best be described as that between a sick and a convalescing man—the latter still has bouts with abnormality, but it is no longer a permanent condition.

The Bureau's metamorphosis, if one can call it that, has at least part of its roots in the new awareness of minority rights and sensitivities. Ethnicity is in the saddle in America, and even that old standby, the ethnic joke, has been effectively ridden out of town. The inacceptability of stereotyped rhetoric has brought with it a concomitant embargo on stereotyped thinking. Thus, if the State Department has become less biased, it is at least in part a reflection of the fact that America itself has become less biased—not just against Jews, but against all minorities.

## Diversionary Role

Other elements contributing to a change in the Bureau are more peculiar to the area. Some of the fears expressed in those early years about the ramifications of partition, most notably the “Communist” scare, have proven to be fallacies; and until the recent oil “crunch,” there were some at State who were crediting Israel with playing an important “diversionary” role in the Middle East by keeping the Arabs too distracted to turn on another possible “enemy”—the Western oil companies.

Reassurance on the political front has led to a corresponding decrease in apprehensions about the threats Israel's existence poses for the United States. However, other fears—more substantial ones—have replaced these old discredited notions. In the main, they center on the presence and power of the Soviet Union in an area where it has little traditional influence. But these are not bogus factors, and the men assessing them are a somewhat different breed from the foreign service officers of the 1940s.

As one official put it, “We are not scarred by the fires and battles that burned our predecessors.” He went on to admit that for all too many years the old warriors remained to haunt the State Department, venting frustration and anger and forsaking the “coolness” of their profession.

During that entire period, however, the United States never deviated from the pro-Israel course set by Harry Truman. There was a lesson in this,

and it was not lost on the State Department: in order to be effective one must first have credibility. This basic precept of politics and influence may have played as important a part as anything else in bringing about changes in the Near East Bureau. High-level officials now boast that “we are listened to,” as proof of their credibility, and by extension, of their impartiality.

## Hue and Cry

Recent developments in U.S. Middle Eastern policy would appear to support their argument. They are listened to – and that has not been true of every Bureau at State. One reason for this is that while Henry Kissinger was the President's chief trouble shooter for Viet Nam and in Moscow and Peking, he was kept out of the Middle Eastern picture partly in recognition of the fact that his involvement might have raised a hue and cry in the

Arab camp. Now that he is Secretary of State, the formal foreign policy executor for the Administration, he can no longer avoid a confrontation with the problems of the area. Nor, knowing Dr. Kissinger, does he intend to. If his ego is not, as Nick Thimesch declared in a New York Magazine profile last year, “one of the largest ever to occupy the White House,” the celebrated self-image of the “cowboy leading the caravan astride his horse . . . without even a pistol” projected in his interview with the Italian reporter, Oriana Fallaci, has never been personally refuted. And no fearless cowboy of modern diplomacy could ask for a more difficult, dangerous, and demanding test than the Middle East impasse.

To his credit – and perspicacity – Kissinger has moved with deliberation. His September 24th speech to the UN General Assembly was a broomide for both sides. “We will never

Henry Kissinger (left) and admirer: State's new boss has warned the Arabs not to look for any "miracles."

Wide World Photos

50 THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

abandon our allies or our friends," he seemed to be telling the Israelis. And while underscoring America's determination not to attempt to "substitute for the efforts of the parties involved" in resolving the dispute, he, nevertheless, held out to the Arabs the promise that "we are prepared to use our influence to generate a spirit of accommodation and to urge the parties toward practical progress."

Israel's UN Ambassador Joseph Tekoah called it "the most impressive address heard in the General Assembly for many years." The Arabs were scarcely effusive, but neither were they belligerent. "We'll judge by his actions," an Egyptian spokesman declared.

## 'Open Attitudes'

The Arabs were being cautious, too. Five of their 18 delegations (Syria, Iraq, Libya, Algeria and South Yemen) decided to boycott a Kissinger luncheon at the U.S. Mission the following day, but 13 showed up and three (Lebanon, Bahrein and the Yemeni Arab Republic) sent their foreign ministers. They got a pledge from the new Secretary of State of "open attitudes" on the part of the U.S. in the quest for peace along with a warning not to "look for miracles" from this country. The delegates may not have been as "delighted" and "entertained" as they indicated, but neither, apparently, did they want to alienate Kissinger from the start or imply that his Jewish origin was any obstacle to a useful relationship.

