MIDEAST

WASH. STAR
NEWS
5/30

Continued from Page A-1

ate Egyptians, more radical
Syrians, Israeli "hawks" or
Israeli "doves" — allows
much compromise on these
issues.

Accordingly, the pre-
sumption in diplomatic cir-
cles has been that Kissing-
er's only hope of maintain-
ing U.S. influence on future
Arab-Israeli negotiations at
the same level he has
achieved so far is to contin-
ue to use the same tactic
that has worked: piecemeal
discussion of limited prob-
lems to which both sides
have an interest in limited
solutions.

Gromyko's Damascus
utterance, underlining as it
does the Soviet propaganda
campaign against Kissing-
er's step-by-step approach,
seems to suggest that the
Russians agreed not to hin-
der a Golan Heights cease-
fire in order to weigh in
more heavily against the
piecemeal tactic later on.

The Soviet Union and
Syria "consider that as
soon as an agreement is
reached on the separation
of forces (on the Golan
Heights) and its clauses are
implemented," yesterday's
Damascus communique
said, "the necessary meas-

ures must be immediately
initiated to arrive at the
overall and just
solution . . . ."

Furthermore, "the Soviet
Union should take part in
all stages and all aspects of
the settlement," it went on.

Gromyko has been a
ubiquitous shadow through-
out the Kissinger mission,
hovering on the sidelines of
the whole effort.

THE MISSION began,
more than a month ago,
with a meeting between the
American and Russian for-
eign secretaries at Geneva,
at which Soviet cooperation
in the Golan Heights opera-
tion was reportedly en-
treated. At a midpoint in
the mission, the two met
again in Cyprus, and the
Soviet attitude was general-
ly reported as encouraging.

Now, with Gromyko in
Damascus at the end of the
mission, why the Soviets
were willing to go along
with a Syrian-Israeli ceas-
fire has emerged clearly :
Settling that point removes
the last excuse for a
Kissinger-dominated diplo-
matic show in the Middle
East and hastens the time
when the Soviets can reas-
sert their influence on a
"comprehensive solution."

Crosby S. Noyes:

# A Start Up the Mountain

WASH. Star
News 5/30

We must be quite clear on one thing: What has been accomplished so far in the Middle East as the result of a herculean personal effort by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is the merest beginning toward a peace settlement between Israel and her Arab neighbors.

Agreement on the separation of hostile forces on the Egyptian and Syrian fronts and the establishment of a cease-fire is not peace. It is at best a tentative, uncertain and hazardous start up the mountain. And to believe that it is more than this is to invite cruel disappointment.

THERE WOULD, of course, be no start up the mountain until the first step was taken. The alternative would be another disastrous round of fighting which would leave the prospect of peace more remote than ever. Today that prospect has visibly improved, even though very little of substance has changed in the attitudes on both sides.

When it comes to the shape of a permanent settlement, these attitudes are still light-years apart. Agreement on a separation of forces only indi-

cates a willingness on both sides to explore the space in between, but with no concessions in sight that would make a genuine settlement remotely possible.

There is considerable danger in believing that the dividing line between Israeli, Syrian and Egyptian forces is in any way a definitive territorial settlement between the three countries. Somehow, this seems better understood in the case of Egypt, where the initial Israeli pullback was taken on both sides as a prelude to further withdrawals from the Sinai.

No such understanding seems to apply in the case of Syria. The bitter contest over the military demarcation line at least implied an element of permanence. Certainly, Israeli sentiment gives no indication of any further retreat on the Golan Heights.

IF THIS IS TRUE, there is serious trouble ahead. The most moderate Arab opinion still insists that nothing less than a complete Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 frontiers is, or ever will be, tolerated by any of the Arab state concerned.

The only alternative, as these Arabs see it, is more fighting, for which the United States will get the lion's share of the blame. Add to this demand the intractable problem of the 'rights' of Palestinian Arabs and one can see why the prospect of a full-fledged peace conference at Geneva is viewed with trepidation by many people.

Still, the effort will have to be made, and what should concern Americans at this point is how to go about it. And the one thing that now seems very clear is that it cannot be the kind of exercise in personal diplomacy by the secretary of State that has led to the tentative progress achieved so far.

That effort has absorbed virtually all of the energies and attention of Henry Kissinger for weeks on end. American foreign policy has been focused on the Middle East since the end of the fighting last October. And even if it is accepted that the area is in some ways the most critical to world peace, it is questionable whether what has been achieved has been worth the effort.

IT IS A serious matter that all of the leaders involved—

Arabs and Israelis alike—seem to regard Kissinger's physical presence as essential to any progress at all and also seem to be taking his services as a mediator for granted.

No doubt, it is flattering to these leaders to have an American secretary of State shuttling back and forth between Jerusalem and Damascus to the point of numbed exhaustion. But there is a point at which these activities become bizarre, if not demeaning.

Peace in the Middle East is an important objective of American diplomacy, but it is very far from being the only one. American foreign policy cannot be successfully conducted by concentrating exclusively on one relatively small facet while all the other great problems of the world are left to manage themselves.

In a situation where the solution to definitive problems is certain to take years, the parties directly responsible must at some point face up to the fact that they are essentially on their own and that their favorite messenger boy has other things to attend to. And so must the secretary of State.

# 'Let Henry Do It'

To the Editor:

I refer to James Reston's May 22 column "Where Are You Now Henry?" which appeals to Mr. Kissinger to come back to Washington "to deal with the world as Secretary of State."

Our excellent Mr. Kissinger is abroad in the interests of peace in the Middle East, a matter of deep concern to everybody. If Mr. Kissinger's absence abroad in the interest of peace is permitted to be made an excuse for poor morale in the State Department, then we should devise some father figure to take the Secretary's place to soothe those afflicted sufficiently so that they can get on with the work they were hired to do.

May I say, in defense of Mr. Kissinger's several absences from Washington, that historically there has been a lamentable decline in the importance of ambassadors "extraordinary and plenipotentiary;" that this slide began when the first telegram was put on the desk of British Prime Minister Canning in 1827. Mr. Canning correctly prognosticated that the event marked the end of old fashioned diplomacy. Until Mr. Canning received his famous telegram, an Ambassador sent abroad by the British sovereign, for instance, was truly extraordinary and plenipotentiary because there would be no contact with London for several months at a time and he was entrusted with serious business and could not go to a telegraph office, let alone a telephone, to ask for additional instructions if the heathen he was dealing with became obstreperous.

The fantastic growth and improvement in voice communications, and in the last 25 years the development of supersonic aircraft meant that heads of state and Foreign Ministers could personally meet each other with little inconvenience and little waste of time, and bad news was promptly made known along with good news, of course, and everyone concerned could cluck in satisfaction or make appropriate sounds of anguish.

Cigarette

Mr. Dulles accelerated the movement towards personal diplomacy for reasons which are well known and diplomacy today isn't what it used to be, to which a cynic might reply, "No, and it never was!"

I hope Mr. Kissinger will continue to use his considerable talents in the interest of peace no matter where. I believe the Department of State is in good hands; and I have the feeling that there has lately been an improvement in morale which admittedly has suffered a steady decline long before Mr. Kissinger became Secretary, in fact, ever since Presidents began to take a personal interest in foreign affairs. We remember Wilson's Colonel House, Roosevelt's Harry Hopkins, and in very recent times the build-up of a foreign affairs staff in the White House that has acted as a super Department of State to the dismay, embarrassment and even humiliation of some Secretaries of State.

"Let Henry do it" abroad, and let the State Department in Washington back-stop him to the fullest.

WILLIAM H. CHRISTENSEN
Grosse Pointe Woods, Mich.

May 22, 1974

The writer is a former foreign service officer.

The New York Times/May 30, 1974

The New York Times/May 30, 1974
swum in to cover the open water and
the whale.

It appeare d that the animal, whose
eat would have fed this entire village
for a year was lost.

But then at 3 o'clock on Sunday
Morning Mrs. Tuzroyluk burst into the
tent where the Senator was sleeping
with four of the younger crew members.
"They got whale," she called, ringing
bell to alert the members of the crew
lifted out over twenty miles. Quickly
tent emptied and everyone trotted
to the edge of the ice.

A Lucky Wind

A shift of the wind had pushed the
ice mass that had covered the whale to
the west and even though the shoreline
had been radically altered, the men
new where to look. Hooks that they
had fashioned the day before from iron
ods caught the flukes and the massive
body of the whale, buoyed by gases
formed by putrefaction, came easily to
the surface, floating belly up.

The steaks would no longer be fit for
human consumption; they would go to
food the dogs. But the muktuk—the
skin and outer layer of blubber that is
the staple of the Eskimo diet—was

loads of meat on sleds drawn by ice
machines. The meat was then stored in
a natural underground freezer dug out
of the permafrost.

Through much of this time Senator
Buckley watched and marveled at the
energy, ingenuity and cooperation of
the men.

He observed that on Friday he is to
take part in a panel at his 30th Yale
reunion, the subject of which was to
be "The American Dream: Is More Still
Better?"

