Vance Affirms That Mideast Peace Settlement Must Be Made by Parties to the Conflict, Not by the U.s

Secretary of State Cyrus Vance said today that the United States would put its “suggestions on the core issues” of the Middle East conflict to the “individual countries” involved but insisted that the peace settlement itself must come from the parties. “It cannot be made by the U.S.,” he said.

Responding to questions at a press conference before leaving for a Western economic summit meeting in London, Vance said U.S. suggestions will be made after American officials meet the new Israeli leaders who will emerge from the May 17 elections in Israel. He said the U.S. still wants to see the Geneva conference reconvened this autumn but “it is terribly important that the proper base be laid before going to a Geneva conference.” Vance stressed that “It is essential adequate preparations be made so that we have some idea of what will be coming out of Geneva other than go to Geneva just to be in Geneva.”

Vance said he expects to re-visit the Middle East after the Israelis “have put together a new government” which, he said, might take “from three weeks to a couple of months” after the elections. By then, he pointed out, the new Israeli Premier “will be in a position to speak with authority with respect to the Israeli position and what flexibility there may be in that position.” Vance noted that to return to Israel before a new government is established “would not make sense.”

SUGGESTIONS AFTER FUTURE MEETINGS

He was asked if the Administration would present “a comprehensive American plan without the elements of compulsion or enforcement but just for discussion.” Vance replied that as President Carter has indicated, following the round of talks, including those with Israel’s new leaders, “we will then complete our work and we will be prepared then to make suggestions to the parties with respect to what we believe would be a fair and equitable manner of dealing with the Middle East.”

Vance added: “We will then go and discuss these suggestions with the parties in an effort to see how much common ground we can find among the parties. The ultimate decision, however, on a Middle East settlement, as we have said many times before, must be made by the parties themselves.”

The Secretary said it was “getting into a question of semantics” whether “you want to call” the U.S. suggestions “comprehensive or not.” However, he made it clear they would deal with the “core issues.” These have been described previously by Carter as secure borders for Israel, recognition of Israel by the Arab states ### solution of the Palestinian problem.

Meanwhile, the State Department has categorically denied that Carter’s remarks on a BBC television interview Monday night implied in any way that the U.S. might try to impose a peace settlement in the Middle East. The State Department was responding to expressions of concern here and in Israel with respect to an imposed settlement.

CONCERN ABOUT AN IMPOSED SETTLEMENT

(In Jerusalem today, Defense Minister Shimon Peres who has assumed the functions of Premier, was quoted in Maariv as saying that an imposed settlement in the Mideast would be no settlement at all since it would be imposed only on Israel. Peres was apparently responding to Carter’s remarks broadcast in London.)

Carter, in his interview, said, “I would not hesitate, if I saw clearly a fair and equitable solution, to use the full strength of our own country and its persuasive powers to bring these (Mideast) nations to agreement.” He added, ” I recognize though that we cannot impose our will on others and unless the countries involved agree, there is no way for us to make progress.”

The President defined the American role as that of a “communicator between the parties involved or among them, and we also are in a position of one who can influence countries to modify their positions slightly to accommodate other nations’ interests.”

Vance, at his press conference today, declined to answer directly when he was asked what kind of “persuasive power” could the U.S. use, such as a reassessment of its Middle East policy or a reduction of aid to Egypt, to “accelerate voluntary compliance on the part of the parties.”

The Secretary replied: “The first thing we would have to do is put before the various parties the logic behind the position, why it appears to be fair and have a dialogue with each of the individual countries with respect to whatever suggestions we may make in terms of why we believe them to be fair and equitable. But again, I stress, ultimately the decision for a settlement has to be made by the parties. It cannot be made by the U.S.”