Kissinger has denied the existence of any "Kissinger Plan" for a Middle East settlement, but if a five-point plan reported by the Times of London (and refuted by Kissinger aides) represents a trial balloon, it is revealing of the task the Secretary of State has set for himself in dealing with the Arabs and Israelis. The plan reportedly would call for Israeli withdrawal from the Suez Canal with both banks again under Egyptian control; the creation of an Egyptian-Israeli "condominium" to administer Sharm el-Sheikh as well as other parts of the Sanai; the retention of Jerusalem by Israel but with control of the Christian and Moslem holy places to be vested in the Vatican and Jordan; the return of the West Bank to Jordan, but with new Israeli settlements permitted to remain, and a partial Israeli withdrawal

from the Golan Heights. Such a plan (if it exists) would appear to have no chance of acceptance and little chance of consideration by either side even as a basis of discussion. After Viet Nam, however, nobody is betting against Kissinger's talents of persuasion.

## Shocked and Angered

Kissinger's relationship with the American community will depend as much on his stance on the Soviet-Jewish repatriation question as it will on his Middle East policy. He has been "an understanding ear" in the White House on the Soviet Jewry issue and it is no secret that he has personally pressed Moscow for a more lenient attitude on emigration. Kissinger's efforts also had much to do with the Kremlin's abandonment of the confiscatory academic "head tax" on university trained Jewish emigrees. But he shocked and angered many in the Jewish community with his opposition to the Jackson Amendment and the Vanik-Mills bill linking trade with Russia to a change in that nation's restrictive emigration policies. Judged on past performance in the White House, Kissinger cannot be counted on for any automatic pro-Jewish or pro-Israel penchant.

Washington area Jewish community leaders note that Dr. Kissinger has never been involved in any kind of Jewish organizational activity. Though raised in a traditional Jewish home (his parents, observant Jews, chose to walk from their Washington hotel to his Saturday swearing-in ceremony at the White House), Kissinger is said to view "Jewish" issues from a largely pragmatic perspective. Observers say he does, however, fully perceive the dimensions of the Middle East problem and the importance of keeping Israel strong. His background, of course, has lent depth to that perception. Born in Germany in 1923, he underwent many of the indignities perpetrated on Jews in the Hitler era before arriving in this country in 1938.

His life here reads like the success story the world has come to associate with America. Kissinger has amply paid back his new home for the shelter and comfort that he found in it; and his takeover at State has been described by some as giving him the title —to go along with the job he had been doing all along. Whether or not he

does come up with a successful initiative on the Middle East, one thing is certain: he will be an activist Secretary of State.

## Sisco

In the Middle East area, he will find another activist at State: Joseph Sisco, the 53 year-old career diplomat who heads the Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian affairs and who has been given major credit for such alterations that have been made in the image of that sometimes suspect body.

Sisco is a kind of anomaly in the job. Unlike his predecessors, he never served in the Middle East, or anywhere else overseas, for that matter. His entire career was spent at posts in New York and Washington, serving, most recently, as director of the Office of UN Political and Security Affairs and Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizational Affairs. His lack of overseas experience has earned him the opposition of foreign service groups who lobbied against his appointment. However, it has also been a distinctive plus: since he has never lived in either Israel or the Arab countries neither side can charge him with an inherent bias against it.

Most observers in Washington credit Sisco with having brought a dynamic personality and stature to a job that often saw men lacking in one, the other, or both. So different is he from his predecessors that there are even some Arab mutterings about his being pro-Israel. State Department officials and Israelis both scoff at this, but there is no gainsaying the fact that while Yitzhak Rabin was Israel's Ambassador to Washington, he and Sisco had what officials call "a very close personal relationship." They are quick to add that Sisco has good rapport with other ambassadors as well, including many from Arab countries. Still, they find the Sisco-Rabin relationship a more personal one, forged, they say, by similarities in the characters of the two men.

It is difficult to gauge how much of a change Sisco's presence has brought to the Bureau. High level officials say he has not brought in a single man of his own. What they mean is that no one has joined the foreign service and then the Middle East Bureau because Sisco asked for him. On the other hand, from the ranks of the foreign service, several officers have switched

THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

51

their postings in order to serve with Sisco. Added to that is the unquestionable impact of the man who, by the account of those who work with him, puts his special brand on everything he touches. This trait is evidenced in the answer given by one of his co-workers when asked if the Bureau suffered from internal strife. "No," he replied, "Sisco wouldn't stand for it."

