There is some concern here that the working paper concluded last week between Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and top Lebanese officials for talks on Israeli withdrawal and security might fail to be approved by other elements in the Beirut government.
The concern was voiced today against the back-drop of statements from Beirut referring to the forthcoming talks without reference to the normalization aspect of the working paper which the government of Israel stressed as a significant breakthrough.
Israeli sources have indicated that President Amin Gemayel himself was privy — though not apparently directly a participant — in the Sharon talks and in effect approved the document. But the fears here are that Moslem elements in the Beirut government — the name of Premier Shafiq Wazzan is cited in this connection — do not approve of the working paper and some “slippage” could set in.
By midweek both countries were saying that formal negotiations would begin shortly. Reports here this afternoon predicted the talks would start in the middle of next week, probably at the town of Khalde near Beirut. Israel wants the talks to alternate between Khalde and Kiryat Shmona.
LABOR, LIKUD MKS PRAISE DOCUMENT
Despite the growing concern over “slippage,” Sharon does seem to have persuaded the entire political community here that the working paper, which he disclosed last Thursday, is a meaningful advance holding out the promise of peaceful relations (though not sure peace) between Israel and Lebanon.
At the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday Labor Alignment leaders joined with Likud legislators in praising the document, though some of the Laborites injected a note of caution, observing that the document looked good on paper but its real test would be its translation, during negotiations, from principles into detailed arrangements and provisions.
THREE SECTIONS OF THE WORKING PAPER
Sharon said the document provided for a formal “end of belligerency” between Israel and Lebanon. It comprised three main sections, he continued: on withdrawal, on normalization and on security arrangements. Other sources told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that there is a specific provision that all these three key elements will be negotiated as one package — a provision which Israel regards as especially important from the political standpoint.
On withdrawal, the document deals with prospective Israel Defense Force withdrawal from Lebanon, but the unstated understanding, of course, is that this will come simultaneously with Syrian and PLO withdrawal from the areas of Lebanon under their control.
Sharon told the Knesset committee yesterday that he believed Syria was now ready for at least a first-stage withdrawal, leading to a separation of forces between the Syrians and the IDF. But Israel would not agree to execute a first-stage until all subsequent stages had been agreed upon and scheduled, he said.
Israeli officials believe that the readiness of high Lebanese figures to conclude the working paper with Sharon (their precise identities have not been revealed) itself attests to the feeling by these Lebanese that the Syrians are indeed ready to accept the principle of simultaneous withdrawal — despite Damascus’ formal position demanding total IDF evacuation before the Syrian army begins to move back.
On normalization, according to Israeli sources, the document provides for the principle of borders open for the passage of persons and goods. But these sources anticipate long and tough negotiations on how much normalization will be applied, and how fast it will be applied. The working paper also provides for a permanent channel of communication between the two governments, in the form of an Israeli diplomatic office that will remain in Beirut “until full peace” when full-fledged embassies will be established. Sharon indicated to the Knesset committee that no similar official Lebanese representation in Israel is contemplated at this stage.
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.
