south Lebanon. While there has been no official confirmation of such a development, the indications are that Israel might drop its insistence on IDF-manned surveillance posts in the 28-mile deep security zone after the bulk of the Israeli army withdraws from Lebanon, but only if acceptable alternatives are offered.

Some observers here ascribe the new flexibility to the installation of Moshe Arens as Defense Minister, replacing Ariel Sharon. Ministerial policy-makers have held several sessions to review the status of negotiations over Lebanon, attended for the first time by Arens.

The Israel-Lebanon-U.S. talks will continue this week, alternating between Netanya and Khalde in Lebanon. U.S. special Ambassador Philip Habib is expected back from Washington with new ideas aimed at wrapping up an accord. The main obstacles are security arrangements and a trade agreement between Israel and Lebanon which the Lebanese government opposes at this time.

CONDITIONS FOR FOREGOING PERMANENT OUTPOSTS

Israel is said to be willing to forego permanent outposts in south Lebanon on condition that the security of the region is maintained by joint IDF-Lebanese patrols, regular surveillance flights by the Israel Air Force, coordination of intelligence and a strong role for Israel’s ally, Maj. Saad Haddad in the region.

According to sources here, Israel has yet to receive a satisfactory reply to those conditions from the Lebanese. The latter are speaking of joint “supervision” but Israeli sources insist that is “not the same thing” as joint patrols because supervision denotes something less than a military unit.

Reports from the U.S. indicate that there is no agreement on the role of Haddad. The Lebanese government refuses to allow him to control the south. Habib reportedly conveyed to Israel a proposal that Haddad’s Christian militia would be integrated into the Lebanese army and Haddad himself offered a diplomatic assignment abroad. The U.S. favors this.

But Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir has rejected those terms. He told the Cabinet yesterday that he had made it clear to Habib that Israel would not abandon Haddad who it has armed and financed for years.

The United States had made it clear that it would like to see Lebanon build up its own army as a measure of its sovereignty and as a way to protect its population from any hostile forces that might seek to enter the country.

ISSUE OF FREE FLOW OF GOODS

The question of the free flow of goods across the Israel-Lebanese border also remains deadlocked. Shamir and David Kimche, head of the Israeli negotiating team, reported to the Cabinet yesterday that the Lebanese are balking because they fear a trade agreement with Israel would harm their trade with Arab countries.

The Lebanese have proposed that the present informal situation continue at the border for the next six after which the two countries would start negotiations for a formal trade pact.

Shamir rejected this, too, claiming that if Lebanon refused to negotiate while the Israel army occupies part of the country, it is less likely to do so after the army is withdrawn.

The Israelis also profess to be concerned over Syria’s intentions. They note that Habib has not been able to arrange a meeting with President Hafez Assad of Syria. Assurances that the Syrian army would pull out of Lebanon when the Israeli army did have come from Lebanese, not Syrian sources, the Israelis point out. They warn that Syrian obduracy could undermine any agreement worked out between Israel, Lebanon and the U.S.

Israeli officials are concerned too that the Soviet Union is seeking to foil an accord. The massive rearmament of Syria with new Soviet ground-to-air missiles may indicate that Moscow is determined to thwart American-sponsored peace moves in the region, the Israeli say.