294. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Israel1
246210. For Ambassador Leonard from Saunders. Subject: Alternative Approach to Powers and Responsibilities. Ref: State 243600.2
1. (S) Entire text.
2. This telegram conveys to you the non-paper that we have been discussing with you and a message from Bob Strauss conveying it to you. The letter is self-explanatory, but I want to underscore for you Bob’s desire that we put this paper forward in as informal a way as possible so as to avoid getting ourselves locked permanently into its contents. Given Bob’s desire to approach this informally as described in the letter, we have therefore changed the lead-in to the document itself to establish in the text the informality of the paper. This message authorizes you to go ahead and give our non-paper to Burg Wednesday3 as we have discussed. If you feel the need to discuss it further, you could, of course, tell Burg that it will be arriving shortly and that you will have the paper Bob Strauss promised delivered to him as soon as it arrives, even though you may have departed for Egypt.4
[Page 953]3. In addition to the non-paper, following is the text of a message from Bob Strauss to you which, as the text states, he feels you might wish to give or show to Burg and Khalil in order to underscore the informal nature of this exercise.
4. Begin text: Dear Jim:
You will recall that I told you before I left Israel that I was going to get Ned and Ralph5 to take some notes I made and prepare a number of informal suggestions regarding the question of powers and responsibilities. I have attached these suggestions but want to make it clear to you and ask that you make it clear in turn to the Egyptians and Israelis that even I have questions about some of the ideas contained in these suggestions. I am aware that you will probably have similar reservations about some points as will the other two parties. I do hope, however, that at least a substantial part of these suggestions will be found to be useful by you and by our Egyptian and Israeli colleagues as we attempt to make progress over the next few months.
I would be grateful if you would make it clear to your partners that they need not worry about any formal response to these ideas which are suggested to serve as a basis for discussion. When you distribute the following, you should make clear the very informal nature of this non-paper. If it would help you to make this point, you should feel free to distribute copies of this letter to your colleagues. Sincerely, Robert Strauss. End text.
5. Begin text. Alternative approach to powers and responsibilities as a result of many conversations and after much staff work, we believe both sides might welcome informal thoughts on how to approach the subject of powers and responsibilities in further meetings. It is not expected that either Egypt or Israel will necessarily accept these suggestions in their entirety. Indeed, there may be aspects which may prove very difficult for one side or the other. They do, however, attempt to build on certain areas of agreement reached thus far and, in particular, on the common desire to move this portion of our negotiations forward so that we may begin to deal with these issues in greater detail at a technical level.
Under this approach, the plenary would authorize the formation of technical committees, composed of experts from each side, whose work would be guided by the working group and who would report to the plenary through the working group.
[Page 954]Several such technical committees might be formed at the outset, corresponding to the general areas represented by the spheres of activity on which there is presently agreement:
1) Economic affairs (for example, finance, trade, agriculture, industry and labor).
2) Social affairs (for example, education, culture, religion, social welfare, housing, transportation and health).
3) Local affairs and public order (for example, municipal administration, administration of justice, and local police).
A fourth technical committee might be formed to discuss the structure, composition and seat of the elected body, in light of the agreement to negotiate those subjects. This committee could also discuss those functions specified as responsibilities of the elected body in the appropriate portions of section A of the Camp David Framework (for example, representation on the continuing committee).
Either party should be free to raise any subject in the working group or its committees. Additional spheres can be discussed and additional committees can be formed if necessary, it being understood that each party must agree to any decisions taken.
The work program of the technical committees might include, but need not be limited to, the following:
—Identification and accumulation of the data required to discuss each sphere of activity with objectivity and in detail.
—Description of the major tasks that will have to be undertaken by the elected body in each sphere.
—Description of the major problems with which the elected body will be faced in carrying out those tasks.
—Examination of the existing laws and regulations pertaining to each sphere of activity, and identification of those which will remain relevant to accomplishing the tasks and solving the problems in each sphere during the transition period.
—Identification of those tasks and problems which will require additional measures during the transitional period.
Each technical committee could report the results of its work to the working group in accordance with a schedule decided by the plenary. The working group could then forward each report to the plenary, together with whatever comments it might choose to transmit.
The working group could also review the powers and responsibilities held in all spheres by the military government and its civilian administration under the present arrangements and report to the plenary a comprehensive listing of these powers, responsibilities and spheres. This would be undertaken without prejudice to the views of either [Page 955] party on the disposition of powers and responsibilities in particular spheres under the transitional arrangements.
The work of the technical committees and working group would be facilitated by Israel’s agreement to make available to them documents describing the powers and responsibilities held by the Israel military government and its civilian administration in the various spheres of their activity. End text.
6. Comment: Penultimate paragraph was suggested by L and upon reflection we believe it is worth your consideration for inclusion. We see it as being the only device readily available (which the Israelis so far have not formally rejected) that can broaden scope of working group discussions beyond spheres already agreed upon and therefore help to recommend this paper to the Egyptians.
7. Since you are much closer to the flow of events than we here in Washington, you should feel free to make adjustments to this text to meet the needs of your tactical situation. Our goal remains a document to which both Egypt and Israel can eventually subscribe and which will usher in a new and more concrete phase of negotiations, without opening us to argument at some future time that by putting forward this paper we have agreed that subjects not listed should be precluded from discussion.
- Source: Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Staff Material, Middle East, Subject File, Box 4, Autonomy Talks: 9–11/79. Secret; Immediate; Nodis. Sent for information Immediate to Cairo. Printed from a copy that indicates the original was received in the White House Situation Room. Drafted by Saunders; cleared by Robert S. Steven (S/S–O) and in substance in S/SN; approved by Saunders. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, P850050–1989)↩
- Sent September 16, telegram 243600 to Tel Aviv forwarded an earlier draft version of the Powers and Responsibilities “non-paper,” encompassing the draft outline recommendations received by the Powers and Responsibilities working group at its meeting in Alexandria at the end of July. (National Archives, RG 59 Central Foreign Policy File, P850050–1998)↩
- Leonard gave Burg a copy of the non-paper during a September 19 meeting at the Knesset. At the meeting, Leonard also raised the recent decision taken by the Israeli Cabinet authorizing Israeli land purchases in the West Bank and Gaza. Describing the decision as “regrettable,” Leonard “explained that this, as well as other land issues, were things that should be discussed and settled in the autonomy negotiations. Burg disagreed and asserted that the Cabinet’s decision should not interfere with the negotiations. He explained that the Israeli idea of autonomy was coexistence with the Arabs within one political framework west of the Jordan; he saw nothing wrong with Arabs living in pre-’67 Israel and Israelis living on the West Bank and Gaza.” (Telegram 20187 from Tel Aviv, September 20; National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, P840090–2476)↩
- Leonard and Atherton met with Boutros Ghali to deliver the non-paper on September 22. Two days later, Leonard presented the document to Khalil. Khalil, Leonard reported, “reacted adversely to what he considered the ‘administrative’ focus of our paper, and was only slightly persuaded by my efforts to describe the potential in our suggested approach. Khalil expressed his strong preference for a U.S. paper highlighting the requirement for Israel to supply the documents necessary for a discussion of all powers and responsibilities currently exercised by the military government.” (Telegram 19590 from Cairo, September 24; National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, P840131–2495)↩
- Edward S. Walker and Ralph J. Gerson, both Special Assistants to the President’s Special Representative to the Middle East Peace Negotiations.↩