ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT THE FIERY COLD WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31993, 21 May 1969, Page 14

ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT THE FIERY COLD WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST

(Bu

ERIC DOWNTON,

writina to the “Dailu Telearavh", London, from Beirut)

(Reprinted by arrangement)

“The most expensive propaganda campaign in Egypt since the building of the Giza Pyramids.” Thus a cynical United Nations observer after watching one of the almost daily artillery exchanges between Egyptian and Israeli forces across the Suez Canal.

His comment reflects what ' appears to be the majority 1 opinion among Western ob- i servers in Middle Eastern ; capitals today: that in spite i of all the fiery words and ' sabre-rattling the odds are ' still against a renewed full- i scale Arab-Israeli conflict dur- ' ing the long, hot and troubled summer that obviously lies ahead. When tempers and temperatures are cooler the , prospect for negotiation will , improve, j Arab armies generally, j Egyptian forces in particular, . are in no shape to risk a j calculated confrontation with j Israel, whose military effi- . ciency has improved considerably since the June war two . years ago. An irrational , momentum towards collision , is always a possibility, but it , is a limited risk for the ] moment, particularly as additional strains and dissensions ; have recently emerged from , the predictably disunited 1 Arab ranks. “Fedayeen’s” Influence [ The “fedayeen”, the Pales- ' tinian Arab guerrilla groups, i now probably at the peak of their power, are not likely to drag into all-out war willy nilly those Arab States most directly involved in the confrontation with Israel. Hectoring methods used by the “fedayeen” to establish a position where they are a law unto themselves, defying national rule and international convention, are making them increasingly an embarrassment to Arab rulers. Reaction against these trigger-happy men and their methods, although not their cause, is growing. In the background, the key super-Powers, America and ,

Russia, are working to avoid explosion, although for very different reasons. While Moscow apparently believes a simmering situation suits its strategic designs, Peking,

rabid here as everywhere, incites the Arabs to war, but its influence is marginal. General de Gaulle’s departure has been a sobering event for Arab governments. Blatantly opportunist, the thrustingly pro-Arab policy ordered by the General after Israel’s victory in the June war is expected to be modified—perhaps to the point of relaxing, or even lifting, the anti-Israeli arms embargo. Behind the alarums a significant, gradual change in the Arab world’s economic and social metabolism is being wrought by oil-nurtured development around the Persian Gulf and across the Arabian peninsula. QuasiLeftist revolutionary movements, Nasserite and Baathist, are losing their political appeal and more Arab States have a growing stake in stability.

Purpose Of Duel The artillery duel was timed to influence the Big Four Middle East talks in New York by creating an impression that war is imminent. The bombardments, the small-scale night raids by Egyptian troops across the canal, and the accompanying propaganda vastly exaggerating damage inflicted are also for domestic consumption as well as to impress the Arab world.

Cairo seems to hope that play upon the apprehensions of the Big Four—America, Russia, Britain and France—will procure pressure for Israel to implement the United Nations Security Council resolution of 1967 which called for withdrawal from territories seized during the June war.

In Egypt, the costly expenditure of ammunition is meant to impress the civilian population and provide a safety valve for feelings of younger officers who want action against Israel. For the Arab world at large the cannonades along the Canal —which both Egypt and Israel have now written off as a formal cease-fire line—are supposed to restore lustre to

Egyptian arms. Egypt’s allies, however, listen with scepticism to Cairo’s claims that Egyptian forces are now much stronger than before the June war and are capable of crossing the Canal and inflicting a resounding defeat on Israel in a “limited war.” A King’s Ploy? In another sphere ofi propaganda, King Hussein’s recent tour of Western capitals was more successful in presenting the moderate Arab cause abroad than in edging his fellow rulers towards some form of carefully-circum-scribed negotiation with Israel. It is felt in most Arab capitals that the Arab case, particularly the Palestinian refugee problem, is now getting an improved hearing in the West. Perhaps the affair of the King’s six-point peace plan was a ploy pre-arranged with his fellow Arab rulers, both Left and Right, to impress on the West the intransigence of their opposition to negotiations with Israel. In Washington, King Hussein outlined proposals for settling the Middle East crisis. Patently these were a restatement of the Security Council resolution which Dr Jarring, the Swedish diplomat, has beenj trying with admirable pati-l ence to implement in his role as United Nations special envoy to the Middle East. With a celerity that was surprising, if not suspicious, the plan was attacked by the Right-wing regimes of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia as well as by the “revolutionaries.” When King Hussein returned to Jordan there was no trouble from the Palestinian guerrillas, who have threatened to murder anyone who negotiates with Israel, and there seems to be no deterioration in his relations with various Arab kings, emirs, sheiks and Socialist presidents.

The fiery “fedayeen” comet, which has paled Colonel Nasser’s star in the Arab sky, is now probably at its zenith. From President Al Bakr of Iraq, on the Left, to King Feisal of Saudi Arabia on the Right, there are symptoms of unease at the guerrillas’ go-it-alone behaviour.

Protection For Rulers Seeing the creation of a belligerent State-within-a-State in Jordan, the provoking cf a serious political crisis in Lebanon, trouble-making in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, the formal rulers will no doubt devise protection for their own interests from behind a veil of polite verbiage. Rivalries between “fedayeen” groups are sharpening Public questioning of their military capacity is growing. The guerrillas have been

given at least £2O million and unlimited arms supplies during the last two years, but have not mounted any strategically serious challenge to Israel.

Egyptian, Jordanian, Syrian and “fedayeen” propaganda has asked Arabs to believe that in the past eight months the whole Israeli tank force, at least two divisions of infantry. much of the Air Force, and just about every Israeli post on the River Jordan’s west bank have been destroyed. Arabs are beginning to ask for a concrete demonstration of a major military success, particularly by the “fedayeen,” which so far has not been forthcoming. Inter - Arab divisions, papered-over after the war with Israel, are breaking out again. Ba’athists and the Arab nationalist movement, encouraged by the anarchist behaviour of the “fedayeen" groups they sponsor, foment subversion against the traditional monarchies. The pro-Communist Syrian junta conspires against moderation in neighbouring Lebanon to the extent of sending Damascus-backed guerrilla units, with regular Syrian Army officers thinly disguised as “fedayeen,” on a [miniature invasion of Leban[ese territory. Macabre Farce North and South Yemen snarl at each other, daggers drawn. The Bagdad State-con-trolled press and radio proclaim Iraq will “fulfil its mission of carrying revolution to the Gulf.” Egyptian cryptoCommunists throw out dark hints against Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf Sheikdoms. The Iraqi air force drops napalm on Iraqi Kurds, and so on. After the honeymoon period, purchased with a lavish dowry of vast armament supplies, Russia is beginning to encounter snags and irritations in its Middle Eastern dealings. Russia’s interference in Syria’s political crisis to ensure survival of the pro-Communist Attassi regime, and the Kremlin’s coolness towards the “fedayeen" movement because it is not Communist-controlled, are among recent developments that have aroused Arab suspicions.

Something akin to macabre farce is brought to the situation by the fact that while Big Four diplomats exchange platitudes in New York their Governments encourage armaments dealers to hustle for sales in the volatile Middle East. With Israel still obdurate, the outlook is for a protracted period of fitful twilight—with spasms of limited violence—between full-scale war and elusive peace.