U.S. Seeks Syria’s Help in Mideast

The Times’ stand (editorial, “The War of False Analogies,” Sept. 11) that a broad conference on the Middle East should not be mounted now is wrong. In a fractious area, U.S.-led diplomacy could be successful if objectives were redefined. We proved that enlightened diplomacy could work in southern Africa where the unlikely parties--South Africa and Cuba--came to terms over Angola and Namibia.

Successful diplomacy in the Middle East would entail aligning the United States with the “land for peace movement” in Israel, the Palestine independence effort and republican forces in Arabia.

A broad conference now--with Saddam Hussein cornered and with the U.N. acting in concert--could settle major Middle East conflicts once and for all if the U.S. acted forthrightly. Syria would have little motive for its costly occupation of Lebanon if the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights were returned. With an independent Palestine (already more than 100 countries have recognized its provisional government), much Middle Eastern tension would abate.

The Times’ argument that Israeli territorial occupations have a different history than Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait is interesting, but should not obstruct the present diplomatic opportunity: a general settlement in the region ending Iraqi, Israeli and Syrian occupations.

The emir of Kuwait could be reinstated as spiritual leader, but political authority should be democratized. Iraq’s attack was not “unprovoked.” In June, the emir tried to have Saddam Hussein assassinated.

The U.S. should return to its founding principles of republicanism and self-determination and use its power and leadership constructively in the Middle East. The present course will lead to disaster.

DONALD W. BRAY

Professor of Political Science

Cal State Los Angeles