Israel Must Give Land for Peace, Shultz Warns

In his valedictory on the Middle East peace process, Secretary of State George P. Shultz renewed U.S. support for Israel’s security but warned that there can be no peace unless Israel ends two decades of military occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.

Writing on his last full day in office, Shultz said that the new U.S. dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization, which he initiated last month, marks no change in the U.S. “commitment to Israel.” But he made it clear that there are wide gaps between the American and Israeli approaches to a Middle East settlement.

In a two-page letter to California Rep. Mel Levine (D-Santa Monica), Shultz provided a concise summary of current U.S. policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict. It forms the starting point for the Bush Administration’s consideration of the issue.

Reluctant to Change

President Bush and Secretary of State James A. Baker III, of course, can change the policy. But earlier administrations have been reluctant to make radical changes in previously stated positions on the Middle East because the region is so sensitive, both diplomatically and politically.

For instance, in 1975, then Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger promised Israel that the United States would not have any dealings with the PLO until it recognized Israel’s right to exist and met some other conditions. At the time, Kissinger apparently thought that he had outlined the functional equivalent of forever. But late last year, when PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat accepted Kissinger’s terms at a Geneva press conference, Shultz said that the United States was honor bound to begin substantive talks with the PLO.

Levine, a staunch supporter of Israel, said that he asked Shultz for the summary because he was concerned that the opening of the dialogue with the PLO had created “some unrealistic assumptions and expectations.”

In the Jan. 19 letter, Shultz minimized the importance of the U.S.-PLO talks, reassuring Israel and its supporters in Congress that the dialogue did not erode Washington’s longtime opposition to the creation of an independent Palestinian state. But he was unyielding in his assertion that Israel must withdraw from occupied territory, including the Golan Heights that Israel formally annexed in 1981.

“I feel that having such a reaffirmation of policy from Shultz, who is the one who opened the dialogue (with the PLO), is a very useful message to all the parties in the region,” Levine said in a telephone interview.

Shultz said that the PLO talks “represent no change in our assessment of what is required to bring about negotiations leading to a comprehensive settlement.”

But he added: “There must be withdrawal by Israel from occupied territories, in a manner consistent with the necessities of security.”

No Division of Jerusalem

He said that future negotiations must take place to determine the extent of the Israeli withdrawal from territories captured during the Arab-Israeli War in 1967 and to fix new borders. He said that it is “out of the question” to expect Israel to return entirely to pre-1967 boundaries and that Jerusalem must not be divided again, as it was before 1967.

“The only way in which Palestinian rights can be realized and at the same time Israeli security ensured is through direct negotiations, launched--if necessary--through a properly structured international conference,” Shultz said.

He also said that Washington wants “a comprehensive settlement” that would end all aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict at the same time. That approach is generally endorsed by the Arab parties but has been rejected as unrealistic by Israel. The Israelis, asserting that it never will be possible to reach agreement with all of the Arabs simultaneously, prefer a step-by-step strategy of negotiating peace treaties with one Arab state at a time, the same technique that produced the Israel-Egypt treaty in 1979.

“Palestinian political rights must be recognized and addressed,” Shultz said. “The answer is not in an independent Palestinian state, which the United States does not support. The answer is not in Israeli annexation or continued control of the territories.”

Shultz said that Israel’s right to exist in secure and recognized borders “is not negotiable.” And he said that a continuation of the present level of animosity and distrust between Arabs and Israelis “is not tenable.”

He also warned the PLO--which renounced terrorism as part of the deal that produced the dialogue with the United States--that “terrorism must not only be renounced; it must be stopped--period. . . . We continue to believe that performance counts and we will be watching PLO activities and statements carefully.”