Israel’s Anti-PLO War of Words Hitting Snags

JERUSALEM — Despite the Israeli government’s insistence that the Palestine Liberation Organization is still a terrorist group and its recent declaration of independence is an empty gesture, this country’s campaign of persuasion, both domestic and international, is running into snags.

The biggest row inside the country has been set off by the government’s censorship of news broadcasts of Tuesday’s declaration by the Palestine National Council in Algiers. In that declaration, the PLO’s so-called parliament in exile called for an international peace conference on the Middle East, endorsed two key U.N. resolutions implicitly recognizing Israel’s right to exist and declared an independent Palestinian state.

The government’s ostensible reason for the censorship was as a riot control measure--to keep the news from reaching Arabs in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. But critics charged that the government’s true intent was to keep the Israeli public from hearing what went on.

Censorship Unnecessary?

The critics pointed out that since the army had cut off much of the electric power in the West Bank and Gaza, it was unnecessary for the government to censor the broadcasts--unless the intent was to deprive Israelis of the news.

“The official level is trying to accomplish the impossible,” said Yaron Ezrahi, a political theorist at Hebrew University. “They are trying to wish it (the Algiers meeting) away.”

During the week, prominent journalists protested the censorship. At least one, David Grossman, author of a recent best-selling book about Arab-Israeli relations, quit his job.

Grossman compared the censorship to army actions designed to put down the Arab uprising in the West Bank and Gaza, now in its 12th month.

“The heads of the Broadcasting Authority try to shoot down words,” Grossman said.

The Broadcasting Authority, which controls the government’s monopoly on the electronic media here, accused the protesting journalists of favoring the PLO in their reports. Israel Television showed no pictures of PLO leader Yasser Arafat, nor did it disseminate the statement he delivered Tuesday in proclaiming the Palestinian state. An analyst, however, rebutted the points in Arafat’s statement.

It is far from clear that all Israelis accept their government’s total write-off of the PLO’s Algiers declaration.

“We cannot close our minds to the thought that clearly, something very fundamental is taking place in the Palestinian camp,” said columnist Hirsh Goodman in the Nation newspaper.

“There were some new things. You can find issues that can blur. But all in all, I think it’s significant,” said Moshe Maoz, an expert in Arab affairs.

‘Another Stage’

Added a commentary in the daily Hadashot newspaper: “The PLO . . . has managed to create another stage to be treated in the international arena.”

Israeli officials suggest publicly and privately that the government is inclined to wait out the aftershocks of the PLO’s declaration rather than produce any new proposals of its own.

Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, considered a dove in the current post-election caretaker government, gave a good example of the static approach Thursday. In a press conference, he took pains to convince reporters that the PLO, through its self-styled parliament, had neither recognized Israel nor renounced terrorism nor, in short, done anything to advance peace.

Then, as if to make sure he left no holes in his argument, Peres said that even if the PLO had taken such steps, it would make no difference because the organization is fundamentally “incapable of changing its positions.”

“That’s why all of us reject the PLO,” he said.

Government aides close to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir took the rejectionist rhetoric further. “If the PLO could make peace, it wouldn’t be the PLO,” said one.

Abroad, Israel is hoping to at least keep friendly countries in the West from recognizing the Palestinian state. So far, 30 nations have recognized the Palestinian declaration of independence, but of those, only Turkey and Cyprus have full diplomatic relations with Israel. Peres met with 40 ambassadors stationed in Jerusalem on Friday to discourage recognition.

Perhaps the biggest setback on the diplomatic front has been from the Soviet Union, which on Friday extended its own carefully worded recognition to the Palestinian state. Although Israel has no relations with Moscow, the Israelis have been courting the Soviets and hope to open relations with them soon.

It is not clear, given the present makeup of the Israeli government, that it could do anything but reject Palestinian overtures of any sort. Since 1984, Peres and Shamir have alternated as prime minister in a rotating coalition government that essentially paralyzed Israeli policy on the issue of peace talks.

Even though the Nov. 1 elections gave Shamir and his rightist Likud Party a mandate to form a new government, he is still in the process of building a coalition, and the previous coalition government with Peres’ center-leftist Labor Party is still in place.

Shamir favors direct talks with Jordan and other neighboring countries, perhaps with the inclusion of handpicked Palestinian delegates. He opposes giving up any of the occupied land.

With the Algiers meeting and its aftermath, Peres’ hints of future compromise have disappeared. Shamir blames Peres’ proposals for encouraging the PLO to make superficial changes that have put Israel on the defensive, aides of the prime minister said.