Israeli-Palestinian Deal Still Far, U.S. Is Told

Israeli and Palestinian leaders told Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on Wednesday that they are far from reaching a deal to settle their decades-old conflict but promised to attend a summit if President Clinton calls one.

The ambiguous end to Albright’s third trip to the Middle East in a month seemed to rule out the sort of early July extravaganza that Clinton clearly wants--and Albright was sent to the region to set up. But it left open the possibility of a high-stakes meeting involving the three leaders later in the year.

By agreeing to attend a summit if it is called, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat put unexpected pressure on Clinton. The U.S. president has sought to play the role of mediator but clearly has been uncomfortable with suggestions that he could or should dictate an outcome.

Israelis and Palestinians acknowledged that they are so far apart on key issues that an early summit would run a substantial risk of failure. But Barak said it is time to go ahead anyway, while Arafat hung back.

A senior State Department official here said Clinton will not convene a summit that is likely to fail. The official said the president will weigh the extent of disagreements, whether his intervention will close the gaps and whether the disputes can be settled any other way.

In Washington, Clinton told a news conference that he hadn’t made a decision yet.

“I think that [with] some foreign policy problems, the answer is to kick the can down the road and wait for them to get better and hope time takes care of them. Some have to be decided sooner or later, and sooner is better than later,” he said. “My own instinct is that the cluster of problems here would be better off being resolved sooner rather than later.”

During his meeting Wednesday with Albright, Arafat said there is little chance of a successful summit now because lower-level negotiators have not yet bridged the gaps between the two sides, according to senior Palestinian officials.

Nabil Shaath, a key Arafat advisor, said the Palestinians want a summit--but not now.

“We trust that President Clinton will decide on a summit when the negotiators have made sufficient progress,” Shaath told reporters. He said that the lower-level negotiators, meeting in Washington and elsewhere with a minimum of fanfare, have made progress and that the talks should be allowed to continue without the pressure of an early summit date.

In contrast, Barak said he is ready to go to a summit at once despite the continuing deadlock on such emotional issues as the future of Jerusalem, Palestinian statehood and refugees, and Israeli settlements. The Israeli leader said those disputes can only be settled at the highest level, implying that additional talks at lower levels will be futile.

“Substantial negotiation will begin only if and when there will be a summit meeting,” Barak told a joint news conference with Albright.

Clinton envisions a summit, leading to a historic Israeli-Palestinian peace accord, as the highlight of his foreign policy legacy. But the outcome of Albright’s diplomacy leaves him with a stark choice: He can try to bring Barak and Arafat together under one roof and hold them there until they either reach agreement or break off talks, perhaps indefinitely. As an alternative, he can hold back until an agreement seems more likely.

In 1978, President Carter adopted the first strategy when he brought Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to Camp David and, in effect, refused to let them go home until they reached an agreement. The conference lasted 11 days and ended in success, although it took almost a year of additional diplomacy to turn the agreement in principle into a peace treaty between the two longtime enemies.

But few other presidents have chanced rolling the dice in that way.

For Barak, the gamble on a summit is even more daring. The strategy is controversial among the Israeli public; even some of his own Cabinet members question his strategy.

Foreign Minister David Levy suggested in a television interview Tuesday night that the prime minister had not demanded sufficient concessions from the Palestinians to offset Barak’s plan to give up most of the West Bank to a future Palestinian state.

In a joint news conference with Albright on Wednesday, Levy said it was a mistake to ignore “the stubbornness, the extremism of the other side.” He added, “Israel is not here to surrender.”

Asked about Levy’s comments, Barak called the foreign minister “my best political colleague and my best diplomatic partner,” despite the well-documented friction between them. But Barak insisted that he will only negotiate an agreement “that will strengthen Israel.”

Levy joins Interior Minister Natan Sharansky and Labor Minister Eli Yishai--politicians who control two enormous blocs of voters--in opposing Barak’s approach to a deal with the Palestinians.

Arafat has threatened to declare an independent state in September regardless of where the peace talks stand. Israel has said it would annex parts of the West Bank in retaliation for such a declaration.

“And then things will deteriorate rapidly with an ending that cannot be predicted,” said Barak’s chief security advisor, Danny Yatom. “I have no doubt that we will gain the upper hand as things deteriorate, but I also have no doubt that the price will be heavy.”

A large group of Jewish settlers, including many children, from the Gaza Strip demonstrated outside Albright’s hotel Tuesday night. They were protesting any summit and reports that Barak is prepared to evacuate a number of settlers from territory that might go to the Palestinians.

Times staff writer Tracy Wilkinson contributed to this report.