0 OPINION Page 4 Saturday, December 1, 1984 The Michigan Daily 0 The state of Israeli foreign relations. Wolf Blitzer, the Washington Bureau Chief for the Jerusalem Post, was in Ann Arbor this past week and spoke with Daily associate editor Thomas Miller about the current state of U. S. -Israeli relations. Daily: It has been two-and-a-half years since the Israelis moved into Lebanon. Do you think they've accomplished their basic goals? Blitzer: Well, the immediate goal as initially stated by the Israeli government, to secure a zone in southern Lebanon about 25 miles from which terrorists could no longer threaten Israel, at least in the immediate future has been accomplished. The PLO has been uprooted from South Lebanon and their former positions have been destroyed. Yasir Arafat and his supporters have been disbanded and removed from Lebanon and they're in various Arab countries right now struggling to survive, especially in the aftermath of the Syrian op- position to Yasir Arafat and Syria's effort to find an alternative PLO leadership. But the greater geo-political and strategic objective which some Israeli cabinet ministers appeared to have supported have clearly not been achieved. Creating a pro-Israeli, Christian dominated Lebanon with which Israel could sign a peace treaty for example-I think hopes for that type of development were dashed when Basir Gemayel was assassinated in September 1982. Things quickly started to deteriorate for Israel in Beirut. There is peace in the Galilee today, but it's a peace that's been achieved at a tremendous cost-not only materially, but in terms of human lives. Over 600 Israeli soldiers have been killed over the past two-and-a-half years in Lebanon and there's been a tremen- dous debate going on within Israel. So looking on the balanced ledger, the results from the war, from the Israeli perspective, are at best quite mixed. Daily : What's the next step for Israel? Blitzer: The next step for Israel as defined by the new National Unity government is to try to get out of Lebanon completely as quickly as possible. Israel has about 10,000 soldiers remaining in the southern part of Lebanon. Israel is very anxious to remove those soldiers, but to do so in a way that guarantees the security of Israel's northern towns and villages. That is not easy. Israel is currently negotiating directly with the Lebanese at Naquara, but it's also negotiating indirectly with the Syrians through all sorts of inter- mediaries. My sense is this is going to be a very difficult, prolonged negotiation, but that it is clearly achievable. Perhaps in six months, or nine months, maybe even a year, some sort of agreement will be reached which will enable Israeli forces to leave and a combination of Lebanese Army, South Lebanese Army, and United Nation's peacekeeping forces to protect Israel's northern border. Daily: During the last four years of the It is obvious that the United States can improve its relations with other Arab countries without necessarily weakening its relationship with Israel,' Reagan Administration, have U.S.-Israeli relations improved? Blitzer: Yes, Israeli relations during the first four years of the Reagan period have clearly improved. There've been some differences, of course, but this is a normal feature of U.S.- Israeli relations. Fundamentally the curve has moved in an upward direction, and I think it's fair to say that U.S.-Israeli relations are better than ever. If you use economic relations, military relations, cultural ties, diplomatic ties, clearly the relationship is very strong today, and in my opinion, will continue to be strong and will continue to get stronger because it fundamentally serves both coun- tries' national interest. Daily: Aside from the strategic military aspects, what does the United States stand to gain through improved ties to Israel. Blitzer: Well, it's clear that America is very very concerned with promoting democracies around the world. In a world where there are increasingly few genuine democracies, the United States can look to Israel as one of them. Israel is a stable country which will be close to the United States irrespective of a labor-led government or a Likud government. So I guess that's another benefit. And there are a whole range of cultural ties and moral committments eminating from the birth of Israel out of the ashes of the Holocaust. There is such a closely- knit fabric of relations that I guess it's become a given within the foreign policy decision- making process in Washington. Needless to say, Israel has always been blessed with a strong reservoir of American domestic political support. That type of support is an im- portant restraint on any administration which may want to go too far in leaning on Israel, or whatever. So there are many reasons why the U.S.-Israeli relationship has grown so much over the past 36 years. My sense is that even though there will be differences from time to time, occasionally serious differences on gut issues, the relationship is going to continue to improve. Daily: What do you think have been the most serious differences between the United States and Israel in the past four years? Blitzer: Well, clearly there's a difference on what the final shape of the settlement involving the West Bank and Gaza should be. The United States under the Carter administration, and even during the Reagan administration, has been promoting a more far-reaching Israeli territorial withdrawal than either the former Likud government or even this new National Unity government could support, and that's a fundamental difference. It's been put on the backburner for the time being, because there's no really serious Arab-Israeli peace negotiations underway right now. Another dif- ference, a key difference, and a traditional strain on the U.S.-Israeli relationship has been Washington's desire to sell sophisticated arms to Saudia Arabia and several of the other Arab states. Israel sees this as a threat and has almost always opposed these types of sales. That's been a thorn in the side of the relation- ship. It will, in my opinion be brought into focus in the coming months as the Reagan ad- ministration moves ahead with a very, very large arms package to Saudia Arabia, probably Jordan and several other Arab nations in the Persian Gulf. This will generate some strong opposition in Congress. It will automatically spill over and have some impact in hurting the U.S.