### Davies and Atherton

Immediately beneath Sisco in authority are two other career officers who, unlike him, have had long service overseas. Rodger P. Davies heads the Bureau when Sisco is away. Davies has been posted to several Arab capitals (including Damascus which seems to have been a training ground for many foreign service officers) and he speaks Arabic. The man who, in effect, heads the Near East section is Alfred "Roy" Atherton, with the title Deputy Assistant Secretary. It is from his office that policy memoranda originate. He, too, has served in Damascus, but he speaks no Arabic and was once head of the "Arab and Israel-Arab Affairs" desk, a misnomer for what is the only desk that deals with Israel exclusively.

To those who know them, neither Davies nor Atherton has a noticeable bias for one side or the other.

However, as one moves below that point in the Bureau's pyramid, the statistical data is such that it can be interpreted as lending support to those who accuse State of having a pro-Arab tilt. Though it is true that the Bureau now has only two sons of missionaries in its ranks (one is in Tunisia, the other, in Kuwait), there is a decided imbalance in the number of Arab specialists as opposed to Israel experts.

The imbalance is not too flagrant at the Country Director level. There are four of these: one for Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria; another for Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen and the Persian Gulf States; a third for Egypt; and a fourth for "Israel and Israel-Arab Affairs." Of the four, two have served in Israel and speak Hebrew. All, however, have served in at least one Arab capital and speak Arabic.

### Stackhouse

Fortunately - for this has not always been the case - one of those

who has served in Israel and does speak Hebrew is the Chief of the "Arab and Israel-Arab Affairs" desk. He is Heywood Stackhouse, a 49 year-old native of Florida who holds an O-2 foreign Service rating (O-1 is the top). Stackhouse has vast overseas experience, having served in Latin America before switching over to the Middle East. His posts include tenures in Beirut, Ghazqi, Tunis and Tel Aviv. He holds a PhD from the University of Chicago and speaks Arabic, Spanish, and French, in addition to Hebrew.

The desk he runs is described as being a "key" one by State Department officials. It is not more influential than the others-but it does come into the decision-making process more often. Something that is happening in Lebanon may also involve an opinion by the Israeli desk, when it comes to a State Department policy session, because of the possible impact it may have on Israel and its position in the area. The "impact" angle means the desk takes on added importance within the Bureau.

But to return to numbers, the ratio is much more lopsided at the next level - that designated as Political/Economic or Commercial officers. There are 13 such posts and of these, 11 officers have served in at least one Arab country while only one has served in Israel. Nine of them speak Arabic - none speaks Hebrew.

State Department officials do not argue with the figures. They argue with the conclusions that may be drawn from them. They note that simply having lived in a region does not make of an officer its advocate, contending that some of the most ardent anti-Arabists have come from the ranks of erstwhile residents. Further, they point out that since there are 18 Arab states and only one Jewish state, it is logical that there would be more foreign service officers who have served in Arab lands. As for language proficiency, it is up to the individual foreign service officer to determine what tongue he wishes to study. It is not surprising, say Bureau officials, that more of them would choose a language spoken in more places, if only for the greater mobility and posting opportunities it gives them.

### Pro-Israel Lobby

Even accepting all this reasoning as

valid and inevitable, does not the preponderance of Arabic experts give the Bureau, at the very least, a greater comprehension of the Arab position? On this point, the consensus is a reluctant yes. But the equation does not end there. It still needs one more factor - a factor many say is the determining one: the pro-Israel lobby.

The effectiveness of the lobby is denied neither by its critics nor by its supporters. It has been credited with establishing the international climate necessary for the creation of Israel and for its continued strength. In America, it has made bedfellows out of political foes, joining conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans in a way that perhaps no other single issue has.

The State Department, which fought and lost a battle against it, would be the last to minimize the role of the pro-Israel lobby. But some officials complain that the lobby is still operating in high gear when a lower one might be in order. As one officer put it, "When it comes to propaganda, the Arabs don't know where to begin and the Israelis when to stop." The key to the lobby's influence is its ability to mobilize public opinion virtually overnight. When former Secretary of State William Rogers announced his Middle East peace plan, thousands of letters opposing it poured into the State Department within hours of the announcement.

In the eyes of the Bureau's officers, the presence of the lobby more than sets the balance straight, bringing to the fore the Israeli position with vigor and conviction. But this very statement carries with it a kind of covert admission that public opinion apart, there would be a penchant toward the Arabs.

