Arafat Stirs New U.S. Interest in Peace Efforts

For the first time in more than a decade, cautious U.S. interest in a new Middle East peace effort has been sparked after Palestine Liberation Organization chief Yasser Arafat accepted Israel’s existence and renounced terrorism, American officials indicated Thursday.

Israel has rejected outright Arafat’s so-called Stockholm declaration, issued Wednesday after a meeting in the Swedish capital between Arafat and five prominent American Jews. At the same time, radical Palestinians are condemning it.

But some State Department officials already predict that a Mideast peace initiative will be high on the foreign policy agenda of the incoming Bush Administration.

“It is obvious that many in the Palestinian community are grappling with the issues of terrorism and the role of U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338 and are re-examining and abandoning the earlier dogmas of armed struggle and total victory,” Assistant Secretary of State Richard W. Murphy said Thursday.

Both Resolution 242, adopted in 1967 after the Six-Day War, and 338, passed after the 1973 Middle East War, implicitly recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Speaking at a conference held to mark the first anniversary of the Palestinian uprising in Israel’s occupied territories, Murphy added: “Increasingly, Palestinians are thrashing out the complexities of moving toward accommodation with Israel.”

In a signal that the final U.S. verdict will await Arafat’s address to a special meeting in Switzerland of the U.N. General Assembly, Murphy said: “Will Arafat’s speech next week in Geneva contribute to these changes? We will be listening attentively.”

At his news conference Thursday night, President Reagan acknowledged that “we’ve been watching very closely and, for example, we thought that over the last few days there’s been a statement that came out of that meeting in Sweden that appeared to be clear-cut and not with the things around the edge that then defuse what seemed to be a pledge.”

The President indicated, however, that Arafat’s news conference held after the two-day Stockholm meeting had led to U.S. doubts.

“But we had to wait until his press conference, and I have to say that, again, he has left openings for himself where he can deny that he meant this or meant that, that sounded so clear cut,” the President said.

“It’s up to him. We are willing to meet with him and talk with him, and I am sure the Israelis would be, when once and for all it is clear cut that he is ready to recognize Israel’s right to be a nation.”

The issue has been pivotal to U.S.-PLO relations since 1974, when President Richard M. Nixon’s secretary of state, Henry A. Kissinger, told Israel that the United States would not deal with the PLO until it recognized Israel’s right to exist.

‘Distinct Improvement’

Middle East analysts say the United States soon may be in a corner.

The Stockholm declaration “is a distinct improvement on the PLO’s statement in Algiers last month. It’s getting to the point that the next Administration may find it increasingly difficult to reject the PLO position,” said Geoffrey Kemp, senior director of Middle East affairs at the National Security Council in 1981-84 and a foreign policy consultant to George Bush’s presidential campaign.

The Palestine National Council, the PLO’s parliament-in-exile, last month in Algiers declared an independent Palestinian state and appeared to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Kemp added that “despite the Shultz snub of Arafat on the visa matter, it looks as if Arafat’s sticking to a straight course on this subject. . . .”

Secretary of State George P. Shultz last month vetoed a visa for Arafat to speak to the United Nations in New York, which led to the change of venue on the Palestinian debate to Geneva. The State Department also contended that the Palestinian resolutions on Israel and terrorism were ambiguous.

“If Arafat further clarifies what he said in Stockholm, the U.S. is absolutely obliged to send somebody to talk to a representative of the PLO,” said Judith Kipper, a Mideast specialist at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

A ranking U.S. official conceded Thursday that Shultz had seen a draft of the Stockholm declaration two weeks ago. He asserted that it fell short of U.S. conditions.

“With respect to the formulation on (resolutions) 242 and 338, it is much clearer than the statement in Algiers. . . ,” this official said. “At the same time, it is coupled with the proposition of an independent Palestinian state. This is a precondition we cannot accept.”