Entente Cordiale In Washington

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32234, 28 February 1970, Page 11

Entente Cordiale In Washington

(By ENDRE MARTIN, of the Associated Press, through N.Z.P.A.)

ourable impression on professional diplomats, the majority of members of Congress, and on hundreds of journalists by his straightforward eloquence and candour. He did not evade sensitive issues—in fact, he raised them himself, not waiting for questions. At the very outset of his visit he freely acknowledged that there were differences between the thinking in Washington and- in Paris on several issues; but, he said, they were not essential, and while many Americans oppose this view, cool-headed diplomats at the White House and the State Department appear to agree with it. This is also true concerning the most controversial issue: the sale of 110 French Mirage aircraft to Libya. American advocates of an “even-handed” Middle East policy—and they are in the majority among the Government’s Middle East specialists—agree with Mr Pompidou’s reasoning that the coup in Libya last autumn created a vacuum which somebody had to fill. It goes without saying that they prefer France to play this role instead of the Soviet Union.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 27.

In three days of talks in Washington, President Nixon and President Pompidou achieved nothing more and nothing less than what they had in mind:,to end a decade of almost Arctic climate, uriprecedented in the 200-year-old relationship between the two nations. The visit, the first by a French head of State, since General de Gaulle came to See President Eisenhower in 1960, was an exercise in good will and, as such, it was a complete success, diplomats on both sides agree. President Nixon, they stress, remained loyal to his principle of speaking in low tones; there was no effort made to persuade Mr Pompidou to change French policy in the Middle East or elsewhere? Mr Pompidou made a fav-

There is no doubt in Wash- sided with Moscow in brandington that these aircraft ing Israel as an aggressor. But might be used one day against Mr Pompidou said: “Israel, Israel, whether piloted by judging its existence threatLibyans or Egyptians, what- ened, has started a preventive ever assurances France may war.” This comes very close have received from Libya’s to the assessment of _ two new rulers. The only conso- United States Administralation is that the Mirages will tions. Israel, it is acknowbe delivered over four years ledged here, fired the first —and there are still some op- shot, but it was forced to do timists who say that there is so; it had no other choice, a faint hope there could be The only difference bepeace before that. tween the Washington ana United States officials still Paris views remains that complain, however, about the while the United States recogcomplete lack of consulta- nises, without reservation, tion on the Libyan deal. Mr that Israel’s existence was Pompidou is understood to indeed threatened, France have been told in unmistak- still insists that this was able terms that the American Israel’s judgment and not Government resented that, necessarily a correct one. His reaction remains secret. On the more important The Secretary of State (Mr issue of how to continue the Rogers) toasting Mr Pompi- search for peace, Mr Pompidou at a luncheon an Wednes- dou understandably mainday, said how pleased he was tains that the New York by what the French President meetings of the four Great had said about Israel in his Powers, initiated by France, address to Congress. Studying provide the best forum for Mr Pompidou’s words under a such efforts. magnifying glass, some United American officials remain States officials claim that he sceptical, but they are ready has changed slightly, but sig- to talk anywhere and with nificantly, General de Gaulle’s everyone to prevent further rigid assessment of the 1967 deterioration of the Middle war. East situation. General de Gaulle, in effect, Regarding the time-table of

a hoped-for settlement, the French President was inclined to be closer to the Soviet Union position than to that of the United States. The question boils down to this: sliould there be a package deal, meaning that all commitments have to be made simultaneously by both sides; or, as Mr Pompidou seems to advocate, must Israel first commit herself to withdrawing from the occupied territories, this to be followed by pledges by the Arabs to recognise Israel’sexistence, her sovereignty, and her right to navigate on international waterways? The United States still believes there must be a “package.” Everything else Mr Pompidou said, publicly or behind closed doors, about Vietnam, N.A.T.0., and other issues, was an eloquent restatement of known French positions. The visit, United States officials sum up, was needed. Because of it, an era which began with angry exchanges in the early 1960 s and continued in icy silence when Lyndon Johnson was the President, has now come to an end.