Shamir Braced for Controversial Issues on Coming U.S. Visit

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir prepared Thursday to leave on a visit to the United States, where he is expected to face a series of controversial issues in his talks with U.S. officials, but he insisted that he will not be on the defensive.

In an interview before his scheduled weekend departure, Shamir touched on some of those issues, including Israel’s military supply relationship with South Africa, his government’s role in the Iran arms scandal and apparent U.S.-Israeli differences over Middle East peace strategy.

The 10-day visit, which is to include three days in Los Angeles Feb. 20-23, will be Shamir’s first since taking over from Shimon Peres last October as head of Israel’s national unity government. It comes at what some supporters of Israel think is a poor time because of the various controversies in which Israel finds itself.

On South Africa, Shamir said that because of a growing international movement against the white-minority government, it is in Israel’s interest to further limit what he described as its already marginal relations with Pretoria.

Shamir refused, in an interview, to comment specifically on a Los Angeles Times report that he, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin have agreed to phase out agreements on arms sales and the transfer of military technology to South Africa.

But he did say that “there are some problems that are handled by our leading personalities, and I think that we are handling this subject according to our interests.”

Asked if those interests now call for minimizing relations with the Pretoria government, he responded, “Well, you know there is an international movement for sanctions, for instance, against South Africa.”

Thinks Sanctions Ineffective

Shamir said his country opposes sanctions as ineffective. He said Israel cannot transfer technology or arms “sold to us by others,” but when it comes to “what we are producing, we’re entitled to do whatever we think necessary for our policy.”

He added, however: “From time to time, there are some changes. We decide about it. There are no political rules that are appropriate for all times and all situations.”

On Wednesday, Shamir had told Israeli correspondents that he favored lowering the profile of Israeli-South African relations.

“There is no need to provoke anyone,” he said.

Shamir is not expected to make any public announcement of a change in policy toward South Africa while in Washington, even though the reported decision by Shamir and other top officials to phase out Israel’s controversial military relationship with South Africa is said to have been made in the hope of heading off a potential crisis in U.S.-Israeli relations.

Under the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act passed by the U.S. Congress last October, President Reagan is to receive by April 1 a report from the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research listing arms sales to South Africa by other nations. Nations found to be selling military equipment to the Pretoria government face a possible cutoff of U.S. military aid, which in Israel’s case means $1.8 billion a year.

Israeli Assurances

The Israeli leaders reportedly hope that both the Reagan Administration and Congress will stop short of any public condemnation of Israel based on assurances that it will gradually end its military relationship with South Africa.

Referring to South Africa and other issues facing Shamir in the United States, Harry Wall, head of the Jerusalem office of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, said: “I think this visit is fraught with a number of possible pitfalls. And he’s going at a time that Israel’s image and position have suffered a series of setbacks.”

However, Wall added, “To the extent the prime minister gets out in front on a number of these controversial matters and puts Israel in sync with American concerns, I think his visit offers an opportunity to reaffirm the strength of the Israeli-American relationship.”

Shamir was asked, in the interview, if he had ever considered postponing his trip because of the controversy looming over it. He laughed and replied:

“I’m going to meet friends, and very close and good friends. I don’t think that there could be any bad timing for a visit of any Israeli politician or Israeli minister in such a friendly country as the United States.”

He acknowledged that there “are some difficulties” but said, “I don’t think I will be on the defensive.”

The style of the man who will be meeting with President Reagan and other top Administration officials, congressional leaders, the press and American Jewish leaders represents a sharp contrast with that of his predecessor, Peres, who was the last Israeli prime minister to visit the United States--last fall.

The public relations-conscious Peres was always interested in generating news, if only to maintain an appearance of momentum, but Shamir is just the opposite.

“You know the man; he’s not the announcing type,” a senior official here said. “He’s the most formidable introvert that Israeli politics has ever produced.”

No Public Revelations

Regarding the Iranian arms affair, Shamir said he will be prepared to answer any questions that Administration officials or congressional leaders might raise. But he is not expected to make any public revelations.

“Maybe I have not been very well aware of all what happened” as the arms deal evolved, Shamir said, but “I am responsible with my colleagues in the government for all that we did. And I have no reservations about all that Israel did.”

He said he had “no reason to blame . . . anyone” for the way the affair worked out, and he added, “I know what happened and what was going on, and I don’t blame anybody.”

He refused to discuss details of the case but said that “when everything will be known, and all the investigations will come to an end, I think nobody will have any reason to blame Israel’s participation in this joint operation.”

‘Another Point of View’

Asked about U.S. involvement, he replied: “Well, the United States has maybe another point of view. Maybe there are some legal matters which we don’t have. But from the moral point of view and the political point of view, I don’t think there was something wrong in all this.”

Accompanying Shamir on his trip will be Cabinet Secretary Eliakim Rubenstein, who has been designated as Israel’s liaison officer to deal with the various American investigations into the Iran affair.

Israel has agreed to respond on a government-to-government basis to questions regarding the activities of four of its citizens who played central roles in the affair.

Regarding the Jonathan Jay Pollard spy case, another thorny U.S.-Israeli issue, Shamir refused to discuss the matter, arguing that legal proceedings are going forward in the United States. Pollard, a former U.S. Navy intelligence analyst, pleaded guilty last June to spying for Israel but is still awaiting sentencing.

Officials Surprised

Other Israeli officials expressed surprise at an American statement earlier this week charging that Israel had failed to cooperate fully with U.S. investigators and that as a result four Israelis implicated in the case have lost their immunity from possible prosecution.

The officials said they had seen the decision to postpone Pollard’s sentencing until next month as a welcome effort “to have a soft landing for Shamir” when he arrives in Washington. So the later American statement was an unpleasant shock.

The latest surprise was a letter to Shamir from Secretary of State George P. Shultz in which he said he hopes to review all options for advancing the Middle East peace process, including the possibility of an international peace conference.

Shamir, who opposes such a conference, had an angry public exchange here this week with Peres, who has endorsed the idea so long as it leads to direct negotiations between Israel and Jordan. The prime minister had expected support from Shultz, who had previously expressed fear that such a conference would serve only to give the Soviet Union a stronger hand in the region.

“Until the day before yesterday, I thought (Shamir) would find a very understanding partner in Secretary Shultz,” an official here said, referring to the letter.

No Great Differences

In the interview, Shamir said that differences over an international conference are “not terribly serious in my opinion, because we have not any concrete proposals.”

“Nobody,” he went on, “has a proposal out to make such a conference--what will be the condition, who will participate in it, what will be the terms of reference--and therefore I don’t think we have now to decide about it.”

Nevertheless, he added that he expects to discuss the option as part of broader talks with U.S. officials about how to advance the prospects for regional peace.

For all the quips that his low-key political style invites here, his aides point out that Shamir was the man who, in a previous term as prime minister, in 1983 and 1984, helped restore Israeli-American relations after the deterioration caused by the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

“Shamir’s greatest achievement in his previous term was the November, 1983, agreement on strategic cooperation” with the United States, political adviser Yossi Achimeir said. And he and Shamir both said that strengthening that agreement will be a key goal of his trip.