Looking to Washington

By William E. Smith

Arab visitors draw the U.S. further into the search for peace

he Lebanese people deeply appreciate and will never forget your gracious and decisive efforts to help bring an end to the suffering of my country. We see the U.S. role as the indispensable ingredient toward bringing peace not only to Lebanon but to the whole region." So said the new President of Lebanon, Amin Gemayel, 40, to Ronald Reagan on the south driveway of the White House last week. The American President has not heard that kind of talk from many Arab leaders lately. More important, officials hoped that the Gemayel visit to Washington would speed up the search for a solution to the most pressing issue in the Middle East: how to get the Israeli and Syrian armies, as well as the remaining fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization, out of Lebanon as quickly as possible.

But President Reagan also had the region's most intractable problem on his mind last week. Three days after his meeting with Gemayel, he received a seven-member Arab delegation, led by King Hassan II of Morocco. The group had been appointed by the Arab summit conference that met at Fez, Morocco, last month to explore Reagan's plan to solve the Palestinian problem by linking the Israeli-occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Jordan. The Arabs at Fez had come closer than ever before to a recognition of Israel's right to exist, but the President hoped to extract a more explicit commitment from his visitors. "We believe the time has come to stop talking about talking about peace and start sitting down at the table," a senior State Department official said on the eve of the visit. Although Reagan did not get the statement he sought, he hailed the meeting as "an important milestone" toward "a common objective, a just and lasting peace in the Middle East."

The convergence of Arab visitors in Washington underscored the expanding U.S. involvement in the search for peace. Gemayel told Reagan that the 4,000-man U.S., French and Italian peace-keeping force in Lebanon would probably have to be expanded up to 30,000 in order to ensure stability in the country until the Lebanese army can be strengthened. Although U.S. officials do not like the idea of expanding the American garrison, which remains vulnerable to unexpected hostile action, the Administration is coming around to the view that it may have no choice. Said a White House official: "We are being drawn into this willy-nilly."

Gemayel, who became President after his brother Bashir was assassinated as President-elect less than six weeks ago, was on his first overseas mission as his country's head of state. On a one-day stopover in New York City, he made three speeches in three different languages. The first, an address to a gathering of Lebanese Americans, was delivered in Arabic. The second, to the United Nations General Assembly, was given in English for the benefit of television audiences in the U.S. The third, to the U.N. Security Council, was delivered in French.

Before the General Assembly, Gemayel declared that Lebanon was "like the phoenix rising out of its own ashes," and vowed to lay "the foundation of a strong, independent and democratic state." He said that the Palestinians should be allowed to live "in peace and freedom and self-determination in their land." Somewhat unexpectedly, he paid tribute to Syria, which still has 30,000 troops based in Lebanon. Then, to a burst of applause, he said, "I call for the immediate withdrawal of all non-Lebanese forces from Lebanon." Later, before the Security Council, he asked specifically for the removal of Israeli troops from his country. The effect of these remarks was to move Lebanon a notch or two closer to the position of the majority of Arab states, which favors the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Gemayel's statements caused concern in Israel, which has supported the Christian Phalangist forces for years and was particularly close to Bashir Gemayel. Complained one Israeli official: "We felt like saying to him, 'Come off it. Don't exaggerate. Our positions in Lebanon are keeping you alive.' He didn't have to go as far as he did to please the Syrians." Some Western diplomats argued, however, that since Gemayel is dismissed by many Arabs as an Israeli puppet, it was necessary for him to try to reassure his Arab neighbors, particularly the oil-producing moderates whose help he will need in rebuilding his country.

Next day Gemayel flew to Washington for a round of meetings with Administration officials. He had breakfast with Reagan at the White House, lunch with Secretary of State George Shultz at the State Department and tea with Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger at the Pentagon. The purpose of the talks, from the Administration's point of view, was to give the young President a sense of confidence in the U.S. commitment to bring about the withdrawal of foreign troops from his country and to help with the rebuilding of Lebanon. Gemayel later described his meeting with Reagan as "excellent," and a member of his party said flatly, "We are very reassured."

On specific requests, Gemayel got only vague promises. He asked for large-scale aid in repairing his country's war damage, which has been estimated at $10 billion to $15 billion. Reagan replied that, for the time being, the U.S. would not go beyond the $110 million it has already committed. He said that he thought most of the money should come from other Arab countries (such as Saudi Arabia), Western Europe, the World Bank and private investors, including the many Lebanese who have bank accounts abroad. Last week, as it turned out, a wealthy Lebanese businessman from Sidon gave the city of Beirut more than $7 million to help in clearing the rubble.

