Rollins & Hagan

Insurance & Real Estate Agency

P. O. BOX 267
386-2531

Johnsonville, S. C. 29555

148 WEST MAIN STREET
394-2422

Lake City, S. C. 29560

HIGHWAY 17, 8th AVENUE SOUTH
238-5923

Surfside Beach, S. C. 29577

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

Attached are brochures which I believe will be of interest to you. One is for Fawn Vista North, our section of Deerfield Plantation. Since it was prepared before detailed plans were finalized, I have listed below some additional information for your consideration.

Fawn Vista North will consist of 2 and 3 bedroom condominium townhouses with sales prices of each unit ranging from $32,000.00 to $39,000.00. Each townhouse will offer Dishwasher, Compactor, Garbage Disposal, Washer and Dryer, Self-Cleaning Range, Refrigerator with Ice Maker, and Cable Television. Each unit will have Mailboxes mounted as an attractive outdoor light fixture with daily mail delivery. All utility wires will be underground.

A Kidney-shaped Swimming Pool 25' x 40' and all weather tennis courts with lights will be provided. Twenty-four hour Security Service will be in effect at the main gate.

All units will offer a choice of wall to wall carpet, tile, and wallpaper. All units will have Electric Heat and Air Conditioning.

Deerfield Plantation itself will contain an 18 hole golf course, an olympic size pool, a three story club house, and four tennis courts, among other outstanding facilities.

The second brochure is for Marina Colony located in Murrells Inlet. Each unit will have the same appliances as above with Cable Television, Electric Heat and Air Conditioning, and a choice of wall to wall carpet, tile, and wallpaper.

I will be glad to furnish you with any additional information and to show you around Fawn Vista North and Marina Colony at any time.

Developers: ----------

Builders: ----------

William P. Hagan & George T. Hagan

Harvey J. Grier & Allen C. Grier

Yours, truly,

P.S. Estimated monthly charges at Fawn Vista North for common maintenance, repairs, etc., is $30.00.

FAWN VISTA NORTH

MARINA COLONY

FLORAL VILLA

ELC

ROLLINS & HAGAN, INC. - DEVELOPERS
GRIER BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO. - BUILDERS

Highway 17 & 8th Avenue South
Surfside Beach, South Carolina

TELEPHONE: (803) 238-5923

Mary Jane Sink, Sales Agent

MAP OF

DEERFIELD

PLANTATION

Biographical Outline of Fawn Vista
and Deerfield Plantation

For those who can afford the best of everything and would like to have it in one place, a championship golf course in the heart of The Grand Strand, members will enjoy a 12,000 sq. ft. club house, swimming, tennis, fishing and boating are also included for relaxation and family fun. In addition to this Deerfield is the most planned well thoughtout community on the Grand Strand, this includes water system and waste treatment plant. All utilities are underground the streets are paved and we have 24 hr. security service. In addition to all of this Fawn Vista offers a swimming pool, tennis court and sauna bath.

This lovely planned community is located 5 miles from the heart of Myrtle Beach, 2 miles from the U.S. Air Force Base that will be in joint use for commercial and air force, to be served by jet air service by Piedmont, Eastern and Delta air lines.

Deerfield Plantation is located approximately 1 mile from the famous blue Atlantic and 6 miles from historic Murrells Inlet, the seafood capital of the world.

Fawn Vista North is a unique condominium project for those who can afford it, with occupancy spring of 1974.

Marina Colony

Gulf Stream
50 miles

Marina Colony

Hwy. 17

Located in historic, picturesque Murrells Inlet, Marina Colony offers a unique blend of modern luxury living in a setting of beautiful live oaks and Spanish moss, unsurpassed seafood restaurants, charter fishing boats and Southern charm. Two-bedroom townhouse units designed by Homecraft include all appliances, central heat and air conditioning and plush appointments throughout. Purchasers will own a common interest in a swimming pool, tennis court, boat ramp and marina docking facilities with natural channel access to inlet and deep sea fishing. All this is offered for the unbelievable price of $35,000 to $39,500 per unit.

Murrells Inlet

Marina Colony has been developed from a dream to provide a setting steeped in tradition with amenities designed to offer a complete luxurious restful life with recreational activities ranging from water skiing, tennis and swimming for the more active sportsman to fresh water fishing on premises and a private marina for access to the sea.

