(2 of 5)
The U.S. lost no time following up on its commitment. The next day U.S. Ambassador to Tunisia Robert Pelletreau, the "only authorized channel" for the discourse, telephoned P.L.O. headquarters in Tunis to arrange a meeting Friday at a state guesthouse in nearby Carthage. Pelletreau and a four-member P.L.O. delegation met for 90 minutes; afterward both parties called their first official talks "practical."
As far as the U.S. is concerned, the first topic in an extended dialogue will be terrorism. The U.S. wants to serve notice on Arafat that it remains highly skeptical of his renunciation of the tactics that have subjected Israelis and others to decades of hijacking, bombing and murder. Washington will hold Arafat personally responsible for controlling his organization, and if he fails the U.S. will not hesitate, as President Reagan said, "to break off communications." The U.S. also expects Arafat to condemn and dissociate himself from violent acts by renegades and to help bring any terrorists to heel.
- Beyond that, the U.S. wants to advance the dialogue toward the essential business of peace negotiations. "I view this development as one more step toward beginning direct negotiations between the parties," said Shultz. The U.S. will make it clear that it does not recognize the P.L.O.'s self-declared independent state and will not adopt any of the Palestinian objectives in advance of peace talks with Israel. Pelletreau will have to impress upon the P.L.O. that it must convince Israel, and not the U.S., of its readiness to engage in serious negotiations. Nor will the U.S. cease its unflinching support for the Jewish state or let the P.L.O. divide the two allies. But Washington sees its official face-to-face talks with the P.L.O. as a chance to probe and define an acceptable Palestinian role in direct negotiations with Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir denounced Arafat's U.N. address as a "monumental act of deception" and called the U.S. decision a dangerous "blunder" that "will not help us, not help the United States and not help the peace process." Even Shimon Peres, the Foreign Minister who has struggled to devise a working peace plan of his own, considered the U.S. naive. "While other countries are expressing their views out of sincere hope, we express our views out of bitter experience," he said. Israel has cause for its unyielding refusal to trust the P.L.O.: 24 years of terrorist violence.
Israel's reaction has been confused by its domestic politics. Since the election Nov. 1, neither the Labor Party nor the Likud bloc has been able to muster a governing majority. Now, however, there is a greater chance that the two main groups will continue their paralytic unity coalition, if only to give cover to each other in handling this diplomatic bombshell. On one point they are already united: Israel will not alter its refusal to talk with the P.L.O. Both parties are bracing for a bumpy time with Washington. Ever the optimist, Peres suggested that the U.S. will soon wise up to its mistake and back out of a bad judgment. The dour Shamir offered little but bitterness last week.