More significant than Gemayel's request for funds was his proposal that the multinational peace-keeping force now serving in Beirut be enlarged so as to provide security throughout the country. The force is currently made up of about 1,200 U.S. Marines, some 1,600 French paratroopers and about 1,200 Italian soldiers. The American Marines are assigned to protect the area around Beirut International Airport. Unlike the French and Italian troops, they have seen little of the city because U.S. authorities have been determined to avoid incidents between the Marines and Lebanese civilians. The U.S. forces have invited a few Lebanese officials and journalists to visit the American naval vessels offshore, but otherwise have had virtually no contact with the local populace.

Gemayel emphasized in Washington, as well as during his subsequent talks in Paris and Rome, that the extra peace-keeping forces would be needed until the Lebanese army has been significantly strengthened. In Paris, President Franc,ois Mitterrand promised to increase the number of French troops in Lebanon. Said an Elysee spokesman:

"[France] is ready to give any sort of aid that is wanted by Lebanon for its reconstruction, whether this be military, technical, financial, economic or cultural."

In Rome, officials assured Gemayel that Italy would consider his request for an enlarged peace-keeping force.

In addition, Lebanese Foreign Minister Elie Salem reportedly told his Italian counterpart, Emilio Colombo, that the Lebanese army will have to be enlarged from 22,000 men to 50,000 or even 60,000 in order to provide for the country's security once the Syrian and Israeli occupiers have been withdrawn. Such an increase cannot be achieved quickly. Gemayel could fill the army's ranks with troops from the Christian militias that solidly support him. But that could prove disastrous at a time when he is trying hard to reunite the country. The Reagan Administration at first appeared to take a dim view of increasing its troop commitment to Lebanon. As Weinberger put it, "If the multinational force needs expansion, there is no reason why only three countries need be the only ones involved." But Administration officials hinted later that if President Reagan is convinced that a stronger force is needed in order to solve Lebanon's current problems, he would probably be willing to take the risk. Said one White House aide: "The President believes the 'Viet Nam syndrome' has put ridiculous restraints on peace keeping, even when it is in American interests. He is disturbed at the reluctance to use American military force when it can be a useful adjunct of our foreign policy." The President realizes there will be some opposition, says the aide, but he appears ready to take on the battle once the November elections are past.

Gemayel also indicated last week that he wants to use the U.S. as a buffer between Lebanon and Israel in negotiating agreements that appear to be essential in restoring a stable and independent country. He opposes Jerusalem's demands for a peace treaty between the two nations on the grounds that it would alienate the rest of the Arab world. The logical starting point, therefore, is a U.S.-negotiated agreement to withdraw all foreign forces from Lebanon. Neither Syria nor Israel, however, wants to be the first to pull out, and Israel is asking for solid assurances that it will no longer have to worry about being attacked by P.L.O. guerrillas in southern Lebanon. Though Israel hopes to retain a military presence in a 30-mile-deep security zone in southern Lebanon, it might settle for an agreement under which the area would be patrolled by foreign peace-keeping forces. At that point, presumably, the withdrawal of Israeli, Syrian and P.L.O. soldiers could begin. A few months later, the newly expanded Lebanese army could replace the multinational force.

In pursuit of that strategy, the Reagan Administration made plans to send U.S. Negotiator Morris Draper back to Beirut for further talks. But even as it concentrated on the Lebanese crisis, the U.S. was working to get negotiations going again on a larger issue, the pursuit of a wider peace in the Middle East. In Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin once again attacked the Reagan plan. He charged that a Jordanian-Palestinian federation would lead to a "mighty flow of modern weapons" into the newly created Palestinian homeland and a "constant war of attrition" against Israel. By contrast, he argued, Israel could maintain its present occupation and anticipate "a lengthy period of peace, be it contractual or factual." Begin seemed as determined as ever to fight any scheme that would remove the occupied territories from Israeli control. With that, he also seemed to be undercutting America's main hope for a lasting peace in the area. --By William E. Smith. Reported by Douglas Brew/Washington and William Stewart/Beirut

Reported by Douglas Brew/Washington and William Stewart/Beirut

With reporting by Douglas Brew, William Stewart

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.