Marina Colony is located in the heart of Murrells Inlet, which is surrounded with history. This famous seafood resort has been a retreat since the early seventeen-hundreds. No visit to Murrells Inlet is complete unless you have the good fortune to meet an old timer who is willing to share with you his memories and perhaps even experiences of the past. You will listen spell bound as he tells intriguing tales of the civil war and of the ghosts that can still be seen wandering through our inlet. He will tell about the ghost that lives at The Pelican Inn at Pawley's Island, he died during a hurricane trying to warn his fiancee of the storm, or perhaps he will tell about Alice who still roams through the moss lined gardens of The Hermitage which is less than a mile from Marina Colony. Alice can be seen in the moon light looking for the engagement ring she lost in the garden just days before she died.

When tourist leave Murrells Inlet they feel a longing to return soon, many return to this area to make it their home.

ROLLINS & HAGAN, INC. - DEVELOPERS
GRIER BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO. - BUILDERS
Sales Agent

TELEPHONE: (803) 238-5923

23 Avenue de la Joyeuse Entrée
1040 Bruxelles

12 October 1973

I am pleased to be one of the few lucky ones to see you at dinner on Monday evening (I gather it is the most popular dinner in London for at least 50 years and tickets are changing hands on the Black Market for astronomical sums !) and I am in fact coming over from Brussels specially for this delightful purpose.

What I was wondering was whether there was any chance of chatting to you for a few minutes later that evening - since we are hardly likely to get an opportunity of doing so at the dinner ? Walter Annenberg tells me that he carefully refrains from enquiring into your late night plans - hence this note and if in fact you have no other plans after the dinner we might go and have a quiet chat at Claridaes or at some suitable night club.

Best wishes,

The Honourable Henry Kissinger.

30 November 1973

I was delighted when your secretary rang me the other day and told me that you had been able to find a date for the London visit and in the meantime all necessary arrangements have as you know been made. We now look forward with joyful anticipation to listening to you on the 12th.

Generally speaking, things seem to be moving sideways rather than forward on the various fronts we talked about in our brief chat in Washington. If you have a few minutes during your European visit it would be fun to talk again, but I know that you will be extremely busy - so please do not give it too much thought.

Your secretary has my telephone numbers in Brussels but unfortunately I will not be here during the whole of the two days you yourself are due to be in town. What we might do - if you are not too committed in other directions - is to explore the London night life after your speech on the 12th !

9 MOORFIELDS HIGHWALK
LONDON, E.C.2.

01-638 4010

30th October 1975

I hear that you and Nancy are likely to spend a few days
in London in mid-December.

If your timetable permits it, Heather and I would very much like to catch a glimpse of you both. Is there even a remote chance of our having you to lunch or dinner (or for a drink)?

It also occurred to us that you might perhaps enjoy a
small gathering in one place of some of your private U.K.
friends and in that case we could easily arrange to assemble
such an assortment for you and Nancy at our house. But above
all it would be very nice for us to see the two of you!

The Hon. Henry Kissinger.

1/6/77
2:00pm

Madison Hotel
London,
1 Stanhope Street,
The General Electric Company, Ltd.,
Mr. Ronald Crichton,

Henry V. Kleininger

Warm regards,

you at the Madison.
January 10th and 13th I will have my secretary contact
can get together, but it something opens up between
January 20th. I doubt if I will have a moment when we
By the look of my calendar between now and

of you to think of me.
Already made other plans, but it was extremely kind
holiday after we leave here. Unfortunately, we have
full offer of the use of your house in Florence for a
Nancy and I much appreciate the very thought-

Dear Ronnie:

January 10, 1977

THE GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY LIMITED

1 STANHOPE GATE · LONDON W1A 1EH
01-493 8484

22nd December 1976

PERSONAL

It has just occurred to me that if you and Nancy want to have a
<u>totally</u> quiet time after the 20th January and do not mind wintry Mediterranean
weather we would be very pleased to lend you our farmhouse near Florence for
as long as you want it. It is comfortable and we have an excellent staff
who would be delighted to look after you. You have only to say so and we can
make the arrangements.

On the other hand I suspect that you will either be busy in the States
organising your new life or in search of warmer Caribbean temperatures.

I will be in Washington from 10th to 13th January but imagine that this
will be just about the busiest week of your life. However if you have time for
a chat, your secretary can either contact me here before the 10th or leave a
message for me at the Madison where I will be staying.

The Hon. Henry Kissinger.

REGISTERED IN ENGLAND NO. 69307 . REGISTERED OFFICE: I STANHOPE GATE, LONDON

Ford stands by
Henry Kissinger
against attackers

By TOM OCHILTREE

Panax Washington Correspondent

WASHINGTON — In the wake of the Vietnam debacle, Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger's status has changed dramatically from "genius" to "expendable" with a lot of people, but the one person who counts, President Ford, firmly rejects that line of talk.

