Ford and Israel: What’s Ahead?

With Gerald Rudolph Ford as the new President, the question uppermost in the minds of Jewish leaders and the Jewish community as a whole is what, if any, changes can be expected in the American Middle East policy. The consensus, both private and public, emerging this weekend is that there will be no substantial change and that the U.S. will continue to seek ways to help establish a stable and lasting Mideast peace.

One of the encouraging signs, in addition to Ford’s self-expressed attitude of friendship for the Jewish State, is that Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger will continue in his position under the new Administration. Ford himself made it clear that he will continue the foreign policy developed by President Nixon.

Speaking extemporaneously in front of his home Thursday night shortly after Nixon concluded his resignation speech, Ford declared: “Let me say without hesitation or reservation that the policy that has achieved peace and built the blocks for future peace will be continued as far as I am concerned as President of the United States.”

He also referred by name to only one member of Nixon’s Cabinet, Kissinger, who directed the talks which led to the disengagement agreements between Israel and her Arab neighbors, Egypt and Syria. Ford praised Kissinger as “a very great man” who has helped “to build the blocks of peace under President Nixon. I think those policies of peace will be continued, and those policies of peace should be continued.” Observing that Kissinger had agreed to continue on as Secretary, Ford added that it means that “he and I will be working together in the pursuit of peace in the future, as we have achieved in the past.”

ASSURES DINITZ OF CONTINUED FRIENDSHIP

The new President issued similar assurance when he met Friday with Israeli Ambassador Simcha Dinitz and affirmed that the U.S. would continue its friendship and take the required action to strengthen Israel’s economy and military forces, it was reliably reported here. His meeting with Dinitz was one of a series of meetings he and Kissinger held with some 60 foreign envoys some two hours after Ford took the oath of office.

In the presence of reporters. Ford told a group of 15 Arab diplomats that “negotiating not only with opponents but with your own party is difficult, too,” citing his 25 years in Congress. He assured the Arab envoys that Kissinger would continue to conduct Middle East negotiations as he did for former President Nixon. Ford also stressed in his meeting with the Arabs the continuity of U.S. foreign policy and his desire to achieve a lasting peace and friendship with all of the Arab nations.

This policy was also underlined by Nixon in his resignation speech. Citing his own foreign policy programs, he said that in the Mideast “100 million people in the Arab countries, many of whom have considered us their enemies for nearly 20 years, now look on us as their friends. We must continue to build on that friendship so that peace can settle at last over the Middle East, and so that the cradle of civilization will not become its grave.” Nixon, however, made no specific reference to Israel and its people.

ELEMENTS IN FOREIGN POLICY

Basically, however, it is still much too early to assess Ford’s foreign policy views beyond the generalities he made since Thursday night. His involvement and expertise in foreign affairs has been almost nil. Whatever abilities he may have in dealing with these complex issues and in relating to the diverse and even antagonistic ideologies and objectives of the Russians, Chinese and Arabs will be tested shortly.

To a large extent Ford will be able to pay more attention to building and reinforcing U.S. foreign policies because for the first time in decades the U.S. is not embroiled in fighting wars abroad. Also, the foreign policies developed by Nixon will not be overshadowed and diminished by Watergate. Ford’s views and actions in the area of foreign affairs will develop in the course of time–welded by his own growing insights and the imperative needs of the nation to develop its economy domestically and its diplomatic and economic ties abroad.

Ford has said that while he was once an isolationist he is now an “ardent internationalist.” Taking him at his word the question at this time is not how much internationalism but what kind, not with whom he will seek closer ties but to that extent. Observers note that Ford, as a Middle American, is less likely to seek the kind of alliances and foreign commitments that will require greater tax burdens on the American people.

During the interim period, until Ford and the new Administration has had a chance to settle down, the new President is likely to act in an ad hoc fashion and pragmatically, taking his cues from those in his Cabinet who will help him shape and formulate foreign policy foremost perhaps, Kissinger. Ford’s known capacity to moderate between divergent views and groups in the House while he was Republican leader indicates that he may strive to find some common ground among the diverse forces in America’s political and economic arena that have interests in the Middle East.