-Israeli relationship. But I don't think it will be a fatal blow. I realize it will create some strains but there have been strains in the past-the AWACs fight in 1981, and the Carter administration's F-15 package to Saudi Arabia back in 1978. So this is not a new development, but is something that irritates the relationship. Daily: Israel has been successful in disper- sing the PLO but what type of threat does the PLO now pose for Israel? Blitzer: It's arguable whether the PLO was ever a hard military threat. There was always a terrorist threat and there were many terrorist incidents over the years. In terms of a conventional military threat along the lines of a genuine armed force like Syria, Egypt, or Jordan, the PLO, I don't think, ever represen- ted a threat. There is a political threat because the PLO is still regarded by many Palestinians and other Arabs as the spokesman for the Palestinians. As a result, the PLO does still command some authority. But in the aftermath of the war in Lebanon, the destruction of the PLO's geographic infrastructure in Lebanon, the PLO has suffered a very serious setback. And now in the aftermath of this Syrian-led struggle against Yasir Arafat, there is even more of a threat to the current composition of the PLO. But the PLO is more of a political threat to Israel because it tries to undermine worldwide support for Israel. Daily: The United States and Iraq have recently reestablished relations. What kind of effect do you think this will have on U.S.-Israeli relations? Blitzer: I was at the White House when Reagan met with Iraqi foreign minister Tarikaziz. Afterwards there was a briefing in the White House press office by a senior ad- ministration official who told us the new relationship would have no effect whatsoever on U.S.-Israeli relations and he went out of his 'Everyone says this is a cold peace, but a cold peace is better than a hot war.' way to underline the fact that U.S.-Israeli relations are better today than ever. It is ob- vious that the United States can improve its relations with other Arab countries without necessarily weakening its relationship with Israel. If Iraq is moving towards a more moderate, reasonable stance vis a vis the Arab-Israeli conflict, I'm sure Israel will welcome this development and will not see it as some sort of threat to Israel. I think there have been a few promising signs eminating from Bhagdad not so much because of Israel, but because of Iraq's own problems in its four-year war with Iran. The Iraqis are increasingly removing themselves from the image of a front-line Arab state fighting against israel for the Palestinians. Iraq is now moving toward a very secondary level in this struggle. As far as Israel's concerned, this is a positive develop- ment. 6 Daily: What are the chances for a long term peace in the Middle East in the coming years? Blitzer: The Arab-Israeli conflict has been going on now for many, many decades and there are no quick-fix, overnight solutions. It's a very,very complex problem. In the long run looking over many years, yes, I think that people in that part of the world will come to grips with reality and live and let live. And cer- tainly, the achievement of peace between Israel and Egypt is a tremendous development. Unfortunately, it hasn't warmed things up as much as everyone would have liked. But Egypt and Israel are still in a state of peace, they maintain diplomatic relations and their bor- ders are still open. Everyone says this is a cold peace, but a cold peace is better than a hot war. I would like to see it expand to include all of Israel's neighbors, but that is not going to be easy. I would not expect any breakthroughs in the immediate future, given some of the other problems going on in the Middle East. There are tensions like the spread of Islamic fun- damentalism, the preoccupation with war in the Gulf, and the fact that King Hussein of Jor- 6 dan, even though he may personally be willing to have a dialogue with Israel, recognizes that not only would his political survival be in danger but his physical survival as well if he were to negotiate. He's in a very rough situation, so he has to act very cautiously as he always has over the years. Without King Hussein getting involved and representing the Palestinians, there will be no real Reagan peace initiative because it would be predicated on the assumption that King Hussein would represent the Palestinians. He's been afraid to do it. So there are some genuine problems, but I'm an optimist and I sense that over years-and unfortunately people get killed in the meantime-over many years, this problem will work itself out, one way or another. Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Sinclair Vol. XCV, No. 71 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board The unknown threat T he University's project engineer overseeing the Lorch Hall renovations owes office workers in that building an explanation of why he chose not to inform them that asbestos insulation was being removed from pipes. Also of concern to those who may have been exposed to the fibrous mineral, no matter how low the dose, is the question of why the testing for ex- posure levels was done three weeks af- ter the construction and not directly following the work. .Tests taken three weeks after the work was completed showed that levels of exposure were well below the legal standards set by the government. This, however, does not excuse the of- ficials responsible for not adequately informing building employees of their activities. Several office workers said they experienced headaches and one said she noticed that her throat and skin became dry and that she began to sneeze. These effects may not have been due to an exposure to asbestos, but then again, they may have. Because the University did not prom- ptly test the exposure levels, the office workers have reason to complain. Environmental and industrial health officials say they doubt that a few weeks' exposure to the substance could lead to health problems and caution about becoming overly concerned. Asbestos has been linked to several forms of cancer but only at high and persistent levels of exposure. The odds are low that any of the people in Lorch Hall will have long term health problems due to the minute levels registered in the later tests. That doesn't mean the Univer- sity officials shouldn't have bothered to inform the building's inhabitants. Any carcinogen exposure raises legitimate fears in people's minds. University officials responsible for the asbestos removal should have shown more sensitivity to the issue. In the future, adequate notice to em- ployees and prompt tests for exposure levels should be expected. i h LETTERS TO THE DAILY SPOCK not at fault for low turnout \ A Wfs$ui\ iE1I i 51wC k"E . S N To the Daily: The LSA-SG has a lot of nerve blaming SPOCK for the low voter turnout in last week's election. We at SPOCK experienced first- hand the ineptitude of the SAID- headed government inrunning the election. We were informed twice that a single candidate could run for more than one office at the same time. After the filing deadline, the government decided this was not legal and we had to withdraw candidates obvious that the SAID gover- nment was more interested in getting its party reelected than with promoting the election. Otherwise, more 'Vote' and less 'Vote SAID' posters would have been so visible on campus. Regardless as to the outcome, the real winners of this year's election were the 90 percent of BLOOM COUNTY LSA students who turned out in droves not to vote. They ob- viously realized how little the LSA-SG meant to them or, better yet, they didn't know it existed at all. -Eric Shapir4 November 21 Unsigned editorials appearing on the left side of this page represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board. by Berke Breathed I i Yfla WO(/tpNT AIL ANY 1 I I x.