Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir is drafting a letter to President Bush that “would enable the peace process to go forward,” a well-placed Israeli government official asserted Tuesday.
The official disputed media reports saying that Shamir would reject a plea for Israeli flexibility contained in a letter Bush sent to the prime minister last weekend.
The media reports, which predict an imminent confrontation between Bush and Shamir, have senior Israeli policy-makers seriously concerned.
Their worry is that inaccurate reports of Israeli intransigence may persuade the Bush administration to abandon its Middle East peacemaking efforts and blame Israel for their failure, the government official, who requested anonymity, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
The letter to Shamir was one of several Bush sent last weekend to Middle East leaders, urging them to show flexibility on the procedural issues blocking a Mideast peace conference.
The White House confirmed that Bush sent such letters to Shamir, Jordan’s King Hussein, Presidents Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Hafez Assad of Syria, and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia.
The letters were described as a “follow-up on the various opportunities” that arose during Secretary of State James Baker’s last peace mission to the region in May.
Bush reportedly tried to convince the Mideast leaders that the obstacles to a peace conference are basically secondary and procedural.
It is up to them, he is said to have written, to transcend such considerations and seize upon the historic opportunity provided by the coalition victory over Iraq to help create a “modality” in which substantive peace talks can take place between Israel and the Arabs.
Bush implored the Middle East leaders to make compromises to help advance peace in the region. Media reports said Israel was asked to make the bulk of the concessions.
PUSH FOR A ‘SILENT U.N. OBSERVER’
The two issues on which Baker’s shuttle diplomacy foundered are a U.N. role in the proposed peace conference and continuation of the conference after its ceremonial opening.
Israel wants no U.N. role whatever, because it considers the world organization to be biased in favor of the Arab cause.
It also wants the conference restricted to a one-time opening session that would usher in direct, bilateral talks between Israel and its adversaries. Once that was accomplished, the conference would be adjourned and could not resurface to adjudicate or impose any solution, the Israelis insist.
The Arabs hold opposing views on those subjects. Syria, for example, demands a significant U.N. role and a conference that would be the first of a series of multinational meetings.
In his letter, Bush reportedly asked Shamir to reconsider Israel’s rejection of a proposed “silent U.N. observer” at the conference and to accept the notion of a conference that could be reconvened, though only if all parties agreed.
Media reports said the prime minister expects Syria to reject Bush’s call for flexibility. In that event, Israel would not be held alone to blame if Washington gives up its peace efforts.
There was speculation, though, that rather than abandoning the diplomatic initiative, Bush and Baker might decide to send invitations to a Middle East conference, even if the prospective conferees fail to reach agreement on procedures.
A joint U.S.-Soviet invitation specifying date and place would be difficult to reject.
(JTA correspondent David Friedman in Washington contributed to this report.)
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.
