(2 of 3)
Ample Leverage. Mrs. Meir arrives this week for a face-to-face confrontation with President Nixon. Her friends in the U.S. gave her ample leverage last week. The Senate voted 81 to 14 for $500 million in military credits for Israel, half of it specifically earmarked for Phantoms. Eight Senators representing both parties meanwhile paid a private call on Secretary of State William Rogers to urge him to change his stand on Phantoms for Israel. Rogers not only stood fast but told the group that Israel's intransigence on peace terms was isolating it in world opinion. The U.S., he said, was Jerusalem's only true friend.
Rogers is likely to say as much to Mrs. Meir; in addition, U.S. officials will contend that even if they did approve Israel's purchase of more Phantoms, the planes would be a long time coming off production lines. The fact is that if Washington wanted to, it could provide the planes almost immediately. Two years ago, a fleet of 50 Phantoms for Israel was put together out of allotments ticketed for the U.S. Air Force; the planes were hurriedly swabbed with the white and blue insignia of Israel and rushed across the Atlantic. Plainly the Administration is sidetracking the present request so as to pressure Israel into peace concessions. But with U.S. elections upcoming, Nixon may be hard put to continue saying no.
Super Dilemma. The domestic ramifications of the situation are not lost on the Arabs. In an interview with TIME Correspondent Gavin Scott in Cairo last week, Egyptian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Riad, a shrewd and seasoned diplomat, professed to be confused. "It is something we cannot understand—how a superpower wild certain responsibilities about peace in the world can be affected by some votes in an election. We don't understand how it is commonly accepted that the Jews are a community completely separate from other Americans, as if their loyalty is to Israel rather than to their own country."
Riad also wondered why a superpower like the U.S. should have any difficulty at all telling Israel precisely how to behave. "I recall what Dean Rusk said to me in 1968," Riad told Scott, "when I asked him about the U.S. position on withdrawal by Israel. He said, 'There is no doubt that we don't want any country to annex territory of another country. This is our policy, so the Israelis should no doubt withdraw from your land.' I replied, 'Why, then, don't you make a public statement? That's all we want.' Mr. Rusk said, 'We are a superpower. We are not Upper Volta or Gabon, and if we say that Israel should withdraw, then they must withdraw.' "
Continued Riad: "Mr. Rogers has said Israel should withdraw. He has said that the U.S. would use all its influence to see U.N. Resolution 242 implemented and the U.S.'s own plan implemented. When you hear these words from a big power—that it will use its influence—well, it's something that has big meaning. That is why we agreed to the U.S.'s playing a role. But if it turns out that the role is no more than that of a small power like Nicaragua or Costa Rica or Malawi, what's the point in receiving any American representative?"