"In Point Hope it seems that which
is best has very little to do with ma-
terial possessions," the Senator said.
"We are having the privilege of sitting
in on people working in harmony with
their envionment, working very hard,
enjoying life, plus having children par-
ticipate in family activities as part of
an economic unit."

A Private Trip

Mr. Buckley has long been interested
in the Arctic and has made several
expeditions to northern Canada and to
Greenland, although this trip marked
the first time he had lived with Eskimos.
He made the trip because of this interest
and because he had been invited to
view the hunt by The Tundra Times, a
weekly that circulates in Eskimo vil-
lages. It was not a publicity-seeking
trip. The New York Times sought and
obtained permission to accompany the
Senator from Mr. Buckley's hosts.

"This has been an enormously re-
warding experience for me and not
merely because of the drama of the
whaling operation," said Mr. Buckley
while waiting for the plane to Kotzebus.
"You could also see human relationships
working closely. There is a sense of
identity and place, which we have
largely lost."

And indeed there was. In six days of
tension, frustration and cold, no one
had uttered an angry word, not even
when the whale appeared lost.

"Down there on the ice, we can't

Continued on Page 65, Column 6

News Summary and Index

THURSDAY, MAY 30, 1974

The Major Events of the Day

10 A

Thursday, May 30, 1974

Mountain

Minneapolis

Tribune

Established 1867

Charles W. Bailey Editor

Wallace Allen Managing Editor

Leonard Inskip Editorial Editor

Volume CVIII Number 6

## An extraordinary Middle East feat

The military disengagement between Syria and Israel is an extraordinary accomplishment, achieved by extraordinary diplomacy. Nowhere do mistrust and hostility run deeper than between those two countries. That is why past efforts at mediation by third parties failed even to scratch the surface of the Syrian-Israeli impasse. That is why the agreement reached Wednesday required an unprecedented, 32-day marathon of shuttle diplomacy by the world's most prestigious negotiator, Henry Kissinger.

That such methods should be necessary to achieve what is really only a workable armistice is testimony to the seeming intractability of the Middle East conflict. The American team was involved far more in minute details of the settlement than it was in the comparable negotiations between Israel and Egypt. And it would appear that the Syrian-Israeli agreement also required more specific proposals by the secretary of state in order to bring the two sides together.

Major problems remain. Not the least of them is whether the openings to-

ward Middle East peace so arduously carved by Kissinger can be widened through negotiations among the parties. Some indication of their willingness to do so should come in the official signing of the Syrian-Israeli agreement, scheduled to take place in Geneva on Friday.

A commitment by Arabs and Israelis to sustain the negotiating momentum is important on many counts. Peaceful settlement would allow peoples of the area to concentrate on something other than preparing for the next war. Similarly, the risks of a widened conflict, so clearly demonstrated last October, would diminish. For Americans, another aspect of national interest arises in hoping that military disengagement is the prelude to self-propelled negotiations: The Arab-Israeli conflict has been too incendiary for this country to ignore, but neither can it be permitted to continue absorbing the full energies of the top U.S. policy-maker. Kissinger has shown that compromise is possible even in an area where antagonisms are at a peak. The initiative now should be taken by the antagonists.

White

## A pyrrhic victory in Northern Ireland

The collapse of Northern Ireland's moderate Protestant-Catholic coalition government presents Britain's Labor government with one of the toughest problems it has had since it came to power three months ago. London will attempt to put together another coalition, but sooner or later the militant Protestants will try to bring that down, too. If London opts for new

commanded some attention recently when he launched an appeal for a million signatures on a withdrawal petition, said 600 years was long enough for Britain to try to sort out Ireland's problems. "The majority of people," he said, "are now sick and tired of it." Prime Minister Harold Wilson is hardly likely to pull out the troops yet. British banks and commerce have sizable interests in Northern Ireland.

By Joseph Kraft
Publishers-Hall Syndical

### Washington

The White House is small place that the action of any large figure the staff can make a difference. That is presently the case with Kenneth Rush, the former puty secretary of state, was sworn in the other day as counselor to president on econo-

A-22

THURSDAY

The Washington Post

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER

5/30/74

Syrian-Israeli Agreement

The Syrian-Israeli disengagement agreement is exceptionally good news, representing a vital second step (Egyptian-Israeli disengagement was the first) on the Mideast's road from war to peace. The agreement puts space and United Nations personnel between the two armies, and it puts the two governments into a stance of compromise and agreement for the first time. No one familiar with Syria's reluctance to concede the validity of Israel's very existence or with Israel's distrust of Syria's general policy can fail to be impressed. When the two countries' officers meet in Geneva Friday to sign the accord, it will mark, we hope, a new dawn.

In effect there were two sets of negotiations. First, within each country, the elements favoring accommodation had to prevail over those preferring confrontation and the status quo. In Israel this meant primarily a decision to return not only the territory won in 1973 but also a symbolic sliver of the territory won in 1967. In Syria it meant a decision to take back some territory now even though return of the rest cannot be soon expected. Whether Prime Minister-designate Rabin and President Assad can sell their respective doubters on their joint step remains to be seen. Those adversaries are, in the curious way of international politics, unavoidably each other's ally. That they could both absorb the trauma of the Palestinian massacre at Maalot, midway through the negotiation, however, is encouraging. The lay of the land and the record of the two countries' past, after all, made disengagement far more difficult to achieve on Israel's border with Syria than on the Egyptian front.

The second set of negotiations involved the great powers. Here, of course, Secretary of State Kissinger, in his marathon month-long shuttle, performed a virtuoso diplomatic feat. He has a capacity for empathy and imagination, a feeling for the forces at play, not to say a measure of patience and physical endurance, which are truly formidable. President Nixon surely spoke yesterday for all reasonable men in the Mideast and for all Americans, when he praised the Secretary of State.

At the same time, we note with some concern that the United States is becoming more deeply involved in the substance as well as the process of the Mideast diplomacy. The excitement of an American diplomatic coup should not obscure the abiding need of the countries in the region to fashion their own new links with each other. Dr. Kissinger's role no doubt has been indispensable in this first stage, but he should become progressively more superfluous. In fact, there is good

reason to think that in the Geneva peace talks, which should now begin promptly in earnest, Egypt is quite ready for direct dealings with Israel. Syria's readiness is less certain.

Then, one particular aspect of the new accord raises serious questions about the extent to which the United States is becoming, just on the initiative of the executive branch, the fundamental and perhaps single guarantor of a prospective settlement. Reportedly, Syria refused the Israeli demand that it commit itself to stopping Palestinian guerrillas from using Syrian territory to attack Israel. The Syrian attitude reflects a deporable political immaturity; but it is a fact. Apparently Dr. Kissinger got around this obstacle by accepting some kind of Syrian commitment to the United States to leash guerrillas, and by stating to Israel that Israeli retaliation against such a guerrilla attack would not be regarded as a violation of the new accord.

This arrangement is very troubling. It puts Washington smack in the middle of a volatile situation it cannot control, and should be regarded as a temporary expeditent. To be sure, the United States has the carrot of various forms of aid to proffer to both Israel and Syria, in order to induce their compliance with this and other parts of the disengagement accord. But the sooner the two countries themselves perfect the arrangements between them, the quicker the United States can ease out of its apparent guarantor's role. In any event, that role must be explained to the American people.

Several times while the Kissinger shuttle effort was under way, the Soviet foreign minister dropped into Damascus. Whether the Soviet Union helped or—more likely—refrained from hurting is not clear. After the Soviet setback in Egypt, it is easy enough to understand why the Russians would want to keep a position in Syria. In any event, as a co-chairman (with the United States) of the Geneva peace conference, the Russians will have an opportunity to demonstrate their interest in a general settlement, if they have such an interest. The Soviet Union remains a potent force in the Mideast, for all that its star may have been dimmed for a time by events since the October war. Its capacity to champion and manipulate the more radical Palestinians in particular should not be underestimated nor ignored.

President Nixon was happy in announcing the new agreement at the White House yesterday. He should be. The agreement seems to serve well the American interest in advancing a final political settlement of the conflict in the Mideast.

EDITORIALS

NEW YORK NEWS 30 May 1974

HENRY PULLS IT OFF

In spite of what seemed insurmountable obstacles, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has succeeded in prying apart the armed forces of Israel and Syria after more than a month of exhausting, non-stop diplomacy.

The final agreement follows the pattern established in the Israeli-Egyptian ceasefire that Kissinger also nurtured into being.

Israeli forces will pull back from advanced positions along the Golan Heights—in some areas from real estate captured in 1967—and a United Nations peace-keeping force will be inserted in a buffer zone to keep the antagonists separated.

Secretary Kissinger

The understanding is an enormous personal triumph for Kissinger, who succeeded in bridging the bitter hostilities between the parties even in the face of efforts by Palestinian terrorists and Russian trouble-makers to sabotage his mission.

The larger task of finding a basis for a fair, just and permanent settlement to replace the temporary truce arrangements still lies ahead. Negotiations at Geneva, Switzerland, on the broader issues certainly will be as tough as those just concluded—and take longer.