Penchants, however, are to be expected in conflicts as volatile as this one, which partly illuminates a statement by a top-level State Department official. He said: "In this situation where there is more heat than light, we have in the Near East Bureau, the most detached people in the world."

Whether one accepts his conclusion, or not, there is no doubt that America's pro-Israel policy is now so fixed a part of this country's international outlook and comportment that no "penchant" or personal bias stands to do it any serious harm.

THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

53

# Soviet Jews in New York
## Freedom Has Its Problems, Too

New York's Soviet-Jewish colony is suffering from a common case of cultural shock. There's crime in the streets, nudity on the screen, and a good job is hard to find when your English isn't up to your academic achievements.... Still, none of the city's 3,000 Russian Jews is ready to trade his troubling freedom in for a ticket back to Brezhnevland.

by Shlomo Shamir

Morris Friedman is still afraid to talk to strangers. His answers are short, evasive, and he avoids eye contact during conversation. He's 24, born and raised in a small village in the Carpathian Mountains and recently arrived in New York with his parents. He's wearing a $40 suit straight off the pipe racks at Robert Hall, a 99¢ tie, and a hat that's obviously too big for him. His new shoes squeak and even in a rush hour crowd at Grand Central Station, you'd have no trouble spotting him. He's one of New York's small but growing colony of Soviet-Jewish immigrants.

Rosa Kandel is already driving her own car and like any New Yorker she can give you an earful on the city's rapacious garage owners and repair shops — and, of course, about the traffic. Rosa came to New York three years ago from a town called Chost in the Carpathians. Her English is first class — acquired at a Russian University. She arrived here with hopes of becoming an English teacher only to find that New York had a surplus of English teachers. After two years of job hunting, she finally settled for a secretary-typist position at a Manhattan office. The salary is $170 a week — not bad by Soviet standards.

### 'Proud and Kosher'

The Browns arrived in New York last August. Four days later, Herman,

Ray Ellis

Rosa Kandel — Nobody wants a Russian English teacher.

THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

54

Kissinger believes
differences reduced

JERUSALEM (AP) — Egypt rejected parts of Henry A. Kissinger's troop pullback plan for the Suez front Monday and the American secretary of State flew to Jerusalem with an Egyptian counterproposal.

"I believe we have narrowed the differences substantially on this trip," Kissinger said as he left Aswan military airport after four hours of talks with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. "I hope to be able to narrow them further in Israel in the next day or two."

Kissinger carried with him to Israel a map prepared by the Egyptians to outline the positions they want to hold as well as the buffer zone to be manned by U.N. emergency forces when the two armies are separated.

Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban met

Kissinger at the Jerusalem airport. Israeli officials said later that Eban and Kissinger talked business on the drive to the city and the meeting continued for another half-hour in Kissinger's hotel. No details were disclosed.

Kissinger also had in his briefcase the draft of a disengagement proposal worked out by a mixed team of American and Egyptian diplomats and Gen. Mohammed Gamasy, the Egyptian chief of staff.

The principal Israeli-Egyptian disagreement appeared to be over the number and kinds of antiaircraft missiles and other weapons Egypt is to retain on the east bank of the Suez Canal.

Israel Defense Minister Moshe Dayan said shortly before Kissinger's arrival that the Soviet Union had rebuilt most of the missile sites in Egypt and Syria and provided longer-range missiles.

A U.S. official in Kissinger's party, who declined to be identified, said Kissinger's talks with Sadat may lead to direct negotiations between Israel and Egypt and a "fairly rapid progress on disengagement."

Kissinger will confer with Israeli leaders Tuesday and plans to return to see Sadat for a probable windup session Wednesday. However, he told reporters in Aswan, "I'm not going to be shuttling back and forth. After this phase we'll have to do it in Geneva."

Israeli and Egyptian military delegations had begun the talks on troop pullbacks at the Geneva Middle East peace conference, but Tuesday's meeting was canceled, the United Nations confirmed. The talks apparently were suspended until Kissinger ends his mission.

Kissinger said he hoped to return to Washington by the weekend. His trip to Amman, Jordan, scheduled for Tuesday, was postponed until later this week.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ismail Fahmy was to travel to the Soviet Union to sound out the Russians — cochairman of the Geneva talks — about disengagement negotiations.