MIDDLE EAST: Whose Nerves Are Stronger?

• Share

(2 of 2)

Nobody was angrier about the Israeli Cabinet's latest action than Jimmy Carter. In his Kansas City news conference late last week, the President declared with accuracy: "There has never been any doubt in my mind, nor President Sadat's, nor Premier Begin's, that one of the premises for the Camp David negotiations was a comprehensive peace settlement." In fact, the President continued, Begin himself had said that he did not seek merely a separate peace treaty. But when the latest draft of the tentative agreement was referred to the governments back home, said Carter, "sometimes the work that has been done is partially undone."

The linkage is particularly important to Sadat, who is still trying to convince the moderate Arab states, and especially Saudi Arabia, that he is not selling out the Arab cause but is working for an overall settlement. Sadat has been disappointed that the Saudis, whose economic support is crucial to Egypt, have not publicly endorsed the Camp David accords. In truth they have been giving him some behind-the-scenes help. At a pan-Arab summit conference in Baghdad, which was convened by Iraq to counter the peace initiative, Saudi Crown Prince Fahd told the other delegates: "An attack on Sadat or Egypt will be considered an attack on Saudi Arabia." He went along with a pro forma condemnation of Camp David, but fought off efforts to impose economic sanctions against Egypt.

A second issue holding up the Washington negotiations concerns Sinai oil. With unrest spreading in Iran, which supplies 40% of Israel's oil, Jerusalem wants to make sure it has an ironclad agreement to buy Sinai oil from Egypt. It also wants the Neptune Oil Co., a U.S. firm that currently has an Israeli contract to pump oil in the Sinai, to continue to do so. Egypt has refused to deal with Neptune, arguing that the company is working the Sinai fields illegally. Complicating these negotiations is the fact that they are tied to simultaneous bargaining over Israeli troop withdrawal from the Sinai.

U.S. negotiators are somewhat annoyed at Israeli attempts to delay any agreement on the treaty until the U.S. has formally agreed to pay the full cost of the withdrawal, including replacement of the two big Sinai airfields. "This issue has nothing to do with the Israeli negotiations with Egypt," complained an American involved in the talks. "We didn't ask them to build those two Sinai airfields or put in all that sophisticated intelligence equipment. They may balk, but they'd better realize that there's not much receptivity in the U.S. to the idea of our footing the bill for their total withdrawal."

On balance, it seemed likely that the Egyptians and the Israelis would be able to resolve their remaining differences in time to sign the treaty by Dec. 17, the deadline agreed upon at Camp David. When agreement is reached, the principals are expected to celebrate the historic occasion by staging twin ceremonies in Cairo and Jerusalem. In the meantime, however, the worrisome final business of linkage must somehow be settled.