Whatever the future holds, Kissinger rates the gratitude of all mankind for defusing Mideast tensions, and we'd say he has earned at least an olive-branch cluster to add to the Nobel Peace Prize he shared for Vietnam.

CHICAGO TRIBUNE

30 May 1974

An agreement at last

Secretary of State Kissinger has at last pulled off the "miracle" which has been the subject of so many premature rumors and for which most of the world has been waiting. Tho we don't yet know what is in the fine print of the agreement between Israel and Syria to stop fighting in the Golan Heights, and tho it is only a preliminary step leading to negotiations for a permanent peace to be held at Geneva, it is nonetheless cause for relief and rejoicing.

Great credit must go to Dr. Kissinger, who spent 33 days in patient discussions with leaders of the two countries, shuttling incessantly between their capitals and persevering in the face of repeated discouragements. President Nixon was quite justified in saying that "a major roadblock to any permanent settlement has been removed." He may even be right in saying that the prospects for permanent peace are brighter than they have been at any time in the last 25 years.

For the first time, Israel has accords of a sort with two major adjoining Arab states—Syria and Egypt. That is a big step—and a diplomatic setback for the Soviet Union, which once counted strongly on these two nations to keep the Middle East churning, and which carried on a mysterious and no doubt mischievous dialog with Syria until the last minute.

All that is to the good. Now comes the time to wonder what we have paid for these gains. What assurance, for example, have we given to Israel relative to Palestine guerrilla activities? The Palestinians were not a party to the negotiations. Israel was known to be concerned during the talks about their future freedom to wage terrorism. This concern apparently remained a stumbling block to agreement until late in the negotiations. Then it vanished. What was promised?

It was clear throut the Kissinger mission that Mr. Nixon—harried by Watergate—was desperately eager for a diplomatic success. The tremendous political value he attached to such success was shown by the fact that he—not the parties directly involved—made the first official announcement of the agreement. On national television.

It would be a shame if this sense of urgency led to commitments which might later prove embarrassing. This is why international agreements have always been undesirable.

We trust that when the specifics of the agreement are made public today they will be complete and will contain no such pitfalls. If they pass this test, then the agreement should indeed prove a great step toward that permanent tranquility that all good men desire in one of the world's great trouble spots.

BALTIMORE SUN 30 May 1974

Disengagement along Golan

As the guns grow silent on the heights of Golan, the Middle East at last has respite from the warfare that broke out on October 6. Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. For many governments there is much to alone for the suffering of this strategic and holy region in its fourth large conflict in a quarter-century. Yet this is no time for reconciliation or might-have-beens. Much has been learned by the parties involved: that true security for Israel cannot rest alone on military strength; that Arab states, their honor restored, must accept Israel's right to exist as a sovereign nation; that the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian peoples can be ignored or exploited only at the peril of governments that do so; and that the United States and the Soviet Union, in the interest of their complex detente, cannot allow themselves to come to flashpoint again in the Middle East.

If any one man has pushed these realities into the light of day, it is Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger. Through some of the most extraordinary diplomacy (or horse-trading) of modern times, Mr. Kissinger has pulled off what Egyptian President Anwar Sadat said would be a miracle. He has arranged a disengagement of the Israeli and Syrian forces that fought all-out last October and then engaged in prolonged artillery duels as background to Mr. Kissinger's Tel Aviv-Damascus shuttle. As was the case in the more easily arranged separation of Egyptian and Israeli forces last January, a United Nations Emergency Force will take up positions between the hotshot armies, thus em-

phasing the resuscitation of a U.N. role that many thought had been fatally compromised in the 1967 war.

While this is a moment to rejoice in the rather sizable blessing of a ceasefire, we must remember that only the first step, albeit a large one, has been taken toward a permanent settlement. What is needed now is a continuation of the Geneva negotiations under American and Soviet aegis, with Syria taking the chair it spurned last December. Mr. Kissinger listed then what are the requirements of a settlement, and they bear repeating. "A peace agreement (he said) must include these elements, among others: withdrawals; recognized frontiers; security arrangements, guarantees; a settlement of the legitimate interests of the Palestinians; and a recognition that Jerusalem contains places considered holy by three great religions."

Yitzhak Rabin's new government in Israel will have to find the flexibility to deal with all these issues at Geneva. The Arabs for their part will have at last to provide some collective good sense to bring peace to the Middle East. Since Yom Kippur, the Arabs and the world have discovered the potency of their oil weapon—the power of the rich Persian Gulf states to help oil-less Egypt and Syria by bringing pressure to bear on Israel.

Much will depend on the behavior of the United States and the Soviet Union, both of which have engaged in an intricate, big-stakes competition for influence in the Middle East.

1-E

WASHINGTON POST 30 May 1974

Syrian-Israeli Agreement

The Syrian-Israeli disengagement agreement is excep-
tionally good news, representing a vital second step
(Egyptian-Israeli disengagement was the first) on the
Mideast's road from war to peace. The agreement puts
space and United Nations personnel between the two
armies, and it puts the two governments into a stance
of compromise and agreement for the first time. No one
familiar with Syria's reluctance to concede the validity of
Israel's very existence or with Israel's distrust of
Syria's general policy can fail to be impressed. When
the two countries' officers meet in Geneva Friday to
sign the accord, it will mark, we hope, a new dawn.

At the same time, we note with some concern that the United States is becoming more deeply involved in the substance as well as the process of the Mideast diplomacy. The excitement of an American diplomatic coup should not obscure the abiding need of the countries in the region to fashion their own new links with each other. Dr. Kissinger's role no doubt has been in-dispensable in this first stage, but he should become progressively more superfluous. In fact, there is good

Then, one particular aspect of the new accord raises serious questions about the extent to which the United States is becoming, just on the initiative of the executive branch, the fundamental and perhaps single guarantor of a prospective settlement. Reportedly, Syria refused the Israeli demand that it commit itself to stopping Palestinian guerrillas from using Syrian territory to attack Israel. The Syrian attitude reflects a deorable political immaturity; but it is a fact. Apparently Dr. Kissinger got around this obstacle by accepting some kind of Syrian commitment to *the United States* to leash guerrillas, and by stating to Israel that Israeli retaliation against such a guerrilla attack would not be regarded as a violation of the new accord.

This arrangement is very troubling. It puts Washington smack in the middle of a volatile situation it cannot control, and should be regarded as a temporary experiment. To be sure, the United States has the carrot of various forms of aid to proffer to both Israel and Syria, in order to induce their compliance with this and other parts of the disengagement accord. But the sooner the two countries themselves perfect the arrangements between them, the quicker the United States can ease out of its apparent guarantor's role. In any event, that role must be explained to the American people.

Several times while the Kissinger shuttle effort was
under way, the Soviet foreign minister dropped into
Damascus. Whether the Soviet Union helped or—more
likely—refrained from hurting is not clear. After the
Soviet setback in Egypt, it is easy enough to understand
why the Russians would want to keep a position in
Syria. In any event, as a co-chairman (with the United
States) of the Geneva peace conference, the Russians
will have an opportunity to demonstrate their interest
in a general settlement, if they have such an interest.
The Soviet Union remains a potent force in the Mideast,
for all that its star may have been dimmed for a time
by events since the October war. Its capacity to cham-
pion and manipulate the more radical Palestinians in
particular should not be underestimated nor ignored.

President Nixon was happy in announcing the new
agreement at the White House yesterday. He should be.
The agreement seems to serve well the American in-
terest in advancing a final political settlement of the
conflict in the Mideast.

FRESNO, CALIF. BEE 16 May 1974 (30)

Reaching Out To Military

The military services have had an impact on Fresno
and the surrounding area in uncountable ways, both eco-
nomic and social.

This should be remembered as the community prepares
for the observance of Armed Forces Day Saturday.

The centerpiece event in Fresno will be tomorrow's
Armed Forces Day luncheon at the Elks Lodge clubhouse.
Assistant Air Force Secretary Frank A. Shrontz will be
the principal speaker.

Like so many cities, Fresno has been changed in fundamental ways by its exposure to the military. In World War II the relationship was intense — there was Camp Pine-dale and the fair ground training center and Hammer Field (which later became the Fresno Air Terminal) and the small Air Force training installations in the outlying cities.

Many who passed through these bases returned to Fres-
no after the war, and the city has been richer for it.

The streamlining and professionalization of the ser-
vices have changed things, of course, but their effect on
this area is still important, if less obvious. Now there are
major installations to the north and south — Castle Air
Force Base and Lemoore Naval Air Station — and a
strong constellation of reserve outfits such as the expand-
ing Fresno-based Air National Guard Group.

It hardly needs repeating that the military has an enor-
mously important, difficult and sensitive mission. Change
is the rule — change in technology, strategy, tactics,
training and — not least — dealing with personnel in the
all-volunteer era.

Few institutions need to be as adaptable as the armed
forces. In rising to this challenge they should have close
links to the civilian community. That is one purpose of
Armed Forces Day. The Bee joins in this salute to the men
and women in uniform.

