Sinai force proposal

Press, 29 May 1981, Page 16

Sinai force proposal

The proposed Sinai peace-keeping force in which New Zealand participation has been discussed arose from the Camp David agreement. Annex 1 of the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty, as the Camp David accords are called, formally provides for a United Nations observer forced When members of the United Nations were consulted on the point, both by the Americans and by the President of the Security Council, Mr ,M. Nishibori, Japan’s Ambassador to the United Nations’ there seemed to be insufficient support for the proposal for it to be raised formally. Because of this the United Nations proposal was shelved and a proposal of a private force was canvassed. To Some extent this suited the Israelis, who had been keener to have a force with considerable American participation than to have a United Nations force; but did not suit the Egyptians. They came, eventually, to accept the idea and have been pressing for Third World participation in the force. The countries mentioned in United States considerations have been Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

In denying that there has been a formal approach to New Zealand, the Prime Minister, Mr Muldoon, acknowledged that informal discussions had taken place. It is doubtful whether a formal request, which would have to come from Israel,. Egypt, and the United States, would be made unless acceptance by New Zealand were already a foregone conclusion. It may be taken that the real discussion about whether New Zealand will take part is going on at present. It must be hoped that the Government vviir take no hasty decision in favour of, joining such a force. The fact that insufficient enthusiasm for the force could be found in the United Nations means two things. One is the very serious consideration that it will not be a United Nations force. The second is that it is doubtful whether the force would have even the unofficial blessing of the United Nations. It would be an international force' with a status which would be hard to define and it might become exposed to the criticism of the United Nations. The final test would be whether the force succeeded in keeping the peace; such success, of course, must remain a matter of

“speculation. An added assurance of peace is not a guarantee.

Although the Sinai peace-keeping force differs from the Rapid Deployment Force envisaged by the Americans, the Sinai force is likely to have access to'important airfields in the Sinai Peninsula. The Americans have long eyed those airfields with an appreciation of their significance if the Rapid Deployment Force should ever be deployed. In theory, the Rapid Deployment Force is intended as a worldwide force; in practice it is designed solely for use in the Middle . East. It would be difficult for a country such as New Zealand, linked to the United States by a defence treaty,, to be caught between its loyalty to an international force, which would probably include some neutralist countries, and its loyalty to the United States, one of its closest friends. Such a dilemma would be messy indeed and New Zealand should steer well clear of it. New Zealand must also be mindful of the reactions of the countries closest to the region. Even if Israel and Egypt invited New Zealand, various other countries in the area might object, if not to New Zealand, to the whole idea of three battalions, of foreign troops being in Sinai. The participation of New Zealanders in the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organisation, which conducts observations and makes reports on Israel’s borders, might be jeopardised because of the reaction of some of the countries in the area. Nor can New Zealand, from the point of view of trade, ignore the feelings of the area. The Middle East is assuming as great a‘ significance for New Zealand’s lamb trade as Britain holds. The sale of dairy products is also of great’ importance. In spite of the importance of the fact that Egypt and . Israel have sworn off fighting one another, the Camp David accords are not accepted widely as a sound and continuing basis for reaching an overall settlement of the differences between Israelis and Arabs. New Zealand would be wise to stay out of any Sinai force until there is both general agreement in the area that the force is wanted by all the countries of the area, and the United Nations gives its backing to the idea.