The President has said he wants Kissinger to continue to wear two hats — as director of the National Security Council as well as Secretary of State.

THAT IS ONE of the flanks where Kissinger is being attacked. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, a declared Democratic presidential hopeful from Texas, has drafted legislation to prohibit a person from serving simultaneously in those two posts on the grounds that this constitutes too great concentration of power in the hands of one man.

The President also has said that Kissinger has assured him that he will stay through the end of Ford's present term.

While the President's publicly expressed support undoubtedly is a comfort to Kissinger, there is no question that some of the glitter has gone out of the Secretary of State's performance in the international arena.

Commenting on this change in Kissinger's public image, Sen. Robert P. Griffin, D-Mich., told newsmen the other day:

"I THINK HE is being made a target now by a lot of people in the media, and by Democrats running for the presidency. I think it is unfair and is part of an effort to shift the blame for failures of foreign policy, which really are failures of congressional foreign policy.

"I think historians will assess Kissinger as one of the most able and best secretaries of state in the history of the United States. Also, I think a lot of his critics know that.

Asked to cite examples where interference by Congress had produced foreign policy setbacks, Griffin listed:

- The cutting off of arms aid to Turkey in the wake of the Cyprus crisis which damaged America's relationship with Turkey without winning us any compensating improvement in relations with Greece.

- The attempt to provide Soviet Jews with more opportunity to migrate to Israel by linking that issue with American trade and credit concessions to Russia. As a result, improvement in American-Russian trade relations was nullified while the position of Soviet Jews was made worse if anything.

- The removal of "most favored nation" trading arrangements with oil producing South American countries such as Venezuela — a counter-productive action which added to hemisphere bad feelings.

- The Democratic Caucus resolutions before the Easter recess and before the South Vietnamese pullback and collapse in the northern provinces which convinced Saigon it no longer could count on American military aid.

FOR THE PAST decade Congress, and particularly the Senate, have engaged in a tug-of-war with succeeding administrations for a larger say in the conduct of foreign affairs. The lawmakers argued that succeeding presidents, at least since Woodrow Wilson's time, have eroded responsibilities in the fields of diplomacy and war making which the Constitution grants Congress.

That argument now largely has been won. Whether this is good or bad for the country remains to be seen. Griffin, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, made this comment: "There are times when national security requires that we be able to speak with one voice. I think the assertion by Congress of a greater and more meaningful role in diplomacy is good, but in the process Congress will have to exercise responsibility and restraint.

"Foreign policy issues are not things which can be switched around or run up and down to correspond to public opinion polls."

Griffin said close consultation between the White House and Congress was necessary in the forging of a bipartisan foreign policy.

NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY

Room 1509

2 West 45th Street

New York, New York 10036

212-575-1876

PROFESSOR HANS J. MORGENTHAU
CHAIRMAN

DOCTOR A. ROY ECKARDT
VICE CHAIRMAN

DOCTOR FRANKLIN H. LITTELL
VICE CHAIRMAN

STATEMENT OF POLICY AND OBJECTIVES

The National Committee on American Foreign Policy has as
its primary objective alerting and educating the American people
and our leaders to the grave risks to the security of the United
States and the Free World inherent in a foreign policy which is
based on the premise that the Communist bloc is honestly committed
to meaningful global detente. The Committee believes this premise
to be most immediately dangerous in the Middle East, where the
present policy of the United States Government is to placate the
Soviet Union and the Arabs by American concessions, involving the
territorial whittling down of Israel. The Committee believes that
emphasis should be placed on preserving the security of staunch
allies, such as Israel, as being in the best long-term strategic
interest of the United States and the Free World.

July 24, 1974

Room 1509

2 West 45th Street

New York, New York 10036

212-575-1876

September 11, 1974

Dear Professor Griffith:

No sane person can be opposed to true detente
between the superpowers and to real peace in the Middle East.
But "detente" can also be used as a slogan to cover actions
conductive neither to security nor peace.

The most recent examples of such actions range
from false and misleading statements about alleged "summit"
achievements to the unremitting pressure on Israel to jeopardize
its very existence, while the Arabs move towards another war;
from the intended sale of the most sophisticated electronic
surveillance equipment to the Soviet secret police to awarding
a nuclear reactor to Egypt, a country that has access to an
abundance of energy sources.

