Newspaper Page Text
f
that
slowed
by David I.andan
JERUSALEM (JTA)—The
Cabinet decided by majority vote
thii week to extend the life of Elon
Moreh for at least another five
weeks, the estimated time required
to complete construction of a new
settlement at Djebil Kebir six miles
away. It was the second extension
granted by the Cabinet since the
Supreme Court ruled last October
22 that Elon Moreh was built
illegally on seized Arab lands and
must be removed in 30 days.
The first extension expired Jan.
3. Cabinet Secretary A rye Naor
read a Cabinet statement that
blamed ‘'regretfully'' the difficult
topographical conditions at the
new site and recent heavy raips
down wsik. It
he had voted for the original six-
✓ week extension last month. “In my
opinion, that was time enough,”
Tamir said.
Deputy Premier Simcha
Ehrlich, leader of the Liberal
Party, supported the extension but
said his approval was conditional
on formal assurances from, the
settlers that they will leave Elon
Moreh peacefully. Amnon
Rubinstein, leader . of'the
opposition Shai faction,
denounced the Cabinet’s decision.
“There is apparently no limit to the'
government’s readiness to demean
itself and kowtow to the Gush
Emunim,” he said. Similar
comments were made by Labor
Alignment spokesmen.
the Cabinet acted vti its own
initiative, in affect rejecting the
tractors and ot>er- heavy
equipment to DjeMl Kebir, {he
deadline last Thursday could not
be met.
Nevertheless, the three
Democratic Movement ministers
voted against the second
extension. Justice Minister
Shmuel Tamir told reporters that
he hoped to avoid a clash between
the militant Gush Emunim settlers
and the army and for that reason
tted *0
Premier Menachetn Begin, that it
was not reasonable to extend the
deadline. He said the extension
would be impossible to defend in
court should the owners of the
affected land decide to bring new
legal action. Therefore, Zamir
questioned the wisdom and
propriety of applying to the
Supreme Court for an extension of
the long-passed time limit.
Technically, that limit was
complied with when several
parcels of land were returned last
month to Arab villagers wjio had
filed the original complaint. The
government has acknowledged
that the entire settlement must be
removed since it has been
established for “security” reasons
that the high court found not to
exist.
Work at Djebil Kebir, which is
located on State-owned land,
began only three weeks ago after
the Elon Moreh settlers indicated
that they would leave peacefully.
Subsequently they made their
compliance contingent on the
adoption of new legislation to
change the legal status of Jewish
settlements on the West Bank in a
way that would bar future court
mmSwim
Any such measure is almost
Certain to be defeated in the
Knesset and is therefore
unacceptable to the government. A
violent Qpnfrontation between the
settlers and the army is still
possible. Begin apparently is
banking on the assurance by
National Religious Party right
winger HaimrDruckman that the
Gush Emunim leadership has
promised that the Elon Moreh
settlers would transfer peacefully
to Djebil Kebir.
Atlanta, Georgia, Friday, January 4,19M
\ cr
o
c
r\j
CE
r\i
X tr
to
xj
-i •*
.
X
—i
c
o
O 1X1
2
2 2
O LU
—> >
_
2 <
H
3
<
2
2
X o
2
LU h-.
.—i
3C. LL
O
m
1X1 _1
■—.
I o
O
Five more weeks
Israel’s Cabinet git
Israeli school children rally near a replica of the Liberty Bell in
Jerusalem recently, expressing their support for the U.S. hostages
being held by Iranians at the American Embassy in Teheran.
The youngsters carried banners and shouted slogans—some of
the placards comparing the seizure of the embassy to the hijacking
of an Air France jetliner three years ago.
Is Israel
real strategic asset or not?
' ? ■ "•
by Joseph Poiakoff
Th. AOI S«tt«ta
WASHINGTON (JTA)—Contrasting
accounts are being told of Defense Secretary
Harold Brown’s views towards Israel’s
usefulness in the Pentagon's strategy and his
outlook for an American military presence
in the Middle East. The varied accounts
i followed a luncheon- meeting at the
Pentagon Dec. 14 with Brown and 15
representatives of Jewish communal
organizations in their personal capacities.
The discussion was not off the record,
although private, with the usual leakage
occurring.
A similar meeting with Brown was held 18
months ago and some comparisons with the
recent session were pointed out by
participants. The major difference is that in
this instance the Iranian-American crisis
and its implications for the U.S. and Israel
pervaded the talk.
Among those Who had attended both were
Rabbi Alexander Schindler, Max
Kampelman, Richard Maass, Morris
Amitay, Hyman Bookbinder,' Irwin Field,
Richard Shifter, Ben Epstein, Frank
Lautenberg,’ Paul Berger and Alfred Motes.
One generalized account of Brown's
presentations was on the following lines:
Iran is falling apart and a leftist regime may
take over with ominous significance for the
oil sheikhdoms and Arab governments
friendly to the U.S. In these circumstances,
the U.S. must proceed with new urgency for
a solution to the Palestine problem because
as long as this problem' percolates
“moderate” Arabs are in danger.
The U.S., according to this account, can't
use Israel's Sinai bases which are to be
turned over to Egypt in 1981 because that
move would jeopardize President Anwar
Sadat's safety. Neither can the U.S. consider
Israel as a strategic asset except in the most
dire circumstances. The impression Brown
gave was that Israel must adapt itself to
President Carter's formula because in
essence the U.S. support ( of Israel is
fundamentally moral, not strategic.
When apprised of this account, some
other participants expressed surprise. One
found it “an unjustified, alarmist reactiofl*
and that “an alarmist position is not
warranted. There isn’t the slightest basis for
it.” Brown did not show any reluctance,
another- group said, to assert Israel’s
importance to the U.S., a position he did not
take 18 months ago.
Those participants' account, also
generalized, differed in ptany respects from
the one they criticized. They stressed Brbwn
said there is no question Israel is a strategic
asset to the U.S. They quoted him as saying
“we start frotn that premise“1hat lsratl.jp
great strategic alset.” While 18 months ago', •
Brown would not concede Israel's strategic
importance, he now se^s Israel differently.
Sadat, Brown reportedly said, is unwilling
to grant bne rights in the Sinai to any
foreign power. Saudi Arabia requires a
settlement of the Palestinian question.
However, Brown did not imply failure thus
far to involve the Palestinian Arabs in thp
peace process is Israel's fault. In this context.
he pointed to Jordan's refusal to enter the
autonomy talks with the U.S., Egypt and
Israel. :
When the two accounts were broached to
another source, he responded that both
accounts could be drawn from the
discussion. Brown did speak out on the need
to solve the Palestinian issue that troubles
Saudi Arabia particularly. When asked
about Israel’s strategic place. Brown said
“grudgingly*.that Israel has some strategic
vahie. This source observed Brown is “not a
grdqt believer” in' Israel's strategic
j-
The source added the Carter
Administration b facing “a helluva lot of
criticism” on its Middle East policy and it is
wondering what to do. The Defense
Department’s current 'mission in Saudi
Arabia (and three other countries) is to ask
the Saudis “what do you want us to do.”
Summing up, the source said “keep in mind
that Brown called thit meeting. You figure it
out from there.”