B-20 THE SAN DIEGO UNION

Tuesday, May 21, 1974

NEW MANNED BOMBER

Need For B-1 Explained

The manned bomber is an essential element of this nation's strategic forces, providing "sufficient diversification to offset foreseeable and unforeseeable risks such as technological breakthroughs by an adversary."

At least, that is the view of Gen. John C. Meyer, commander of the Strategic Air Command.

Opponents of the Air Force's $15 billion bomber program say missile advances have made the manned bomber obsolete, and that the B-1's contribution to the triad of strategic weapons would be a costly and questionable one.

241 ASKED

Congress is drawing nearer to a final decision on buying 241 bombers, with the first flight of the B-1 scheduled this fall at Rockwell International's Palmdale plant. The purchase decision is expected in 1976.

Opponents favor beefing up the present B-52 bombers to serve as a heavy bomber and a platform for launching strategic missiles.

However, the B-52, introduced to SAC in 1955, is getting old. The latest production version, the H model, is 11 years old and will be 20 years old before the first operational B-1 joins the force.

CHIEF ASSET

As with other strategic weapons, its chief asset has to be survivability. It must be able to survive a nuclear attack and be capable of penetrating the enemy's air defenses to deliver a devastating retaliatory blow. Such is the United States' second strike, assured destruction strategic posture.

To do this, former Defense Secretary Melvin Laird said the bomber must be capable of taking off and flying a safe distance from its airfield within four minutes of the sounding of an alert horn. That is all the advance warning available on a submarine - launched ballistic missile.

The B-52 does not have this capability.

While it is but two-thirds the size of the B-52, the swing-wing B-1 will carry twice the weapons payload, take off from a much shorter runway and fly faster.

SPEED DESCRIBED

Its high-altitude speed is

between 2 and 2.5 times the speed of sound (760 miles an hour at sea level), and high subsonic at treeter level.

The original thinking on the manned bomber called for supersonic speeds at low altitude, because of the need to penetrate sophisticated air defenses where radar systems are least effective.

However, 40 per cent of the aircraft's total weight would have had to consist of expensive titanium. Also, it was argued, interceptor aircraft, with limited distance capabilities at high speeds, simply wouldn't prove to be much of a threat.

MISSILE THREAT

Air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles are now seen as the major threat, and the B-1 will carry a bagful of countermeasures to confuse interceptor missiles.

While the B-1 is a third smaller than the B-52, it appears as a 25th of its size on radar screens, which should enhance its ability to penetrate air defenses.

About 23 per cent of its airframe weight consists of nonmetallic and composite materials, which absorb radar energy.

4-MAN CREW

The B-1 will carry a crew of four and will have a gross takeoff weight of nearly 400,000 pounds. It is powered by four General Electric T-101 turbofans, each developing 30,000 pounds of thrust.

The SRAM (short range attack missile) is the main armament of the B-1. It will carry 24 of the missiles on three internal rotary launchers.

The Air Force envisions additional missiles for the B-1 as the program progresses, including a subsonic cruise missile which will be interchangeable with the SRAMs, and long - and short - range antimissile missiles.

Lt. Gen. James T. Stewart, commander of the Air Force Aeronautical Systems Division, said a number of "near term" technological developments are in the mill to enhance the B-1's chances of carrying out its strategic mission.

"We are working on improved radio frequency scanning systems to allow us to detect enemy electronic emissions and take more effective electronic countermeasures, and infrared defens

fensive warning techniques that will allow us to survey the area to the rear of the bomber and automatically initiate infrared countermeasures," he said.

The missile would be used to form a protective shell around the penetrating B-1,

he said.

Stewart said the Air Force is asking Congress to return the B-1 program to the original plan to build five, instead of the present order for three research bombers.

The third B-1 is scheduled to be completed early next year, while the decision to buy or put the bomber program in production is not due until late 1976 after two years of testing.

The additional two aircraft would provide a more orderly program of development, a recent study said.

OMAHA WORLD-HERALD 22 MAY 1974 (29)

Bomber Vet
Taking Over
SAC Force

By Howard Silber

Warie-Herald Military Affairs Editor

Gen. Russell E. Dougherty, a veteran bomber man, was named Wednesday to head the Strategic Air Command.

The 53-year-old officer will take over the Omaha-headquartered bomber and missile force Aug. 1 upon the retirement of Gen. John C. Meyer, who has been SAC commander-in-chief the last two years.

Acting for President Nixon, the Pentagon announced the designation of Dougherty and confirmed the plan by Meyer to retire from active duty five months ahead of schedule.

The Meyer retirement in the grade of four-star general is subject to approval by the Senate.

In Brussels

Dougherty will move to Omaha from near Brussels, Belgium, where he has served since May 1972 as chief of staff at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers in Europe, the military arm of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Dougherty commanded SAC's 2nd Air Force, headquartered at Shreveport, La., for 13 months before he was assigned to the European post.

Although he has spent most of his 30 years of military service in SAC, he has never been stationed at the Omaha headquarters.

Dougherty is an attorney and, before entering the military as an aviation cadet shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, he was an FBI agent.

He is a native of Glasgow, Ky., and is a graduate of Western Kentucky University and the

University of Louisville Law School.

His first military duty was as a cavalryman in the Kentucky National Guard. In 1943, he completed pilot training and was commissioned a lieutenant in the Army Air Corps Reserve.

Dougherty served in World War II as an instructor pilot and later as a B17 and B29 bomber pilot.

He returned to civilian life in December 1945. In February 1947, he was appointed to the regular Air Force.

He served jointly as a bomber pilot and legal officer, and, at the outbreak of the Korean War, became an intelligence officer.

Dougherty was assigned for a time as assistant Air Force attorney for litigation arising out of military procurement and contractual activities.

"In December 1952 he elected to give up the military practice of law for assignment to SAC.

Since then he has served largely as a bomber unit officer and commander.

Dougherty is married to the former Geralee Shaaber, Louisville, Ky. They have a daughter, Mrs. James Streicker, Evanson, Ill., and twin sons, Mark and Williams.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Louis T. Seith, presently a member of the Pentagon's Joint Staff, was named to replace Dougherty in Belgium and was nominated for promotion to full general.

Army Maj. Gen. John H. Elder Jr. will succeed Seith on the Joint Staff.

Lt. Gen. James M. Keck will remain in Omaha as SAC vice-commander-in-chief.

7-F

NEW YORK TIMES 30 May 1974

NORFOLK VIRGINIAN-PILOT 24 May 1974 (30)

## Triumph of Diplomacy...

These past 32 days have changed the face of the Middle East. In a mood swinging repeatedly from enthusiasm to near-despair, Secretary of State Kissinger has completed a mission of peace and mediation without parallel in the long history of the Arab-Israeli dispute. When the details of this complex negotiation can be made known, it will doubtless rank as a classic example of diplomatic technique.

What has been achieved—it cannot be said too often—is not yet peace. It is not the long-sought comprehensive solution of the conflict. A military disengagement pact between Israel and Syria is confined in space, limited in scope, subject always to violation and reversal. Some of the most deep-rooted issues in the quarter-century Middle Eastern struggle have not yet even been addressed: the political status of the dispossessed Palestinian peoples; the governance and accessibility of the Holy City of Jerusalem; the definitive frontiers of the State of Israel in the midst of the Arab nation.

But to indicate problems yet to be solved is in no way to minimize the importance of the first step now successfully completed. As one of Israel's leading political commentators said on the news of yesterday's agreement: "Something has now started that cannot be stopped; a process has begun, and all sides will either have to get aboard or lose their influence over the future."

The process is nothing less than the recognition, finally, that Israel and her Arab neighbors can meet as sovereign states, not as victor and vanquished. There is now a shared recognition that both sides have special interests, that peace will come—if at all—through give and take, that bargaining rather than bellicosity is the safer and wiser course for leaders genuinely concerned with their peoples' well-being.

If the signing of an accord is the first step, the more subtle second step will be the successful implementation of the negotiated provisions in such a way that the mutual confidence implied in writing can be justified and enhanced in fact. This second step is now well under way between Israel and Egypt, following their trailblazing agreement of last January. The Governments in Jerusalem and Damascus now must take particular care to insure that neither words nor deeds shatter the tenuous faith that each has tacitly and tentatively placed in the other.

Given the maintenance and further strengthening of this new attitude among the Middle Eastern belligerents, future generations will have cause to be grateful for the statesmanship of Syrian President Assad, who perceived his country's true interests beyond the inflammatory dogma of his predecessors, and retiring Premier Golda Meir, whose long and courageous career in Israeli politics is eliminated in its final hours by an accord that none would have thought possible just a few months ago.

## ...And of a Diplomat

Last October this newspaper raised one of many voices critical of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry A. Kissinger for his part in the Vietnam negotiations. The dubious effectiveness of that "peace" accord, and the cynical bargaining and bombing tactics that led up to it did not seem at the time to justify his inclusion in the ranks of such men of peace as Dag Hammarskjold, Ralph Bunche or Albert Schweitzer.