In a democracy, only vigilant public scrutiny
can expose and prevent such dangerous abuses of the universal
aspiration for peace. The National Committee on American Foreign
Policy is dedicated to informing the public, through bulletins,
position papers, advertisements, lectures, and symposia about
these abuses and their implications. Your presence as a member
of our National Board of Directors will lend us the prestige and
weight that are necessary for our effectiveness.

I invite you to sign the enclosed card as an
indication of your willingness to serve on the National Board of
Directors and return it in the envelope provided.

For your perusal, I have enclosed a copy of
our Statement of Objectives and additional material you may find
of interest.

Unless the United States takes immediate steps to force an Arab-Israeli settlement, the explosion of a fifth war in that tragic area seems inevitable—along with a new and tougher oil squeeze, widespread financial chaos and the most serious threat to world peace in decades

IT'S OUR
MOVE IN THE
MIDDLE EAST

BY WILLIAM E. GRIFFITH

IF you think the Arab oil squeeze a year ago was bad, you haven't seen anything yet. The Arabs may soon impose a new squeeze, far more excruciating than the last, either before or during the next Israeli-Arab war, which is now looming on the horizon. If a new squeeze does come, there will be gas rationing, chilly homes and offices, shutdown factories, soaring unemployment and dire shortages of petroleum-based

products ranging from plastics to fertilizers. The Arabs may also try to disrupt our financial system by suddenly withdrawing the billions of dollars they have on deposit in American banks. One way or other, we could well be tipped into the first major depression since the 1930s.

All this will probably happen unless Washington takes prompt and decisive action to settle the long-standing conflict between Israel and the Arabs. The key issue involves the territories that Israel conquered in the 1967 war. The Israelis flatly refuse to return these territories in their entirety. The Arabs are as flatly determined to get all of them back. The recent Arab recognition of Yasir Arafat's Palestine Liberation

WILLIAM E. GRIFFITH, a Reader's Digest Roving Editor, is Ford Professor of Political Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a senior research associate at its Center for International Studies. He is also professor of diplomatic history at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

tires
Itself
I did
I saw
that
the
electronic
Israel
point
of
tact
If
sure
of
its
for
the
Study
to
tar
in
the
war
by
H

[LC]

makes immediate
Ali settlement, the
that tragic area
with a new and tougher
financial chaos and the
peace in decades

THE
EST

ranging from plastics to
The Arabs may also try to
ar financial system by sud-
抽drawing the billions of
they have on deposit in
 banks. One way or other,
well be tipped into the first
expression since the 1930s.
will probably happen un-
Washington takes prompt and
action to settle the long-
conflict between Israel and
Os. The key issue involves
ories that Israel conquered
1967 war. The Israelis flatly
return these territories in
retire. The Arabs are as flat-
mined to get all of them
the recent Arab recognition
Arafat's Palestine Libera-

tion Organization as the sole legiti-
mate representative of the Pales-
tinians has further worsened the
chances of avoiding a new crisis, for
Israel has refused to negotiate with
the PLO.

During a recent tour of the Middle
East, I talked with a number of Arab
leaders. They were unanimous in
telling me that what they call "the oil
weapon" and "the financial weapon"
will both be used against the United
States if nothing is done. We ignored
their warnings prior to the 1973 war
and the first oil squeeze. Will we
make the same mistake again?

Unfortunately, there is a danger
that we will do just that. Influential
elements in Congress and in the pub-
lic at large favor all-out support for
Israel, come what may. They argue
that Israel must retain a substantial
portion of the Arab lands as buffer
zones to protect Israel from Arab at-
tack. They could not be more wrong.
If this is done, Israel will almost
surely become embroiled in a fifth
war with the Arabs. The *only* way
for Israel to be safeguarded is for
it to give up the territories in return
for security guarantees.

I am not proposing that the United
States abandon Israel. On the con-
trary, America should be prepared
to defend its brave ally with mili-
tary force if need be. But defending
Israel's 1967 conquests is another
matter. These include the Sinai pen-
insula and Gaza Strip, which had
been ruled by Egypt; the Golan
Heights of Syria; and the West Bank

of the River Jordan and East Jeru-
salem, which had been part of Jor-
dan. For seven years the one million
Arabs in these territories have been
living under Israeli military rule,
denied self-determination. The Arab
governments have every right to re-
cover these lands, and Israel will
never be secure until they do.

