Ups and Downs for Mr. Shultz

U.S. officials were exultant on May 6 after the Israeli cabinet announced its agreement "in principle" to a plan, mediated by the U.S. and already approved by Lebanon, for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from that country. Only some "clarifications" were required for the agreement to become official, the cabinet said.

Even the usually reserved Secretary of State, George Shultz, raised his thumb in a gesture of triumph and hailed the agreement as a "significant step" towards peace in the area.

As he flew off to fill in Jordan's King Hussein on what had been accomplished, he told U.S. reporters on his airplane that the clarifications sought by Israel "will not pose any real problems," and a senior U.S. official travelling with him added that the American Ambassador to Israel was at that very moment discussing with Israeli officials the matters to be clarified, which "already are virtually all taken care of."

The next day, Mr. Shultz flew into Damascus and received what observers described as a "highly negative" reaction from Hafez Assad, the president of Syria, to the Israel-Lebanon agreement. According to Syrian officials, Mr. Assad voiced objections to practically every clause, particularly those which provide for future "normalization" of relations between Israel and Lebanon, give an important role to Israel's Lebanese ally, Major Saad Haddad, and allow uniformed Israeli soldiers to participate in "supervisory" teams in South Lebanon which will in effect be allowed to hunt down Palestinian guerrillas. After the meeting Mr. Shultz made a statement which by his standards was positively gloomy: "I think it is fair to say that they (the Syrians) are hardly enthusiastic about the agreement that Lebanon and Israel have worked out," adding that he thought negotiations with Syria would be "very difficult."

The next day, May 8, Mr. Shultz sounded more buoyant after he completed a quick trip to Saudi Arabia for a visit with King Fahd, having received the impression that the Saudis supported the agreement. He told reporters that his talks had been "very worthwhile and encouraging."

There was more reason for gloom on May 9, however, after Mr. Shultz's friends in Beirut, the Lebanese negotiators, hit the ceiling upon receiving eight pages of Israeli requests for "clarifications," delivered to them by U.S. special envoy Philip Habib. Many of the requests called for changes on substantive security issues, causing one of the Lebanese negotiators to fume: "What the Israelis couldn't get at the negotiating table they are trying to get through 'clarifications!... In his view Lebanese acceptance of the changes being sought "would change the whole balance of the agreement." But Mr. Shultz, by this time in Paris attending an international economic meeting, said he saw no "special problem" with the Israeli requests. "As is usual in agreements of this kind, there is a lot of effort to dot the i's and cross the t's," he said.

As Mr. Shultz flew home to Washington on May 11 to report to President Reagan on his trip, Lebanese officials appeared to have decided they could cope with the clarifications problem and were preparing to sign the agreement. At the same time, however, reports began coming in from Lebanon of increasing tension in the Bekaa valley, where Syrian and Israeli troops face each other. A war between these two countries could blow the withdrawal agreement sky high.