If Mr. Kissinger's achievements in the Middle East these past months have not yet brought peace, they have surely set the nations of the region squarely onto the path to peace if they are ready to follow it. Considering the failures of all who went before him, this may be achievement enough for one man. By his tireless diligence and unswerving devotion to the cause of peace, Secretary Kissinger has without question earned the honor now.

## Pentagon Gains and Losses

Despite spreading sentiment for deep cuts in spending for arms and troops, the Pentagon fared well on Capitol Hill this week. But Saigon was alerted to expect fewer millions of dollars for its own defense than the Nixon Administration apparently had promised it.

A House-Senate conference voted to grant but $769 million in response to an Administration request for $1.6 billion in supplemental defense funding for fiscal 1974. It specifically denied additional funds for aid to Saigon and forbade the Pentagon to provide such assistance on its own and charge it to another account.

Meanwhile, back at the House of Representatives, liberals were defeated in their attempts to reduce funding for Trident-missile submarines and the B-1 supersonic strategic-bomber program in fiscal 1975 and also to recall 100,000 U.S. troops stationed overseas. But they succeeded in persuading a House majority to give less aid to the South Vietnamese next year than the $1.6 billion the Administration campaigned for; $1.26 billion—the amount designated for Saigon in the current budget—was approved instead. The Senate, when it takes up the military-procurement bill, appears certain to follow its Armed Services Committee's recommendation that only $900 million be authorized.

Defense Secretary James R. Schlesinger pleaded the Administration's position powerfully at a press conference while the House debated. He attributed hostility toward boosting aid to Saigon to "disgruntlement" with and "disilusionment" over the U.S. loss of blood and treasure in Indochina. "Surely," he said, "after all of the involvement in South Vietnam, the South Vietnamese deserve something better than a re-

troactive punishment for our having gotten involved in the war on their side. It is unworthy of us, in my judgment, to behave in such a niggling fashion."

But Congress isn't buying that line this year. Enlarging U.S. military assistance, it has decided, would simply encourage Saigon to fight on without exploring avenues to a peaceful settlement of the protracted conflict. The withdrawal of American warriors was to have set the stage for accommodation, but so far hasn't.

Congress is understandably reluctant to scrap development of major new weapons systems while Washington and Moscow are discussing extending and expanding the first strategic-arms-limitation accords. And the House, if not the Senate, is continuing to resist a pullback of overseas garrisons, especially in Western Europe, while Mutual Balanced Force Reduction talks between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Warsaw Pact nations are going on. Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger's advice to the House from Jerusalem—that a unilateral withdrawal of U.S. forces from Western Europe "would be useful to no one but the Soviets"—was well-taken.

Fundamental questions about this Nation's defense posture are being pressed inside and outside of Washington. Although the Administration avers that large contingents of U.S. troops must be maintained in the far Pacific to support Washington's Asian policy, the Vietnam War has demonstrated conclusively, and tragically, the folly of sending American boys to fight wars Asian boys should fight (as former President Johnson once phrased it). The case for further selective cutbacks in Pentagon programs is strengthening.

WASHINGTON STAR-NEWS

29 May 1974 (30)

## Army Turnip Dry

The general who commands the 185,000 American soldiers in West Germany says there is "no practical way" to meet congressional demands to transform headquarters and support troops into combat soldiers. "We've squeezed all the blood we can out of this turnip," Gen. Michael S. Davison has told an interviewer, drawing the battle lines between Congress and the Army over American troop levels in Europe.

Davison said the Defense Department will lobby against any reductions in support troops. The Senate Armed Services Committee has already drawn a provision in the weapons procurement bill that would either cut 23,000 such troops or turn them into combat soldiers.

3-E

LONG ISLAND NEWSDAY 24 May 1974 (30)

# Getting More Out of the Defense Budget

The good news about defense spending is that Congress at last seems determined to wind down military aid to South Vietnam. The bad news is that otherwise the arms budget looks like business as usual.

The Nixon administration originally wanted to send $1.6 billion to Saigon this year as a token of its esteem for President Thieu. But Congress set a $1.1 billion ceiling, and early this month the Senate blocked an attempt to increase it in a supplementary appropriation.

For the fiscal year beginning July 1 the administration again requested $1.6 billion for Vietnam. The House Armed Services Committee knocked that down to $1.4 billion, and on Wednesday the House lowered the ceiling to this year's level, $1.1 billion. A switch of only 11 votes would have reduced it still further to a flat $1 billion.

Now the action will shift to the Senate, whose Armed Services Committee has already reported out a Vietnam aid bill with the lowest ceiling yet: $900 million. With enough pressure from taxpayers who are fed up with supporting Thieu's tawdry government, that could shrink still more on the Senate floor before a compromise is struck with the House bill.

When it's a matter of spending money at

home, however, Congress for the most part still walks hand in glove with the Pentagon. The Navy is due to get more than $1 billion to construct Trident submarines at the accelerated rate of two a year when one would be more than enough. And Representative Otis Pike of Riverhead failed again to halt development of the B-1 bomber even though its backers conceded the program was "sick."

Defense Secretary James Schlesinger admitted last February that the coming year's military budget had been increased by more than $1 billion at the last minute because the White House was worried about unemployment. The Pentagon, of course, would have no trouble finding projects to spend the money on. But if the administration's own predictions are right, there should be an economic upturn by the time the funds are appropriated, and in that case they would only fuel inflation. The Senate Armed Services Committee has already trimmed $1.3 billion from the administration's fattened-up request for military research and procurement. There's more where that came from, and we hope the senators will take further cuts when the bill reaches the floor.

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

22 May 1974 (30)

## Laboratory Of War

The latest example of the Pentagon's contempt for Congress and the public is provided by the belated release by a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee of a January 1974, letter from then Defense Secretary Melvin Laird in which he acknowledged that, contrary to previous denials, the military carried on rainmaking operations in Indochina from 1967 to 1972.

The last of 2602 cloud-seeding missions came two days after *The New York Times* published an article about the secret operations. If the rainmaking effort was defensible and humane, as Defense officials maintained in their 1974 testimony, why did the sorties cease and why did the Pentagon lie about it at the time?

The cover-up and deception on the cloud-seeding campaign is all too symptomatic of the Pentagon's defiance of civilian authority (Mr. Laird said he didn't know at the time) and its propensity for following whatever rules of war suit its own purposes. Another example was the reported 1966-67 project to create a fire-storm in Vietnam forests, in order to deprive the Viet Cong of jungle cover. That operation was excused with the question: "When you're fighting a war, do you want to save trees or

NEW YORK POST

29 May 1974 (30)

## Message to 'Man's Best Friends ...'

Using animal subjects in medical research is frequently defended on the ground that it helps save human life. That is no defense when the purpose is to refine agents of deaths.

The distinction arose some time back when Rep. Aspin (D-Wis.) ascertained that the Pentagon was using beagle puppies to test the effectiveness of various poison gases, including the so-called "binary" types. The disclosure elicited an extraordinary public protest from tens of thousands of Americans. Subsequently, the Defense Dept. indicated it would discontinue or substantially limit the experiments with dogs.

Aspin's concern was naturally renewed when he learned that the Pen-

tagon had let another contract for purchase of hundreds more puppies. Nothing to worry about, Defense officials asserted yesterday. The dogs won't be used for gas testing as such but rather for "detecting of toxicity in products of demilitarized chemical munitions, detecting toxicity in normal munitions that were damaged by fire and the toxicology of binary compounds to be used in developing vaccines for chemical agents."

Translated, this means an undetermined number of dogs will suffer and die in these esoteric Pentagon exercises. Does the "national security" really demand such ignoble experiments? Is there no better way?

lives?" The clear implication was that Vietnamese lives did not mean anything.

Nor did it matter that the rainmaking project, if it worked, might harm the South Vietnamese.

The military establishment was oblivious to warnings from experts like Dr. Matthew Meseon, professor of biology at Harvard who was quoted in *Science* magazine as stating: "It is...

obvious that weather modification used as a weapon of war has the potential for causing large-scale and quite possibly uncontrollable and unpredictable destruction."

Indochina, as far as the Pentagon was concerned, was a laboratory of war where the people were disposable guinea pigs.

4-E

A 22

5/30/74

THURSDAY

The Washington Post

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER

Syrian-Israeli Agreement

LES JANKA

W.W.

065A

ADVISORY 5-30

EDITORS:

SECRETARY OF STATE KISSINGER HAS ARRIVED IN CAIRO WHERE HE RELEASED THE TEXT OF THE EIGHT-POINT DISENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SYRIA AND ISRAEL. WE WILL MOVE A BRIEF 2ND LD KISSINGER (05CA) AND A SEPARATE SIDEBAR (AGREEMENT) WITH FULL DETAILS OF THE AGREEMENT.