ECONOMIC NEEDS OF U.S. IN MIDEAST

There is no question, however, observers note, that Ford will opt for a policy of peace in the Mideast and try to achieve a balance between Israeli and Arab needs because that is the best course for the U.S. on many levels: to safeguard its current investments, especially in Saudi Arabia, and to lay the basis for opening up new areas for American capital, particularly in the Egyptian petrochemical industry; to offset whatever gains the Soviet Union still has in the area and to prevent the Russians from establishing political and economic hegemony while seeking, at the same time, to develop a policy of co-

Peace in the Mideast is also an economic necessity for the U.S. at this time especially in another way, observers noted. If the Mideast economies were to revert to full peacetime activities and the national budgets especially in Egypt and Syria were no longer largely devoted to military spending, U.S. trade with Arab nations could become more flourishing and thus provide an additional market for American capital and trade and also assure that the properties of American oil firms would be more secure and less subject to further nationalization.

This, however, does not mean that Ford and the new Administration will seek to exert one sided pressure on Israel for her to come to some accommodation with the Arab states on their terms. In fact, some Arab newspapers and spokesmen have already expressed anxiety that Ford may be even more pro-Israel than Nixon. They cited Ford’s views that Jerusalem should be the united capital of Israel and recalled that Ford had indicated some two years ago that the U.S. Embassy in Israel should be relocated from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yigal Allon, who met with Ford two weeks ago while he was still Vice-President, remarked afterwards that Ford is considered a friend of Israel. Allon noted that “I found him very well informed and we had a very interesting talk about matters in the Middle East.” The Foreign Minister also observed that “I don’t see anything like a change in his friendliness” when Ford becomes President.

(Similar expressions were voiced this weekend by Jewish leaders in this country and in Israel by leaders there. See separate stories.)

HAS GOOD TRACK RECORD

In trying further to assess Ford’s attitude towards Israel it was recalled that he has had a good track record with regards to the Jewish State since becoming Vice-President last Dec. On Jan. 8, in an address to the Manufacturing Chemists Association in Washington, Ford hinted that continuation of the Arab oil embargo could lead to a curtailment of food shipments to Arab countries where food commodities are perennially in short supply.

“Close an oil valve in the Middle East and you threaten to shut down a farm tractor in our Middle West,” he stated. “Halt that tractor and some people in the world will hunger for bread.” Ford observed that a “circular flow” was required to keep the industrialized nations running and to provide the Middle East with its basic needs, meaning a flow of oil to the West and a flow of food to the Mideast.

On Feb. 24, Ford told several hundred persons attending the 66th annual award dinner of B’nai Zion, where he was presented with the group’s 1974 America-Israel Friendship Gold Medal “in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the furtherance of America-Israel friendship,” that a “large share” of the credit for the Suez disengagement accord “accrues to the courage, goodwill and vision of leaders in both Egypt and Israel.”

Addressing himself to the issue of the Israeli POWs in Syria, Ford declared that “humanitarian considerations indicate that Syria and Israel should exchange full lists of prisoners and that both sides permit Red Cross visits to POW camps.” He also told the gathering that “an era of peace is within our reach–for the superpowers as well as the Middle Eastern countries,” but that “to reach that objective we have no alternatives but to maintain a strong defense.”

Israeli President Ephraim Katzir, in a message to the meeting, lauded Ford as “a staunch and perceptive champion of the cause of strengthening the bonds of friendship between Israel and the United States.” The then Premier Golda Meir, in a message, called Ford a “great American leader whose whole career bears testimony to his profound humanitarianism, his fearless support for freedom everywhere and his genuine friendship for Israel.” Abba Eban, who was then Foreign Minister, also sent a message lauding Ford for his “efforts to strengthen the bonds of friendship between the people of the United States and the people of Israel” and for his “unswerving and meaningful championship of the State of Israel in its struggle for peace and security.”

METTLE MAY BE TESTED

Meanwhile it is expected that there will be a hiatus in the Administration’s foreign policy activities while the changing of the guard takes Place and while it reassesses priorities on the domestic front. But it is precisely this hiatus–unavoidable in terms of shifting gears — that is causing some anxiety among Jewish leaders in this country and Israeli leaders that the Arabs and Russians may try to create some untoward situation in the Mideast in order to test the new President’s mettle.