U.S. Envoy Ends Israel Talks; No Progress Seen on Peace Moves

U.S. envoy Charles Hill concluded three days of meetings with top Israeli officials here Wednesday without any apparent progress in resolving differences among his hosts over a possible international Middle East peace conference.

However, according to a spokesman for Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, the U.S. official did discuss a possible visit to the region this fall by Secretary of State George P. Shultz in order to provide new impetus to the peace process.

“It’s not sure yet; there are no dates for it,” commented Shamir spokesman Yossi Achimier. “But there are great possibilities that such a visit will take place, and I guess it could take place in a few weeks.”

In Washington, State Department spokesman Charles Redman said “there are no plans at this time” for a Shultz visit to the Middle East.

“The secretary has always said that he’s prepared to go to the region if there’s something useful to do,” Redman said. But he said there was “nothing new” as a result of Hill’s trip to Jerusalem.

Shultz plans to spend most of the rest of this month on vacation. He is scheduled to meet Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze on Sept. 15 to discuss arms control and a possible U.S.-Soviet summit meeting, and U.S. officials say he will devote the first two weeks of September to preparations for that meeting. Later in September, Shultz plans to attend the opening session of the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

Presumably, Shultz could visit the Middle East in October, but U.S. officials say his first priority for that period is to follow up on his talks with Shevardnadze.

Shamir and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, who are the principal partners in Israel’s “national unity” coalition government, are at odds on the conference proposal. Both would prefer direct peace talks with Jordan, but Peres accepts King Hussein’s opposition to talks without some sort of international “umbrella” to protect him from charges of selling out the Arab cause. Shamir is adamantly opposed to an international conference, arguing that it would only marshall forces against Israel and put it on the defensive.

One American diplomatic source here suggested that Shamir’s office was leaking news of a possible visit in order to make it appear that he has “twisted Shultz around” to his views against an international conference.

The United States, which originally opposed any conference giving the Soviet Union a more important voice in the region, has gradually altered its view over the last year. American officials played a key role in brokering what proponents call a breakthrough agreement, reached at a secret London meeting last April between Hussein and Peres, which sets out ground rules for an international conference.

Now, however, there is concern that the progress made to date is threatened by the political deadlock within Israel. So Shultz sent his executive assistant, Hill, to sound out the two sides. Hill is said to have particularly good contacts with Shamir and his aides, who reportedly distrust Washington’s ambassador to Israel, Thomas R. Pickering, as pro-Peres.

Hill arrived in Israel last weekend and held meetings with Shamir on Monday and Peres on Tuesday. On Wednesday he met Shamir for a second time.

Achimier said that Shamir reiterated his opposition to an international conference and discussed alternative ideas.

“After Hill’s talks, it is absolutely and finally clear to the State Department that it will not pass,” the spokesman commented on the conference. “Shamir is against the idea of an international conference, and he will not make any compromise around it.”

Shamir has advocated a “mini-conference” involving Israel, Jordan, Egypt and the United States, an idea that both Jordan and Egypt have rejected. But Achimier said one option discussed with Hill on Wednesday was an initiative by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to host a mini-peace conference.

A source close to Peres, however, insisted that “the Americans are fully aware of the major progress already made, and that it would be a major mistake to jeopardize this progress. The process must go on, and for the Jordanians the international conference is the only way.”

This source said that as a result of Hill’s visit, “the American goal will be to find other definitions that will satisfy Shamir but that won’t cause the Jordanians to say they can’t move with that process.”

Officials on both sides of the debate here said it was significant that in an Israel radio interview Wednesday morning, Peres spoke about the peace process but specifically refrained from mentioning an “international” conference.

“You can do the same thing with a different name,” said one source.

Times staff writer Norman Kempster, in Washington, contributed to this article.