UPI NEW YORK

UPI 05-30 06:54 AED

KISSINGER 5-30

1ST LD 015A, PREVIOUS JERUSALEM

BY WILBUR G. LANDREY

UPI FOREIGN EDITOR

TEL AVIV (UPI) -- SECRETARY OF STATE HENRY A. KISSINGER LEFT FOR HOME TODAY, ENDING HIS MARATHON PEACE MISSION WITH AN ISRAELI-SYRIAN TROOP SEPARATION ACCORD PROVIDING "A TURNING POINT" IN MIDDLE EAST HISTORY.

KISSINGER FLEW TO CAIRO THIS MORNING TO REPORT TO EGYPTIAN PRESIDENT ANWAR SADAT ON THE DETAILS OF THE DRAMATIC MILITARY DISENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT TO END THE WAR OF ATTRITION ON THE GOLAN HEIGHTS.

"I BELIEVE IT CAN MARK A TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE EAST," THE SECRETARY OF STATE SAID IN A DEPARTURE STATEMENT AT BEN-GURION INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.

KISSINGER WAS SCHEDULED TO BE BACK IN WASHINGTON TONIGHT, 33 DAYS AFTER HE CAUTIOUSLY SET OUT ON HIS LONGEST, TOUGHEST AND MOST COMPLICATED DIPLOMATIC MISSION.

THE SECRETARY NOTED "THE GULF OF SUSPICION, THE LACK OF CONFIDENCE, THE SUFFERING THAT HAD TO BE BRIDGED IN ORDER TO BRING BOTH SIDES TO THE POINT WHERE THEY COULD TAKE THIS STEP TOWARD PEACE THAT THEY HAVE IN FACT TAKEN."

"HAVING OVERCOME THESE OBSTACLES, THERE IS NOW HOPE WE CAN MOVE TOWARD A PERIOD OF LASTING PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST," HE SAID.

KISSINGER SAID HE WAS GRATIFIED THAT BOTH SIDES TRUSTED THE UNITED STATES. "IT IS AMERICA WHOSE VALUES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED SUFFICIENTLY RELEVANT," HE SAID.

ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER ABBA EBAN SAW KISSINGER OFF AND SAID THE ACCORD WAS "NOT ONLY A VICTORY FOR AMERICAN STATESMANSHIP, BUT ALSO A VICTORY FOR THE CAUSE OF PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND OF THE WORLD."

A TEARFUL PRIME MINISTER GOLDA MEIR CALLED KISSINGER "FANTASTIC" WEDNESDAY NIGHT AND THANKED HIM FOR ENDING "THE NIGHTMARE OF KILLING AND WAR" ON THE GOLAN HEIGHTS.

THE DECISIONS OF MRS. MEIR AND SYRIAN PRESIDENT HAFEZ ASSAD TO ACCEPT THE ACCORD WEDNESDAY MARKED THE FIRST FORMAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO WARRING NATIONS SINCE THE ARMISTICE ENDING ISRAEL'S 1948 WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.

MILITARY OFFICERS FROM ISRAEL AND SYRIA WERE SCHEDULED TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT FRIDAY IN GENEVA, ENDING THE TWO NATIONS' 11-WEEK WAR OF ATTRITION ALONG THE GOLAN HEIGHTS.

THE BREAKTHROUGH FACT SET THE STAGE FOR A TRIP TO THE MIDDLE EAST BY PRESIDENT NIXON NEXT MONTH AND A FULL-SCALE PEACE CONFERENCE IN GENEVA IN JULY.

ISRAEL WAS EXPECTED TO ARRANGE A NEW TROOP PULLBACK ACCORD WITH EGYPT IN THE FALL AND THEN ATTEMPT TO REACH A MILITARY DISENGAGEMENT FACT WITH JORDAN.

MRS. MEIR CALLED THE KNESSET (PARLIAMENT) INTO SESSION AFTER KISSINGER'S DEPARTURE TO TELL ISRAELI LEGISLATORS THE DETAILS OF THE AGREEMENT AND ASK FOR APPROVAL.

ISRAELI GOVERNMENT SOURCES GAVE THESE DETAILS IN ADVANCE:

--ISRAEL WILL WITHDRAW FROM THE 325 SQUARE MILES OF SYRIAN LAND CAPTURED IN THE 1973 MIDDLE EAST WAR AND A SLICE OF GOLAN HEIGHTS TERRITORY TAKEN IN 1967. ISRAEL WILL GIVE UP QUNEITRA, FORMER CAPITAL OF THE HEIGHTS, BUT KEEP THREE STRATEGIC HILLS WEST OF THE CITY.

--ABOUT 1,250 MEMBERS OF A UNITED NATIONS DISENGAGEMENT OBSERVER FORCE (UNDOF) WILL POLICE A GOLAN BUFFER ZONE 1.2 TO 3.6 MILES WIDE.

--SYRIAN CIVILIANS AND ADMINISTRATORS WILL RETURN TO QUNEITRA AND ARAB VILLAGES IN THE BUFFER ZONE.

--ISRAEL AND SYRIA WILL EACH BE LIMITED TO 6,000 TROOPS, 75 TANKS AND 36 LIGHT ARTILLERY GUNS WITHIN SIX MILES OF THE BUFFER ZONE. EACH WILL BE BARRED FROM HAVING MISSILES AND LONG-RANGE ARTILLERY IN THE NEXT SIX MILES, BUT WILL BE ABLE TO KEEP UP TO 450 TANKS AND UNRESTRICTED TROOPS IN THE AREA.

--SYRIA WILL RELEASE 68 ISRAELI PRISONERS IN EXCHANGE FOR 392 SYRIANS, 10 IRAQIS AND SIX MOROCCANS SEIZED BY ISRAEL IN THE 1973 MIDDLE EAST WAR.

--THE UNITED STATES WAS EXPECTED TO GIVE ISRAEL ASSURANCES OF POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC SUPPORT IN CASE OF RETALIATORY RAIDS AGAINST ARAB GUERRILLA BASES IN SYRIA.

ISRAELI SOURCES SAID THE LAST ITEM LED THE JERUSALEM GOVERNMENT WEDNESDAY TO DROP THE FINAL UNRESOLVED ISSUE -- AN ISRAELI CALL FOR SYRIA TO DISCOURAGE PALESTINIAN GUERRILLA RAIDS.

KISSINGER VISITED ISRAEL 17 TIMES AND MADE 13 TRIPS TO SYRIA DURING HIS TIRESOME PEACE MISSION, WHICH ALSO INCLUDED TRIPS TO EGYPT, SAUDI ARABIA AND ALGERIA.

HE TALKED THREE TIMES WITH SOVIET FOREIGN MINISTER ANDREI GROMYKO TO BLUNT RUSSIAN OPPOSITION TO THE TRIP. A HIGH U.S. OFFICIAL SAID THE SOVIETS DID NOT HINDER THE MISSION, BUT FAILED TO HELP.

UPI 05-30 01:09 AED

a054

r czzcwyyfu v

Kissinger Bjt a030, 031 Lead

By BARRY SCHWEID

Associated Press Writer

JERUSALEM AP - Henry A. Kissinger finally left for Cairo and home today, ending a 33-day marathon peace mission that won an agreement to separate hostile Israeli and Syrian armies on the Golan Heights. The American secretary of state termed the accord a possible "turning point in the history of the Middle East."

"There is now hope we can move to a more lasting peace in the Middle East," Kissinger told a farewell airport news conference.

As Kissinger prepared to board his Air Force jetliner, Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban quipped to newsmen: "I have an announcement to make: the secretary will not be coming back tonight. That is something."

Kissinger shuttled 13 times between Jerusalem and Damascus in his search for the cease-fire agreement.

He flew to Cairo for a stopover of several hours to give Egyptian President Anwar Sadat a personal report as Israeli and Syrian leaders studied the agreement.

Premier Golda Meir was presenting the accord to the Knesset, Israel's parliament, and in Damascus the council of Syria's ruling Baath party was meeting to consider it.

Meanwhile, an Israeli team left this morning for Geneva to sign the pact under United Nations auspices on Friday. The agreement was to take effect then, and fighting was to cease and prisoners held by both sides freed.

The artillery duel on the Golan Heights tapered to a halt on Wednesday as news of the agreement filtered to front-line troops. But the Syrian military command said shelling began again today for the 80th consecutive day.

A spokesman in Damascus said Syrian forces pounded "enemy positions with artillery in four areas, and there were artillery exchanges in some other parts of the front."

News of the agreement received banner treatment in today's Damascus newspaper.

Informed sources in Damascus said Syria was delaying its formal announcement until after the signing Friday, although the Syrian government radio broadcast, a report of President Nixon's announcement in Washington.

Israeli Information Minister Shimon Peres said the pact was expected to win the approval of the 120-seat Knesset. Mrs. Meir's coalition government has at least a two-seat majority, and the only open opposition to the agreement came from the right-wing opposition Likud party, which controls 39 votes.

Israeli officials said Mrs. Meir might resign immediately after a favorable vote, turning over the government to Premier designate Yitzhak Rabin.

