The Long Waiting Game

By James Kelly

Skirmishing intensifies in Lebanon--and in Congress

As usual, the awful sounds of battle shrieked through Beirut last week, but this time the fighting reached its bloodiest peak since last summer. Day and night, the clatter of machine-gun fire and the thump of shells could be heard not just in the city but throughout a 30-mile crescent stretching from Jounieh in the north to the mountain district of Kharroub. In the suburbs of Beirut, the Lebanese Army clashed with Shi'ite militiamen. In the hills east of the city, government soldiers fought forces loyal to Druze Leader Walid Jumblatt. At the southern tip of the Chouf Mountains, the Druze and the Christian Phalange killed each other. Only West Beirut and the airport, where the U.S. Marines are stationed, were spared direct attacks. Since all sides have failed to settle on a security pact that would separate the feuding factions, no one group can be blamed entirely for the bloodletting. Amal, the country's largest Shi'ite organization, did spark some of the fighting. Increasingly unnerved by rumors that government troops would move into the city's predominantly Shi'ite southern suburbs, Amal militiamen overran four army checkpoints, including a key tactical post on the main highway to Damascus. At the height of the combat, many people in Beirut feared that all-out war was imminent.

Martial music filled the state-controlled air waves, the government issued a frantic call for volunteers, and Jumblatt warned that a "decisive battle" is inevitable. When the artillery fire quieted down, the disturbing news came that several hun-dred Syrian-backed guerrillas from the Palestine Liberation Organization were aiding the Shi'ites. Just as the fighting in Beirut intensified, so did the skirmishing between the White House and Congress over the Marine presence in Lebanon. Prodded by Speaker Tip O'Neill, the House Foreign Affairs Committee held hearings on a resolution that urged the "prompt and orderly withdrawal" of the 1,800 servicemen.

Though the measure would set no deadline and be nonbinding, an exchange between Ronald Reagan and O'Neill illustrated how bitterly politicized the issue has become in a presidential election year. "When a policy fails, we in the opposition have a special responsibility to point out that failure," said the Massachusetts Democrat.

Retorted Reagan: "How could he possibly know?" The President bluntly added that he was "not going to pay any attention" to the proposed resolution. Besides recommending such steps as replacing the Multi-National Force with U.N. peace-keeping troops, the text called upon Reagan to submit a written report within 30 days detailing his progress toward achieving a Marine pullout. Some Democrats urged a specific timetable, but the prevailing view was that to set a withdrawal date would embolden Lebanese President Amin Gemayel's foes, which in turn would prompt Republican charges that the Democrats had stymied a political reconciliation among Lebanon's factions. The absence of stipulations also made political sense for O'Neill's party: a nonbinding resolution with no deadline is likely to attract the most votes in Congress. Committee members postponed voting on the measure, however, after hearing an impassioned defense of Administration policy by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Lawrence Eagleburger. He predicted that a removal of the Marines now would only encourage Syria to seek greater sway over Lebanon. Said Eagleburger: "Letting Syria gobble up Lebanon now may only be guaranteeing that in the near-term future an even greater crisis will occur, forcing Israel, and perhaps also the United States, to react in even more dangerous circumstances." Eagleburger's plea helped persuade the resolution's sponsors to soften the language. Criticism of the Administration's policies will probably be modified or dropped altogether, while a passage acknowledging the value of keeping the U.S. Sixth Fleet off the Lebanese coast will be added. But a Marine withdrawal will still be demanded, as will the written report. The resolution is unlikely to come up for a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate until late March, when a bill proposing aid to Lebanon is scheduled for debate. Normally, the Administration could count on winning the battle in the Senate, but last week two Republican Senators also urged that the Marines be brought home. Said Wyoming's Alan Simpson, one of the defectors: "If Reagan does not resolve this before the election, it won't matter what he's done on inflation, the economy, taxes or whatever." Calls for a Marine withdrawal came from another unexpected source last week: Saudi Arabia. Speaking to a delegation of visiting U.S. businessmen in Riyadh, Crown Prince Abdullah said that the U.S. troops should be getting Israeli forces out of Lebanon. Syria, he noted, would follow suit. Such advice from Abdullah, who is King Fahd's half brother and Deputy Prime Minister, astounded U.S. officials. Not only have the Saudis been urging Washington to stand fast in Lebanon, but they have been the prime brokers in negotiating a Lebanese security pact.

Informed of Abdullah's speech, Secretary of State George Shultz appeared genuinely surprised. "The U.S. objective is to create something in Lebanon that is stable," he said, "and that is what Saudi Arabia has said it wants too." That goal remains as distant as ever. U.S. Special Envoy Donald Rumsfeld had no luck pushing the security plan in either Damascus or Beirut last week. Jumblatt continued to insist that a political solution among the country's factions must come first, but added that such talks with Gemayel would be a "waste of time." Some U.S. officials have grown discouraged enough to believe that even if Gemayel satisfied Syria by giving up the May 17 accord with Israel, Syria would still block the security pact. "The Syrians are the only ones who want to stay in Lebanon, so they are just going to wait us out," said a U.S. diplomat. The question now is how long Ronald Reagan is willing or able to wait.

With reporting by Barrett Seaman, William Stewart