Nations look to repairing political fences

Press, 18 June 1982, Page 6

Nations look to repairing political fences

By

HENRY TREWHITT

of

the “Baltimore Sun,” through NZPA Washington With the guns now silent in the Falkland Islands, diplomats of more than 20 nations are sifting through the political debris trying to protect their interests in the aftermath.

For most West European and Latin American governments, it will be easy. Predictably, the Latins supported Argentina, the West Europeans supported Britain, but neither side did so with such passion as to alienate the other. The aftermath is another matter for Argentina and Britain, of course, and for the United States. In the light of its historic ties to Britain and its interests in Latin America, the United States tried to have it both

ways, abandoning neutrality in favour of Britain while urging reason on both sides and avoiding a rupture with Argentina. Now comes the repair work. But for the moment the Reagan Administration is delaying a start on it simply because what it does next depends mainly on the conduct of Britain and Argentina.

President Ronald Reagan contented himself this week with welcoming the end of the fighting and saying the United States stood ready “in any way it can to help resolve this conflict.”

His Secretary of State (Mr Alexander Haig) told the British Ambassador (Sir Nicholas Henderson) that the Administration would help with “humanitarian” problems, apparently including the return home of Argentine prisoners.

More could not be expected, one American official said, until Mrs Margaret Thatcher's management of victory becomes clearer. She has promised to restore British administration of the islands, develop their economy, and generally exercise full British sovereignty.

Nothing else could be expected, in the American judgment, in the early weeks, perhaps months, after she sent British troops to the islands to risk their lives recovering them. But with time, diplomats suggest, Britain will have to create a policy that shares power with Argentina.

In the American view Britain cannot afford to defend the islands indefinitely without either an unacceptable drain on its Treasury or a severe weakening of its

commitments to N.A.T.O.

The United States might be willing to help, perhaps with administration of the islands or picking up more of the N.A.T.O. load, but only if Britain seems to be pursuing a policy of reason.

There is no more of an inclination in Washington now than before to take the Argentine side. One of the tragedies of the conflict, in the American analysis, is that Argentina, by accepting Mr Haig’s early mediation proposals, could have been guaranteed ultimate sovereignty, or at least shared administration over the Falklands.

But neither is there an inclination to further sacrifice American interest in Latin America. Some Administration officials and many independent analysts suggest that salvaging those interests

may not be as difficult as the rhetoric from Latin America has indicated. The United States took a severe beating in meetings of the Organisation of American States on the crisis. But Riordan Roett, a Latin American specialist at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies, noted this week that Latin governments did not suspend relations with the United States, sacrifice ties to New York banks, or give Argentina much more than rhetorical support.

With time, he judged. United States relations to the south would be back to the uneasy status that existed before the crisis. Onereason is that few Latin governments are genuinely close to Argentina. For another, their economic interests in the United States are far more important.

Restoration of workable relations with Argentina may take time.

But Argentina, too, avoided an open rupture with the United States. With its economy wrecked, Argentina is expected to make political peace with the United States as soon as its own political situation permits it. Argentina’s political future is one of the critical unknowns. Many American diplomats expect the defeat by Britain to force a change of Government. But what may appear to replace the military junta is not clear.

Most American officials appear to expect another military regime, but they worry that it may be more Right-wing and repressive than the existing one. Until the junta moved against the Falklands, the Administration had hoped that Argen-

tina's improving civil rights record would permit closer United States-Argentine cooperation.

One desirable possibility, Mr Roett said, would be the emergence of moderate civilian officials as a result of the military’s disgrace.

The nature of the Government is not an academic exercise in Washington, but one of direct political interest. There is concern that the Soviet Union will try to exploit its crisis support for Argentina, at least to the extent of providing arms for the future.

American interest is even more acute because of Argentina's developing nuclear capability. Mr Roett said that Argentina was all but certain to continue to strive for the development of nuclear weapons.