It is important to remember that
Israel did not deliberately set out to
conquer the territories. Early in 1967,
Egypt's then president, Gamal Ab-
del Nasser, made menacing moves
toward Israel to bolster his standing
among the Arabs. He did not ac-
tually intend to attack, but the Is-
raelis misinterpreted his moves and
launched a pre-emptive war. In six
days they humbled the armies of
Egypt, Syria and Jordan and seized
territories more than three times the
size of their original state.

When Egypt and Syria launched
the 1973 war, they did not believe
they could smash Israel or even
reconquer the lost territories. The
aim of the attacks, coupled with the
oil squeeze, was evidently to get the
United States to pressure Israel to
begin evacuation of the territories.
In this the Arabs were initially suc-
cessful. Under American prodding,
Israel pulled back from the Suez
Canal and from part of the Golan
Heights. Subsequently, American re-
lations with the Arab states greatly
improved, especially with the moder-
ate leader now in charge of Egypt,
Anwar Sadat, and with Saudi Ara-
bia's King Faisal, and the Soviets

73

74

THE READER'S DIGEST

lost most of their influence in Egypt.

The Arabs, however, insist that we get the Israelis out of *all* the occupied territories. For the moment they are still waiting, albeit with growing impatience, to see what Washington will do. Many of them are now beginning to conclude that further waiting is a waste of time, that they must prepare to attack Israel again, and to reimpose the oil squeeze.

The opening shots of a new war, however, would probably be fired by the Israelis. They were caught napping in 1973 and are not likely to make that mistake again—especially after the United Nations' endorsement of the call by Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, for the dismantling of Israel. And if at any point in the next war the Israelis felt that they were in danger of being overwhelmed, or of being attacked with the Soviet-supplied SCUD missiles now in Arab hands, they would probably use missiles themselves and, if worst comes to worst, even the atomic weapons that most observers feel they now possess. The two superpowers would then quite likely be dragged into another confrontation that would threaten world peace. The Arabs, desperate for re-supply of arms, would invite the Soviets back. And a new oil squeeze would start at once.

The new squeeze, more intense and of longer duration than the last one, would bring on economic chaos. Oil shortages in the United States would cause serious hardship; but since we depend on the Arabs for

only about ten percent of the oil we consume, we probably could scrape through. The situation in Western Europe and Japan, which depend on the Arabs for 80 percent of their supply, would be much worse, with enormous declines in industrial output, mass unemployment and financial panic. Inasmuch as our economy is interlocked with those of Europe and Japan, they would probably drag us down the slippery slope with them. Certainly the strains on transatlantic relations would be intense and only to Moscow's advantage.

And, of course, in the underdeveloped world a new oil crisis would lead to tragedy. Quadrupled oil prices have already driven up the price of fertilizer so that Indian farmers, among others, are using far less than they should. As a result, food production is falling, and India's normally pitiful standard of living is sinking even further. In a new oil squeeze, widespread hunger could become mass starvation throughout the subcontinent.

What can be done to avert a new oil squeeze? There has been speculation about the possibility of sending an expeditionary force to the Middle East to seize the oil fields. Nothing, in my opinion, could be more self-defeating. The Arabs would blow up not just the wells but the whole complex system of pipelines and pumping stations that move the oil. One expert says that it would take two years to get the oil flowing again. There would be constant guerrilla warfare—in short,

February

1975

another stand by eve. Other Events in the Middle East This s convin tion—th places Ian He outpos a corri former el Sheil to Israe The Is East Je part of which holiest Islam. T about g Thus th that the their ow settleme Only t viet co solution the Isra raelis w necessar Americ aid, to drawals in boun for insti shrine, Jerusale arranger Holy P

[LC]

[LC]

February

ent of the oil we
ably could scrape
tion in Western
which depend
percent of their
uch worse, with
n industrial out-
ment and finan-
as our economy
those of Europe
would probably drag
very slope with
strains on trans-
should be intense
y's advantage.
in the under-
oil crisis would
Quadrupled oil
driven up the
so that Indian
ers, are using far
eld. As a result,
falling, and In-
ful standard of
ten further. In a
videspread hun-
mass starvation
continent.

e to avert a new
has been specu-
lessness of send-
ary force to the
the oil fields.
opinion, could
ing. The Arabs
just the wells
plex system of
ing stations that
expert says that
years to get the
There would be
arfare—in short,

1975

another Vietnam. And we would
stand alone in the world, condemned
by everyone.