Peres, who Rabin has named as his defense minister, said the next step in the Middle East peace process probably will be a second round of talks between Israel and Egypt next autumn.

A resumption of negotiations with Egypt would come before talks with Jordan, he added.

A senior American official, meantime, said the settlement worked out by Secretary of State Kissinger would give "moderate" Arab countries such as Egypt an opportunity to continue their policies.

The official praised Presidents Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Houari Boumedienne of Algeria for "a very constructive role" in the negotiations with Syria.

He said the agreement with Damascus also could make possible a move by Arab countries toward conciliation with the United States.

Israeli sources close to the negotiations described the main points of the agreement this way:

- The United Nations will provide 1,250 soldiers to man a buffer zone between the armies. The zone will be from one to four miles wide and will stretch the 40-mile length of the Golan Heights.

- For 12 miles on either side of this zone, forces for each side will be restricted to 6,000 soldiers, 75 tanks and 36 short-range 122mm artillery pieces.

- Troop concentrations will be unrestricted behind these zones, although only 450 tanks and no antiaircraft missiles will be permitted.

- Both sides will retain control of their air space.

It was understood that delineation of the line would mean the reversion to Syria of some land it lost in the 1967 and 1973 wars with Israel, but sources would not disclose exactly how much.

The breakthrough in reaching agreement came Tuesday when Israel dropped its insistence that the pact incorporate written guarantees against Palestinian terrorist infiltrators from Syria.

In exchange for the crucial concession, Israel reportedly got an American pledge that Israeli retaliation against terrorist attacks would be 'understood,' in Washington - interpreted to mean the United States would veto any U.N. Security Council resolutions condemning possible Israeli reprisal raids.

One of Israel's negotiators, its ambassador to Washington, Simha Dinitz, sounded a note of caution as he returned to his post.

He said Israel was 'well aware we must keep an eye on the Syrians because they are not known as a nation that keeps its promises,'

Dinitz said the agreement was the best Israel could get 'under the circumstances,' He said the cease-fire would 'enable us to have a period of quiet, make steps toward peace and ensure a line of security without loss.'

One expected result of Kissinger's 33-day mission is an upswing in relations between Damascus and Washington. At least part of $100 million in contingency funds sought by President Nixon in foreign aid for fiscal year 1973 may be channeled to Syria.

The United States also may provide assistance to rebuild towns and villages shelled during the 1967 and 1973 wars.

Perhaps more significant for the course of events in the Middle East, Syria has been drawn into the Geneva peace conference that it boycotted last December, even though Egypt and Jordan for the first time sat at the same table as Israel.

Kissinger carefully laid the groundwork for the disengagement by cultivating Algeria's Boumedienne along with Egypt's Sadat - Syrian President Hafez Assad's ally in last year's October war.

Now, on his way home to Washington, Kissinger is stopping in Cairo again today both to give Sadat a first-hand report and as a gesture of support.

Relations with Cairo, broken in 1967 and kept suspended while the United States ferried life-saving arms to Israel in October, have rebounded to the point where serious consideration is being given to supplying Sadat with American weapons.

The United States is assisting the rehabilitation of the Suez Canal region and the major cities along its banks. The troop separation Kissinger arranged last January in the Sinai has given Egypt and Israel a military respite and eased the burdens on their economies. Apparently the terms of the pact are being scrupulously observed.

016A

PEACE 5-30

DAY LD

ANALYSIS

BY STEWART HENSLEY

UPI DIPLOMATIC REPORTER

WASHINGTON (UPI) -- WITHOUT DISCOUNTING THE MAJOR DIPLOMATIC ACHIEVEMENT OF SECRETARY OF STATE HENRY A. KISSINGER IN SECURING AGREEMENT ON DISENGAGEMENT OF OPPOSING MILITARY FORCES IN THE AREA, OFFICIALS HERE SAID THAT SOME TRULY MASSIVE DIFFICULTIES LIE AHEAD.

THE GENEVA CONFERENCE ON THE MIDDLE EAST, WHICH WAS CONVENED DEC. 22 UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA, NOW CAN GET DOWN TO WORK ON ITS MAIN TASK -- WORKING ON A FORMULA TO BRING PERMANENT PEACE AND STABILITY TO THE TURBULENT AREA.

BUT IT WILL TAKE MONTHS AND PROBABLY YEARS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE VOLATILE TERRITORIAL AND SECURITY ISSUES ACTUALLY CAN BE SETTLED.

PRESIDENT NIXON ACKNOWLEDGED IN HIS WEDNESDAY ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ISRAELI-SYRIAN GOLAN HEIGHTS CEASEFIRE AGREEMENT THAT THERE ARE "MANY DIFFICULTIES" AHEAD BEFORE A PERMANENT SETTLEMENT CAN BE REACHED. AMONG THESE, THE TOUGHEST TO SOLVE ARE:

-- THE DEMANDS BY THE PALESTINIAN REFUGEES, WHO HAVE BEEN LIVING IN MAKESHIFT CAMPS FOR 25 YEARS SINCE THE CREATION OF ISRAEL, FOR A STATE OF THEIR OWN. NOBODY HAS COME UP WITH A SATISFACTORY PROPOSAL FOR MEETING THIS DEMAND.

-- ARAB DEMANDS FOR RETURN TO ARABIAN CONTROL OF THE EASTERN HALF OF THE CITY OF JERUSALEM, TAKEN FROM JORDAN BY ISRAEL. THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE SAUDI ARABIA'S KING FEISAL, WHO IS REGARDED AS A "MODERATE" INFLUENCE, IS DETERMINED THAT THE OLD CITY BE RESTORED TO JORDAN. THE OLD CITY OF JERUSALEM CONTAINS SOME OF THE HOLIEST SHRINES OF ISLAM, AND FEISAL CONSIDERS HIMSELF THE PROTECTOR OF SUCH HOLY AREAS IN JERUSALEM, MECCA AND MEDINA.

-- ISRAEL'S DEMAND THAT ANY CHANGES IN THE FRONTIERS IN THE AREA BE MADE IN SUCH A WAY AS TO GUARANTEE HER SECURITY. ISRAEL INSISTS ON DEMILITARIZATION OF THE SYRIAN TERRITORY IN THE GOLAN HEIGHTS, ARRANGEMENTS AT SHARM EL SEIKH AT THE FOOT OF THE SINAI PENINSULA WHICH WILL PREVENT EGYPT FROM HAVING ANY ABILITY TO CLOSE THE GULF OF AQABA TO ISRAELI SHIPPING. WHILE APPARENTLY WILLING TO RETURN ALL OF THE SINAI TO EGYPT, ISRAEL IS CERTAIN TO INSIST ON STRICT LIMITATION ON MILITARY FORCES AND ARMS EGYPT CAN MAINTAIN IN THAT DESERT AREA EAST OF THE SUEZ CANAL.

NIXON EXPRESSED THE BELIEF THAT CHANCES FOR THIS ARE BETTER THAN THEY HAVE BEEN "AT ANY OTHER TIME OVER THE LAST 25 YEARS."

THIS IS TRUE. BUT IT WOULD BE A GRAVE ERROR TO MINIMIZE THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROBLEMS AHEAD.

UPI 05-30 01:17 AED

CBA

WORLD 5-30

DAY LD

BY UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL

ARAB NATIONS REACTED WITH CAUTION TODAY TO SECRETARY OF STATE HENRY A. KISSINGER'S SUCCESS IN SEPARATING ISRAELI AND SYRIAN FORCES, BUT COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD EXPRESSED HOPE FOR A "DURABLE AND JUST" MIDDLE EAST PEACE.

A TEARFUL PRIME MINISTER GOLDA MEIR TOLD KISSINGER OF ISRAEL'S "GREAT APPRECIATION, ADMIRATION AND WONDER" AT HIS MARATHON MISSION TO END THE 11-WEEK WAR OF ATTRITION ON THE EMBATTLED GOLAN HEIGHTS.

"WE ALL HOPE THIS GOES WELL, AND THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS A BEGINNING FOR A REAL AND LASTING PEACE WITH ALL OUR NEIGHBORS, ON ALL OUR BORDERS," MRS. MEIR SAID.

EGYPT'S GOVERNMENT-CONTROLLED PRESS PLAYED DOWN THE MILITARY DISENGAGEMENT PACT AS ONLY A STEP TO FULL-SCALE MIDDLE EAST PEACE TALKS IN GENEVA.

THE CAIRO NEWSPAPER AL AKHBAR SAID PEACE WAS IMPOSSIBLE AS LONG AS ISRAEL "PURSUES AN EXPANSIONIST AND AGGRESSIVE POLICY AND CONTINUES TO DENY THE RIGHTS OF THE PALESTINIANS."

"ISRAEL SHOULD REMEMBER THIS AT THE SECOND PHASE OF THE GENEVA CONFERENCE BECAUSE THE ARABS ARE DETERMINED TO REALIZE THEIR JUST OBJECTIVES REGARDLESS OF THE PRICE," THE NEWSPAPER SAID IN AN EDITORIAL.

