THE MIDDLE EAST: Points of Conflict

• Share

Gathering his experts about him, Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden got set to visit the U.S. this week. The major problem on his agenda was finding Anglo-American agreement on the Middle East where, warned Eden, "a universal explosion could easily be touched off."

Before leaving England, Eden sought to quell the domestic discontent with his leadership: "I want everyone to understand this," he told a Tory audience. "This country is not on its way down, and this government is not on its way out." But most of his hours were spent on preparing the diplomatic briefs he will present in Washington. His agenda, and the points of conflict:

Soviet Infiltration. Communist incursion can be halted only if the Arabs resist it. But they cannot be made to recognize that Russia is their enemy because they are obsessed with their enmity for Israel. Therefore, everything depends on settlement of the Israel-Arab dispute.

Baghdad Pact. Eden will urge the U.S. to join. He hopes thus to bring the U.S., its power, its money and its prestige fully into the Middle East, and at Britain's side. The U.S. is for the pact, but in view of the Arabs' mixed reaction to it, doesn't believe the U.S. should get involved now.

Egypt. Britain has not abandoned hope for Nasser, despite his purchase of Soviet arms. Britain proposes to give him all the assistance he needs, both military and economic, but with a time limit of say six months. Then, the British argue, Nasser should feel reasonably secure, might be willing to join the Baghdad pact. More important, he might sit down at a negotiating table with Israel.

Buraimi Oasis. A small but prickly thorn, the ownership of this sun-scorched cluster of eight scrubby villages (with oil riches below), has resulted in border scraps between Saudi Arabia and two British-protected sheikdoms. The British charge bitterly that the Saudis offered an $84 million bribe to one of the Buraimi chieftains. The British want the U.S. to restrain the Saudis, who have got rich quick through a yearly income of $250 million in royalties from the U.S. oil company Aramco. The State Department says that the U.S. cannot tell Saudi Arabia what to do.

"We shall not agree about everything," Eden comfortably told a TV audience. "Free countries never do. Nor do free men, often enough. But I believe that out of that meeting can come, perhaps, a message of hope and guidance to the world." If there was to be hope found, or guidance given, the U.S. and Britain would have to intervene forcefully in the Israel-Arab situation. To hear both impassioned sides tell it (see below), the Arabs and the Jews are preparing for, or at least resigned to war. Part, but not all, of this noise is designed for outside effect, to establish bargaining positions. But the two sides are also so deeply committed emotionally that it will take great and firm statesmanship to create a peace. The big question is whether either Eden or Eisenhower is really prepared to stand firm and stay firm.

Any solution to the Arab-Israel quarrel finally turns on getting agreed borders. The British propose a settlement based on the lines drawn by the 1947 U.N. partition plan, which among other things gave Galilee to the Arabs. But the Arab nations defied that settlement by going to war, lost the war, and lost Galilee.