Others stake their hopes for Middle East peace on further negotiations between Israel and the Arabs. This seems equally futile. Israel is convinced—mistakenly, in my opinion—that it *must* keep three key places to ensure its security: the Galan Heights, the Nahal paramilitary outposts along the Jordan River, and a corridor through the Sinai to the former Egyptian outpost of Sharm el Sheikh, which guards the entrance to Israel's only Red Sea port, Eilat. The Israelis also insist on retaining East Jerusalem, which they claim as part of their historic capital, but which also contains some of the holiest places of Christianity and Islam. The Arabs are just as insistent about getting all four places back. Thus there is no chance whatsoever that the Israelis and Arabs, left to their own devices, will work out a settlement on these areas.

Only the United States, with Soviet cooperation, can bring about a solution, a true compromise between the Israelis and the Arabs. The Israelis will have to be pressured, if necessary by threat of shutting off American military and economic aid, to make the requisite withdrawals. Certain minor adjustments in boundaries can be made so that, for instance, Judaism's most sacred shrine, the Wailing Wall of East Jerusalem, remains in Israel. And arrangements to internationalize the Holy Places in Jerusalem should

be made. But evacuation otherwise
should be complete.

Obviously, most Israelis oppose
such a move. They must be per-
suaded that they are wrong, that
Israel's security and long-term pros-
perity depend not on keeping the
territories—a delusion that should
have been shattered for all time by
the 1973 war—but on getting rid of
them. As I found during my tour, a
profound malaise has settled over
Israel. Under the constant threat of
a new war, the nation spends 40
percent of its economic output on
defense. Inflation, fueled by military
spending, is running from 30 to 40
percent a year. The Israelis have re-
cently had to devalue their currency
by nearly half. They are a brave peo-
ple, but they cannot cope with this
forever. Only a settlement with the
Arabs, coupled with safeguards, can
extricate them from these stifling
burdens.

How, then, is Israel to be safeguarded? The United States must enter into a treaty with Israel, guaranteeing help against any attack. Some Americans might object that this could drag us into a Middle Eastern war. In fact, the United States has never been prepared, past, present or future, to sit idly by while Israel was overwhelmed. Thus a new treaty would only formalize a long-standing commitment—and constitute a clear sign to the Arabs that we mean business, and therefore that they can never destroy or dismantle Israel.

As an added safety measure, a

75

[LC]

76

THE READER'S DIGEST

United Nations force should be inserted into demilitarized zones along both sides of the various frontiers. This force could be withdrawn only by a unanimous vote of the permanent members of the Security Council. This would give the United States a veto over any unwise withdrawal such as the one, carried out at Nasser's insistence, that helped to precipitate the 1967 war.

The Arabs would have to make major concessions, too. They would have to agree to a formal declaration of Israel's right to exist in peace within the pre-1967 borders, with full freedom for Israeli ships to use the Suez Canal and the approaches to the port of Eilat. This might have been impossible a few years ago; today, in my judgment, moderate Arabs, especially Egypt's Sadat and Saudi Arabia's Faisal, are prepared to live with a pre-1967 Israel. Our massive airlift of weapons to Israel during the 1973 war convinced moderate Arabs that they can never hope to destroy Israel and that they will have to accept its continued existence.

Another issue must also be settled: the fate of the Palestinian Arabs who were driven from their homeland when Israel was established in 1948. Their quarter-of-a-century political struggle has already created a Palestinian nation. The Palestinians and

other Arabs now demand as a minimum that a new state of Palestine be created on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, and the Palestinians still want Israel to be dismantled, to cease being a Jewish state. In this bitter dispute between the Palestinians and Israelis it is not a question of who is right and who is wrong but of two conflicting rights. If the Israelis give up the territories they occupied in 1967, the Palestinians will have to give up their dream of dismantling the state of Israel—and most of them eventually will, although reluctantly.

Moderate Arabs should put pressure on the Palestinians to accept Israel, and also to curb the murderous terrorism of their extremists. And the United States should convince the Soviets that they must use their influence toward such a settlement—that if they do not, our relations with them, and the whole process of Soviet-American détente, will seriously suffer.

Above all, Washington must measure up to its responsibilities in the Middle East, and fast. Only if our government takes prompt and decisive action can the looming oil squeeze and yet another war be averted. If nothing is done, we and the rest of the world will almost surely suffer one of the worst and most unnecessary disasters in history.

INVENTOR R. Buckminster Fuller in *I Seem To Be a Verb*: "The most important fact regarding Spaceship Earth: An instruction book didn't come with it."

—Published by Bantam

T
in
ve
br
sa
wi
1
t
o
c
v
c
i
t