Shamir Promises Written Accounts of Iran Arms Ties

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir promised congressional leaders Wednesday that his government will provide in writing a full account of its involvement in the Iran- contra affair in exchange for a promise by the lawmakers not to attempt to question any Israelis in person during the planned Senate and House investigations.

Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii), chairman of the special Senate committee that will investigate the controversy, said Shamir agreed to prepare as soon as possible a detailed chronology of all financial transactions and of all contacts between Americans and Israelis involved in the sale of U.S. arms to Iran or the diversion of profits to Nicaraguan rebels.

In addition, Inouye said, Israel will provide written answers to questions prepared jointly by his committee and the House panel headed by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.). He said that the questions will be forwarded to Jerusalem in about two weeks.

Although the procedure does not appear to go far beyond what Israel earlier had offered to do, Inouye and Hamilton said they are satisfied.

‘Expedite Our Investigations’

“I think it will expedite our investigations and allow us to get the information we want,” Hamilton said. “If it produces the facts that we want, we will be satisfied.”

The final details were hammered out during a 45-minute meeting between Shamir, in the second day of a four-day Washington visit, and Democratic and Republican congressional leaders. Earlier in the day, Shamir promised President Reagan that Israel would cooperate with the investigations of independent counsel Lawrence E. Walsh and the presidential commission headed by former Sen. John Tower (R-Tex.), which is examining the National Security Council, as well as with the congressional panels.

Inouye said that all contacts would be government to government, meaning that the lawmakers will submit their questions to the State Department, which will forward them to Israel.

Will Allow Follow-up

Although there is no provision for cross-examination and there would be no possibility of perjury penalties in the event of untruthful replies, Inouye said that Shamir agreed to provide “clarifications” if the Israeli answers raise new questions. The lawmaker said that some of the Israeli information would be made public but that some probably would be kept secret.

Inouye said that the committees would not attempt to question in person any Israeli officials or agents. He said it is possible, although unlikely, that Israeli citizens who have no connection with the government might be called as witnesses.

Israel had said earlier that it was willing to provide some information but that it would not permit any questions which seemed to infringe on its sovereignty. The congressional leaders decided not to challenge that attitude.

“We don’t issue subpoenas to the prime minister of Israel or put him under oath,” Inouye said.

House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.) said: “We will respect their sovereignty and we will respect their sensitivities. They will respect our need for the information.”

Issue Dominates Visit

The Iran affair, in which Israel played a major role, dominated Shamir’s first visit to Washington since regaining the prime minister’s office last October. He had previously served in 1983 and 1984. Officials on both sides had said earlier that it would not be a focus of discussions during his visit.

In brief public statements after their White House meeting, Reagan and Shamir sought to minimize the importance of the controversy. Reagan said that he and the prime minister discussed Iran and “agreed on the importance of looking to the future instead of dwelling on the past.”

Shamir, in an oblique reference to the most severe crisis of the Reagan presidency, told the President: “America, under your leadership, stands tall and upright despite transient difficulties.”

Nevertheless, a senior Administration official said that Reagan and Secretary of State George P. Shultz urged Israel’s cooperation “on the subject of Iran (investigations) with our authorities. And this has been pledged.”

Agreement Draws Praise

The fact that the American side brought up Israel’s role in the investigations would seem to indicate that the Administration was concerned that Shamir’s government might be less than candid. However, Administration officials joined the congressional leaders in praising Shamir’s agreement to provide written information.

Reagan and Shamir stressed the close relationship between the two countries on most global issues. However, despite broad general agreement on key matters like the Middle East peace process and the plight of Soviet Jews, there were noticeable differences in approach.

For instance, both Reagan and Shamir expressed concern about Soviet Jews. But Shamir called for efforts to persuade Moscow “to let all our people return to their ancient homeland, the land of Israel.” The United States believes that emigrating Soviet Jews should be allowed to settle anywhere they are welcome, including the United States.