DAMASCUS BROADCASTS GAVE MORE PROMINENCE TO THE LATEST REPORTS OF FIGHTING ON THE GOLAN HEIGHTS THAN TO WEDNESDAY'S SYRIAN-ISRAELI AGREEMENT TO SEPARATE OPPOSING ARMIES IN THE REGION.

SYRIAN RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS GENERALLY CONFINED THEMSELVES TO BROADCASTING EXCERPTS FROM PRESIDENT NIXON'S ANNOUNCEMENT IN WASHINGTON OF THE AGREEMENT.

NIXON SAID WEDNESDAY THE CHANCES OF A LASTING PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST "ARE BETTER THAN THEY HAVE BEEN AT ANY TIME OVER THE PAST 25 YEARS."

"WHAT WAS A MAJOR ROADBLOCK TO A MAJOR PERMANENT SETTLEMENT HAS NOW BEEN REMOVED," NIXON SAID IN A NATIONALLY BROADCAST ANNOUNCEMENT.

A RUSSIAN-SYRIAN COMMUNIQUE, ISSUED AT THE END OF SOVIET FOREIGN MINISTER ANDREI A. GROMYKO'S TRIP TO DAMASCUS, CALLED ON ISRAEL TO ABANDON ALL OCCUPIED ARAB TERRITORY AND SAFEGUARD "THE NATIONAL RIGHTS OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE."

WEST GERMAN FOREIGN MINISTER HANS DIETER GENSCHER CALLED THE ACCORD AN "INDISPENSIBLE PRECONDITION FOR BRINGING ABOUT A DURABLE AND JUST PEACE SETTLEMENT FOR THE PEOPLES OF THE MIDDLE EAST."

A BELGIAN GOVERNMENT SPOKESMAN SAID THE AGREEMENT REFLECTED "THE TALENTS AND EFFICIENCY" OF KISSINGER AND RAISED HOPES "THE GENEVA PEACE CONFERENCE CAN PICK UP A MEANINGFUL PACE."

THE ITALIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY SAID THE PACT RAISED "THE PROSPECT OF NEGOTIATIONS TO RE-ESTABLISH A JUST PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST TO THE ADVANTAGE OF ALL PEOPLE OF THAT REGION."

THE DUTCH GOVERNMENT SAID "A FAVORABLE CLIMATE WAS CREATED FOR AN INITIATIVE AIMED AT CLOSER COOPERATION BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES."

THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE CONGRATULATED "THE GOVERNMENTS CONCERNED ON THIS ACHIEVEMENT" AND SAID KISSINGER'S "UNREMITTING EFFORTS HAVE DONE SO MUCH TO BRING IT ABOUT."

UPI 05-30 02:45 AED

a033

d czzc zyyv zyyv

Reaction With Kissinger Bjt 480
By The Associated Press

President Nixon, Western European leaders and young Israelis welcomed the Israel-Syria disengagement agreement. But the Soviet Union was cautious, Syria and most other Arab countries were silent and some older Israelis were skeptical whether the pact will succeed.

President Nixon said the agreement was "obviously a major diplomatic achievement and Secretary Kissinger deserves enormous credit for the work that he has done."

He said in a televised speech that as a result of the pact, "the prospects for reaching agreement on a permanent basis. I think now, are better than they have been at any time over the past 25 years."

A British Foreign Office spokesman said, "We congratulate the governments concerned in this achievement. We salute Dr. Kissinger, whose unremitting efforts have done so much to bring it about," agreedneh Beriahbyeh Damahsiboy Kissinger sensachoodah for progress at the Geneva peace conference on the Middle East.

Most Arab countries said little about the accord, and Syrian broadcasts only quoted President Nixon's announcement that a settlement had been reached. There was no official Syrian confirmation of the pact, and some citizens doubted it was settled.

A highly placed source in Damascus said Syria might not make an announcement until Friday, when the agreement is to be signed in Geneva. Palestinian guerrilla sources were not commenting, apparently waiting for Syria to take the lead.

In Egypt, however, news of the settlement was flashed on Cairo radio. Particular attention was paid to President Nixon's statement that the prospects for a lasting peace now are better than ever.

The mass-circulation Cairo newspaper Al Ahkbar described the accord as only a "first step toward achieving an all-encompassing solution," to the Middle East problem.

The Soviet news agency Tass reported the agreement but said it must be accompanied by other measures in order to really pacify the Middle East. It said "appropriate measures should immediately be taken to achieve an all-encompassing and just settlement."

That viewpoint was echoed in a communique issued in Damascus by President Hafez Assad and Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko.

"The Syrian and Soviet viewpoints converged that a just and lasting peace cannot be achieved in the Middle East except through complete Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories and the restoration of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people," the communique said.

"I think it's wonderful, Kissinger has done it again," exclaimed Yossi Onn, an Israeli religious high school pupil, upon hearing of the disengagement. But some older Israelis were skeptical.

"I don't trust the agreement one bit," said Moshe Ehrlich, a 48-year-old business executive from Tel Aviv. "I've lived in Israel all my life, and I've never known the Syrians to keep their word."
0328 aED 05'30

MAY 30, 1974

"What Was Your House Going To Be Made Of?"

For the Record

From remarks by Sen. George D. Aiken (R-Vt.) in the Senate, May 21.

In June, for the third year in a row the President will meet with the leaders of the Soviet Union, this time in Moscow.

In the midst of our national political furor, it has been suggested that this meeting be cancelled or postponed. Some feel that President Nixon should not go to Moscow while a political temperature is on here. I hope and trust that the President will go ahead with his plans. It is essential that he do so.

It would be wrong to give the leaders of the Soviet Union the impression that something has happened, or it is likely to happen, that would cast doubt on the priority that all Presidents must give to keeping the peace.

The President has made it plain that he will not run away from the office to which he was elected. When he goes to Moscow, he will be the representative of the United States. It is important to show the Soviet leaders that an open society can still function competently even in the face of bizarre national events and charges.

More important, the leaders of the Soviet Union must not be left in any doubt about our dedication to building on the new relationship that has evolved between our two countries.

The overwhelming justification for detente, of course, is the need to continue to work out a strategic doctrine that rules out the use of massive nuclear weapons as instruments of national policy....

The enduring purpose of the SALT talks is to provide a means through which we can hope to transfer our values to those who possess with us this ultimate destructive power. . . .

The President's trip to Moscow is not designed to engage in debate, but rather to make sure the SALT channel remains open.

I hope and expect that the President will bring back an agreement to this effect.

Jr.

biance in LBJ's Oval Office

Presidents in
Richard

For all their special relevance to an investigation of Watergate crimes and other

10-A Thursday, May 30, '74

DETROIT FREE PRESS

Lightning
Kills 5 in
St. Louis
Suburbs

ST. LOUIS, MO.—(UPI)—Four schoolgirls were killed when they were struck by lightning from a thunderstorm that swept over St. Louis County Wednesday. A woman golfer was killed and her companion injured when lightning split a golf course tree.

The bodies of the four teenage girls were found huddled together beneath a tree in a wooded area behind John F. Kennedy Memorial High School in suburban Manchester.

The bodies of the girls, all students of the private Catholic high school, had traces of burns but no other marks of violence, according to Raymond I. Harris, chief medical examiner for the county.

Harris said the girls apparently had left the school about 10:30 a.m. after taking exams. Their bodies were discovered

six hours later, drenched from the pouring rain which accompanied the storm.

Harris said two of the girls were burned badly.

The names of the girls were withheld pending notification of relatives.

EARLIER WEDNESDAY, two women golfers sought shelter under an oak tree during a thunderstorm. Lightning split the tree and Jackie Rozanski, 31, of suburban Black Jack, died several hours later at a hospital. Her companion, Catherine Gerhart, 31, also of Black Jack, was treated at the hospital and released.

The worgen were standing beneath the tree on the fairway of the 12th hole at the Paddock Country Club when lightning struck the 75-foot tree, splitting it down the middle.

museum
replica
crosses

Please a young
graduate with an
authorized
reproduction by Alva
Electroplated in gold.
We show just four

Come to
sportsman's
country!

Come north to Quebec
Manitou Ridesieu
A grandiose resort
hated rich in European fashion
overlooking
the St. Lawrence River at Murray Bay.
Just north of Quebec city.

The Manic is known for its
excellent facilities. Superb cuisine.
15 hole golf course. Swimming, fishing,
riding, tennis and planned entertainment.

Come to sportsmen's country now!
Manic tables are from $340.
Full American plan plus tax.

LIQUOR SALE

May 31 and June 1, 1974 (time: 8 A.M. to 5 P.M.)

the Michigan Liquor Control Commission
Has Concentrated DISCONTINUED Brands
AT CLOSE-OUT PRICES
AT SELECTED STORES

THIS MERCHANDISE IS AVAILABLE
AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS

STORE 131
DETROIT
6475 E. MICHIGANS
DETROIT, MICHIGAN

STORE 139
PONTIAC
447 50. SAGINAW
PONTIAC, MICHIGAN