Israeli officials consider Syrian intransigence to be the chief obstacle to an early agreement on the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon. That view emerged here today as U.S. special envoy Philip Habib, now in Beirut, was about to begin what is expected to be another prolonged round of shuttle diplomacy to obtain an agreement.
High ranking sources here have expressed concern that the Syrians will give Habib a difficult time. The Israelis cite the pro-Soviet orientation of Syrian President Hafez Assad’s recent rhetoric as an indication that assiduous American diplomatic efforts in recent months have failed to produce a thaw in relations between Washington and Damascus.
The Israelis also express dismay over statements by Assad and the Syrian Defense Minister vowing that they will not pull their own forces out of Lebanon before the last Israeli soldier has left that country. Israel has consistently demanded the simultaneous pull-out of Israeli and Syrian forces to be preceded by the withdrawal of the estimated 7,000 Palestine Liberation Organization fighters from Lebanon.
SYRIAN METHOD OF NEGOTIATING
Israeli sources maintain, however, that the Syrians traditionally take a very hard line at the out set of negotiations for its psychological impact on prospective negotiating partners, but later modify their stance. They recall that diplomatic efforts to get Syrian and PLO forces out of Beirut appeared to be hopelessly bogged down last July and August, but succeeded in September. That analogy is only partially applicable since Israel was bombarding west Beirut at the time. It clearly does not want to resort to military force at the present juncture.
Israel’s dim view of the Syrian stance is matched by its disappointment with the strong, persistent negative attitude toward Israel of President Amin Gemayel of Lebanon since he took office after the assassination of his brother, President-elect Bashir Gemayel last September. “He (Amin) is not Bashir and that becomes clearer every day,” one Israeli policymaker remarked yesterday.
Bashir Gemayel had been Israel’s ally during the war in Lebanon and was expected to be amenable to some sort of formal peace pact with Israel, had he lived.
CABINET MINISTERS ANGERED BY TWO COLLEAGUES
Meanwhile, Cabinet ministers have been angered by public remarks by two of their colleagues, Energy Minister Yitzhak Modai and Welfare Minister Aharon Uzzan, calling for a unilateral partial withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. According to a majority of the ministers, their statements inevitably weakened Israel’s negotiating position just as Habib is about to embark on his latest round of negotiations.
Modai is a member of the Liberal Party wing of Likud. Uzzan, who represents the Tami faction in the coalition government, proposed in a radio interview yesterday that Israel pull its troops out of the Shouf mountain villages where they have been forced to intervene between warring Christians and Druze. According to Uzzan, Israel should return to the original purpose of its war in Lebanon–security for Galilee–and retire to the 40-45 kilometer security zone north of its border.
Cabinet sources accused Uzzan of making irresponsible statements aimed at “headlines.” They pointed out that the security zone demanded by Israel includes many of the Shouf mountain villages. Uzzan’s viewpoint is that since the Lebanese refuse to recognize Israel even indirectly, “let us pull out and leave them to solve their own problems.”
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.
