Vance Insists U.S. Vote in UN Was Not a Change in Policy Toward Israel

Secretary of State Cyrus Vance continued to assert to Congress last Friday that the U.S. vote March 1 for the anti-Israel Security Council Resolution 465 represented “no change” in Carter Administration policy toward Israel, and he urged that no “witch hunt” be conducted because “no devilish plot” had been concocted against Israel. Vance reiterated that the resolution is a “recommendatory” action, warning Israel against establishing settlements in “occupied territories” including East Jerusalem, and resulted from a “misunderstanding” for which he has taken responsibility.

Vance, who spent three hours before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last Thursday, as the Carter Administration’s sole witness on the issue, also appeared alone Friday “morning before the House Foreign Affair Committee, which was considering “a resolution of inquiry” into the process by which the U.S. voted for Resolution 465 and which President Carter disavowed the “including Jerusalem” references two days later.

The Secretary of State, who refused to provide the Senate committee with documentation leading up to the March 1 vote, also refused the documentation at the House hearing. He said that if Congress presses for the documentation he would have to go to the President to see if he wants to invoke “executive privilege,” in which advice to the President is treated as confidential.

In the questioning of Vance, House members indicated, as Senators did a day before, they would not favor additional hearings. It became apparent that the inquiry would be sidetracked, closing the matter. Committee chairman Clement Zablocki (D.Wis.) hinted broadly that he opposed the inquiry and several others openly took issue with it. Rep. Dante Fascell (D. Fla.) observed that while the documentation sought by the inquiry was not forthcoming, the evidence would come to light some day.

Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman (D. NY) who, with Rep. Christopher Dodd (D.Conn.) and Rep. Hamilton Fish (R. NY), had asked for the inquiry, was allowed to question Vance, although she is not a committee member. She was not reconciled by Vance’s testimony that no policy shift had taken place. Other members of the committee who were similarly skeptical included Rep. Benjamin Rosenthal (D.NY), Jonathan Bingham (D.NY) and Millicent Fenwick (R.NJ). Rosenthal, Bingham and Rep. John Buchanan (R.Ala.) pinned responsibility for the vote decision on Carter.

SAYS ADMINISTRATION POLICY IS CONFUSED

Leaving the hearing room, Holtzman said “the Administration’s policy is completely confused.” She said “the thrust” of Vance’s testimony is that “the Administration agrees with the resolution and the President is aware of all the references to Jerusalem in it.” Saying the vote was “not a mistake,” Holtzman said the President’s statement following the vote was “an after-the-fact correction to explain away the Administration’s embarrassment.”

Under Holtzman’s questioning, Vance said that the President was “familiar” with the references to Jerusalem but when she asked whether the President was aware” of all references,” he replied “only the President himself can speak to that.” He refused to say whether he had shown the President the text of the resolution.

Regarding reference to “Palestinian and Arab lands” in the resolution, Vance said “we voted for resolutions” including such a phrase in UN General Assemblies in each of the past two years. “It is merely descriptive language,” he said. When she pressed for a U.S. statement to the UN from Carter, Vance replied that “the President has made a statement” and that “a statement issued by the President of the United States to the world is certainly as clear a notice as anyone can have.”

Earlier in his testimony, Vance said “The President did feel that in the present phase of the autonomy negotiations,” the issue of Jerusalem should not be raised. The UN resolution, he said, “in a fundamental way has not” affected the autonomy negotiations.

Vance told Rep. Stephen Solarz (D.NY) that “Israel has great sensitivity and care” regarding Jerusalem’s holy places but that Jordan’s action in the 17 years it controlled Jerusalem, prior to 1967, specifically regarding some cemeteries was totally unacceptable. I have seen some myself.”

Reps.L. H. Fountain (D.NC), David Bowen (D.Miss.) and Joel Pritchard (R.Wash.) objected to the criticism of the U.S. action in the Security Council. Pritchard said “we should say the settlements are counter-productive and that many Israelis and Jews in this country agree.” Fountain said “I don’t think we should continue trying the U.S. all over the world for a mistake. Some groups in this country have over-reacted to that mistake.”