Jewish Leaders Present Views on Mideast Peace to Senate Committee Reassessing U.S. Foreign Policy

An economically strong and militarily secure Israel, with recognized and defensible borders, provides the best hope for Middle East peace and stability, Rabbi Israel Miller, chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, told a Senate subcommittee here yesterday.

Speaking before the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Rabbi Miller said that the “prevention of Soviet domination over the Middle East is a mutual strategic goal of America and Israel,” He added that “an Israel stripped of geographic assets vital for its defense, an Israel deprived of the means of defending itself, an Israel economically weakened, would entail great risks for the United States.”

Others who appeared before the subcommittee which is conducting a hearing on the “Arab-Israel Dispute–Priorities for Peace, “included Arthur J. Goldberg, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, and Philip Klutznick of Chicago, a world Jewish leader and a former member of the U.S. delegation to the UN.

Sen. George McGovern (D.SD), chairman of the subcommittee, said at the outset that the Administration’s reassessment of American policy in the Mideast “cannot be made by the executive branch alone. It is vital that the Congress accept its responsibilities in the determination of American policy.” McGovern also stressed that the relationship between Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab states “Is the most strategic” of the problems in the Mideast, “for unless the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolved, there is little likelihood that any other problems of the area will be.”

STEPS TOWARD PEACE OUTLINED

Rabbi Miller said that movement toward peace in the Mideast requires “normalization” of relations between Israel and the Arab states which includes diplomatic, economic and cultural relations along with secure and mutually-agreed on borders.

Goldberg, while welcoming an interim agreement between Israel and Egypt if achieved, said he was concerned that the U.S. had “applied considerable pressure on Israel, by freezing arms and economic assistance, in seeking to obtain its agreement to such an accord,” Goldberg said there was nothing wrong with the U.S. urging Israel to give “thoughtful and sympathetic consideration to a proposed settlement in our common interest. It is quite another matter, however, for the United States to impose its views about a settlement by a carrot and stick approach.”

Both Goldberg and Klutznick said the next step once the Sinai agreement is reached will be a return to the Geneva conference. Both said any Middle East settlement should be based on UN Security Council Resolution 242. Klutznick said he would favor a return to Geneva if “adequate groundwork is laid and limited pre-conditions met.”

Klutznick listed these as setting the date three to six months in advance to permit concrete developments, a restoration of relations between Israel and the Soviet Union, a declaration by the Palestine Liberation Organization stating its recognition of the sovereignty and independence of all states attending the conference, an end to terrorism and military operations against Israel by the PLO coupled with an end to Israel’s retaliatory raids, a declaration by the Arab League suspending the boycott against Israel and an end to counter-action by Jewish groups, the renunciation by the Arabs of their intention to use the oil embargo, and an end to the abuse of the UN system.