Won’t Try to Impose a Peace Plan on Israel, Reagan Says

President Reagan, facing Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir’s frosty dismissal of key segments of the latest U.S. Middle East peace initiative, reaffirmed American support for Israel’s security Tuesday and promised that Washington will never try to impose a peace settlement on the Jerusalem government.

“When it comes to Israel, the United States is not a bargainer or a broker,” Reagan told the United Jewish Appeal’s Prime Minister’s Club. “The United States is a friend and an ally.”

Reagan’s comments can be expected to make it even more difficult for Secretary of State George P. Shultz to convince already skeptical Arab leaders that the U.S. proposal is balanced and evenhanded. At the same time, the conciliatory rhetoric seemed to do nothing to melt Shamir’s firm objections to the plan.

Shultz and Shamir met for 2 1/2 hours over a blueberry pancake breakfast at Shultz’s suburban Maryland home and conferred for another 90 minutes at the State Department. When the meetings ended, the two men seemed to be in complete agreement on only two points--Shultz’s wife, Helena, makes tasty flapjacks and the United States would continue its effort to find a way to bring Israel and its Arab neighbors to the bargaining table.

“We have not found any way to bridge all of the differences,” Shultz said after the meeting. With Shamir at his side, Shultz added: “We will work to deal with the underlying problems.”

Shamir said that Israel is ready for peace negotiations but “we don’t see any positive role for an international conference.” A senior Israeli official said later that Shamir specifically objects to Shultz’s plan for an international forum that would provide a continuing backdrop for Arab-Israeli talks but would have no power either to order or veto a solution.

Shultz carefully crafted the conference idea as a split-the-difference compromise between Shamir, who long has opposed any sort of international forum, and Jordan’s King Hussein, who has said that he will enter peace talks with Israel only under suitable international auspices. Hussein, joined by Syrian President Hafez Assad, has called for a conference whose delegates would have real power to take action.

Avi Pazner, Shamir’s top press adviser, said the prime minister considers conference plans, including Shultz’s, to be a trap to pressure Israel to yield territories it occupies.

“What does this insistence on an international conference indicate to us?” Pazner asked. “For King Hussein, this is not a question of forum, this is a question of substance. This is the tool by which he hopes he can extract concessions that otherwise Israel, in free, direct negotiations like we advocate, would be unwilling to give.”

Reagan, who meets Shamir today, tried but apparently failed to reassure the Israeli leader.

He said that the United States will not “acquiesce in any effort to ‘gang up’ on Israel” and added, “Peace will not be imposed by us or by anybody else.”

Neither Reagan nor Shultz even mentioned in public the 3-month-old Palestinian uprising in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Richard Schifter, the State Department’s human rights chief, attended part of the Shultz-Shamir meeting but, according to department spokesman Charles Redman, participated only in the discussion of the plight of Soviet Jews, not of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.

In advance of the Shamir visit, many of Israel’s traditional backers, both in Congress and the American Jewish community, expressed support for Shultz’s peace initiative and vowed to help the Administration persuade Shamir to go along. But they seem to have been no more successful than Shultz in gaining Shamir’s approval.

Shamir met for about an hour with Senate leaders Tuesday. An aide to Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), the majority leader, said that the session was primarily intended to give the senators a chance to listen to Shamir’s opinions rather than attempting to change them.

When Shultz presented his plan to the leaders of Israel, Jordan, Syria and Egypt early this month, he called on them to give him a yes-or-no answer within 10 days, stressing the deadline to emphasize the urgency. But on Tuesday, 11 days after he unveiled the plan, Shultz had received no official replies. Shamir said he will be unable to answer until he returns to Israel and meets with the Cabinet on the subject March 27.

The policy-making Inner Cabinet is evenly split on the Shultz plan, with Shamir’s Likud Bloc opposing it and the Labor Alignment of Foreign Minister Shimon Peres favoring it. The major parties have equal representation in the Inner Cabinet and, unless Shamir changes his mind, there is almost no chance that the full Cabinet will approve the U.S. proposal.

Shultz had hoped to get negotiations started by mid-April, but that now seems impossible. Nevertheless, Shultz said he will continue his mediation effort.

“What we have proposed is the only really operative proposal around,” Shultz said. “We feel it is very important to get some results in that . . . and as long as there is any chance at all of getting some place, we’re going to keep working on it.”

Pazner said Shamir agrees that “talks will have to go on beyond this visit.”

It was not clear just what purpose additional talks would serve. Shultz has said that his plan is so carefully balanced between the Arab and Israeli positions that it cannot be changed. So, unless Shamir reverses his position, the Shultz plan seems doomed to failure even if the Arab parties were to accept it, which they have not done either.