THE big guns of Israel and Egypt have been silent along the Suez Canal for more than a year now. Last week, as the cease-fire that has preserved a tense and tentative peace in the region moved into its second year, TIME Correspondent Marsh Clark talked to Israeli Premier Golda Meir in her Jerusalem office about the outlook for negotiations and the possibilities for a lasting peace. The interview preceded Defense Minister Moshe Dayan's call for Israel to consider itself the "established government" of the Arab territories occupied during the 1967 war. Premier Meir later dissociated herself from that suggestion, but nonetheless she showed little inclination to depart from Israel's tough-minded stance on the question of withdrawal without secure borders. Her comments provided a sharp reminder of how little progress has been made toward any lasting peace.
Q. Mrs. Meir, at this point in time, a year after the cease-fire went into effect, how do you assess the outlook for war or for peace?
A. The cease-fire in itself is something that we welcome. Anything that will do away with the shooting. But we hope that the other side will also come to appreciate the fact that it is better to continue the cease-fire than to re-introduce it after shooting begins again.
Q. Is the interim solution involving the reopening of the Suez Canal still alive, or are we flogging a dead horse?
A. As far as we are concerned it is alive. We, at any rate, are anxious for the negotiations to succeed.
Q. What would be the elements in such an arrangement?
A. The fundamental desire to have peace between Egypt and Israel is the main thing. The forces are there, and they are separated by a body of water, a very important separating element. Now, as for the idea that this exercise involves our moving from the canal, it doesn't make any difference how far (and it won't be too far). No sooner will we move than Egypt's armed forces will come over. It is so ridiculous—illogical. Instead of having a further separation of forces, they would be closer. -
Q. This is a main sticking point, the number and character of the Egyptians on the east bank of the canal?
A. Not the numbers, the very crossing of the canal by armed forces.
Q. What about civilians?
A. Of course we agree that those who are necessary to clear the canal and operate it can be there. No more shooting, though. That element is vital. There must be no military forces crossing the canal.
Q. Is that the major sticking point?
A. It is one. Another major one is no more shooting anywhere. Both of us have to declare that there will be no more shooting.
Q. But there hasn't been any shooting for the past year.
A. That is true, but we don't want to be served a new date every so often. What did [Egypt's President Anwar] Sadat do? He destroyed every constructive element in this proposition. First, he proposed that the Egyptian armed forces cross the canal immediately. Secondly, he gave us a cease-fire for six months. And during these six months he will clear the canal. During the six months, according to his recipe, [United Nations Mediator Gunnar] Jarring has to work out a timetable for our moving back up to the international border.