U.S. Won’t Send Envoy to Review Shamir’s Vote Plan

The Bush Administration, stung by criticism that it was interfering in internal Israeli politics, reversed course Friday and decided not to send a special envoy to Jerusalem to question Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir’s agreement to add tough restrictions to his own plan for Palestinian elections.

Officials traveling with President Bush on his trip across Europe said they are now satisfied with Shamir’s assurances that the election plan remains intact--despite the prime minister’s decision, under pressure from the right wing of his Likud Party, to impose conditions that a senior U.S. official had called a “deal-breaker.”

Government Efforts Cited

“We believe that it will be useful at some point to confer with the Israeli government,” a senior official said Friday. “However, given Prime Minister Shamir’s statements this week and the efforts of the Israeli government to reaffirm its initiative, we believe it is not necessary to send someone right now.”

“It is now clear that the Likud decisions do not bind the national unity government and the national unity government appears to be working together behind the proposal,” the official said. “. . . Things are looking better.”

Shamir said July 5 that he backs changes in the election plan demanded by a Likud faction led by Trade Minister Ariel Sharon. But after the centrist Labor Party threatened to pull out of Israel’s coalition government, Shamir said his pledge to the party did not bind the government.

The prime minister had promised Likud’s central committee that no election would be held in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip until the 19-month-old Palestinian uprising ends; that Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, already annexed by Israel, would be excluded from the proposed balloting, and that Israel would never consider yielding control over the occupied territories.

Loud, Public Complaints

Shamir complained loudly and publicly after Secretary of State James A. Baker III announced in Warsaw on Monday that he would send a special envoy to Jerusalem to determine the status of the election proposal and to discuss ways to win Palestinian acceptance of it. Shamir made it clear that he considered Baker’s plan to be an insult.

Hours before the traveling White House announced cancellation of the envoy plan, Shamir told visiting American Jewish fund-raisers in Jerusalem that the U.S. government had changed its mind. According to the British news agency Reuters, he said: “The fact that this State Department delegation is not coming does not change anything. . . . The Americans know what we want, what our positions are, and we know theirs.”

The fuss over the special envoy underlined a growing disagreement between Washington and Jerusalem over the status of the Palestine Liberation Organization. The Shamir government, which considers the PLO to be nothing but a terrorist band, refuses to consider any sort of role for it in the Middle East peace process.

In contrast, the Bush Administration is trying to persuade the PLO to drop its opposition to the Israeli election plan. U.S. officials say there is little chance that Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip would agree to run--or even vote--in the proposed election without at least the tacit approval of the PLO.

Officials close to Baker say that he was frustrated by Shamir’s promises to Likud on July 5.

An official familiar with Baker’s thinking said the conditions would make it far more difficult to secure Palestinian participation in the election. The official said that if Israel persists in such “deal-breaker” restrictions, the United States might abandon the Israeli plan and turn, instead, to an Arab-backed proposal for an international peace conference.

Baker and officials close to him have been almost alone in the Bush Administration in complaining about Israeli policy. President Bush has not joined in the criticism.

A State Department official in Washington insisted that there is no disagreement between Baker and the White House over policy toward Israel. But the official said Baker may be more sensitive to the impact of Israeli actions on Palestinian opinion than some other Administration officials.

“He’s pretty far out in front in terms of trying to get the Palestinians to go along,” the official said. “Maybe that makes him a little bit more concerned about making sure the base (of the elections proposal) remains firm.”

U.S. officials in Paris said Baker’s earlier criticism of the Likud policy had already produced the intended result when Shamir said the party view does not bind the government. These officials said the Administration wants to see how things work out for a while before trying to force the issue.

“It’s important to let that process develop on its own before we get involved,” one official said.

Another official said sending an envoy “could turn into a political issue in Israel.”

McManus reported from Paris and Kempster from Washington.