Sen. Henry M. Jackson (D.Wash.) severely criticized Secretary of State Henry A, Kissinger’s Middle East diplomacy here last night, saying that “Negotiated settlements that do not include movement toward a genuine peace are certain to fail….Without starting the process of political accommodation, cease-fires and disengagements that alter only the military situation cannot lead to lasting peace.”
But Sen. Jacob K. Javits (R.NY), speaking at the same forum, said Kissinger’s step-by-step efforts “should be continued because they are in the best interests of all parties concerned” and claimed that the differences between Egypt and Israel have “already been significantly narrowed.”
The divergent views of Kissinger’s methods were expressed by the two Senators who addressed the 16th annual policy conference dinner meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) at the Shoreham Hotel. Another speaker was Israel’s former Foreign Minister Abba Eban. (See separate story) More than 1100 AIPAC members and guests–a record number–attended the dinner meeting at the hotel that climaxed a two-day conference.
LINK BETWEEN INDOCHINA AND MIDDLE EAST
Jackson, an announced candidate for his party’s 1976 Presidential nomination and a longtime critic of Kissinger’s diplomacy in the Middle East and Southeast Asia, maintained that the Secretary’s penchant for promoting military detentes without laying the groundwork for fundamental political accords represented “the most profound connection” between the tragedy in Indochina and the failure of Kissinger’s mission in the Middle East. “In the search for peace, a change of line is no substitute for a change of heart,” he said.
He also disagreed with Javits’ view of the Ford Administration’s current reassessment of American Middle East policy. The first conclusion is that “pressuring Israel to diminish her physical security without a political reconciliation with her neighbors is dangerous and unwise,” Jackson said,
Javits, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, viewed the reassessment as “a rather routine development” when measured against the background of the U.S. moral commitment to the security and integrity of Israel. Denying that there was “a crisis in relations with Israel,” Javits declared:
“The mountain of the moment is really only a molehill when viewed from the perspective of the fundamental identity of interests which have bound the U.S. and Israel together for the past 27 years….We all know that there is a highly publicized ‘reassessment’ of the U.S. Mideast policy being conducted by the Secretary of State. It is not clear just what is being ‘reassessed’ and by whom. Indeed, I am not aware of a ‘reassessment’ being conducted by the Congress which has an important, even decisive say in these matters.”
PEACE MUST INVOLVE DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS
Jackson said that another conclusion the Administration must make in its reassessment is the recognition “that a real peace must involve direct negotiations among the parties in which Israeli withdrawal to secure and recognized borders is matched by an end to the state of belligerency.” He said that this was in line with Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.
Jackson declared that “a fair reassessment will reaffirm the soundness of the long-standing American policy of helping to maintain the military balance in the Middle East,” and finally “any clear-sighted reassessment will include a reappraisal of the role of the Administration’s detente in promoting peace in the Middle East.”
RAPS CAMPAIGN TO BLAME ISRAEL
Jackson assailed the “campaign of background briefings, meetings and leaks to the press calculated to imply that Israel alone was responsible for the failure to reach an accord.” He said that because Kissinger returned to Washington from Jerusalem, “some people concluded that the talks had failed when Israel rejected an Egyptian compromise proposal. The truth is otherwise and the record should be clear on this point, Kissinger departed Jerusalem when President Anwar Sadat of Egypt refused even to consider an Israeli compromise proposal that sought to provide a basis for continuing negotiations,” Jackson 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.
