1968_4_arabisraelwar

UNITED STATES AND UNITED NATIONS / 177
the fifth principle, "respect for the political independence and territorial
integrity of all states," the President added an important new qualification:
This principle can be effective in the Middle East only on the basis of peace
between the parties. The nations of the region have had only fragile and violated
truce lines for 20 years. What they now need are recognized boundaries
and other arrangements that will give them security against terror, destruction
and war.
He said, "certainly, troops must be withdrawn," but only if the other principles
are also adopted. In his view, the demand for an immediate return to
the situation as it was on June 4 was "not a prescription for peace but for
renewed hostilities."
While, in the preceding four years, the United States rejected as unrealistic
and premature various UN proposals calling for the Arabs and the Israelis
to enter into negotiations, Johnson's statement marked a return to the traditional
American position of urging negotiated settlements. He declared:
"Clearly the parties to the conflict must be the parties to the peace." The
United Nations and other outside agencies, he held, might help them "reason
together," but the "main responsibility for the peace of the region depends
on its own people and its own leaders." He pledged that "in a climate of
peace" the nations of the Middle East could count on the United States to
"do our full share" to solve the refugee problem, support regional cooperation
and economic development, including nuclear powered desalination projects
to "make the deserts bloom."
On June 20 Ambassador Goldberg introduced in the General Assembly
a resolution incorporating the substance of the President's five principles. It
scrupulously avoided casting blame on either party, and called for the achievement
of peace "through negotiated agreements with appropriate third-party
assistance."
Soviet Demands
The Soviet approach was quite different. Premier Kosygin charged "Israel,
backed by bigger imperialist powers," with having committed aggression
against its neighbors. He claimed that only severing of diplomatic ties by the
Soviet Union and other states and the threat of sanctions had stopped the
"unbridled aggressor" from continuing the invasion of Syria and conquering
Damascus itself. He spoke of the mounting "atrocities and violence committed
by the Israeli invaders," drawing a parallel between the behavior of
the Israeli troops and the "heinous crimes perpetrated by the Fascists during
World War II," and between the Israeli military governors and the Nazi
Gauleiters in occupied Europe. He accused Israel of having long pursued a
policy of "conquest and territorial expansion" and of evicting or "even exterminating"
the indigenous population. He accused the United States, Britain,
and West Germany of having given "direct encouragement" to Israel to commit
aggression by bringing pressure to bear on the Arab states before the war.