The Middle East part of Mr. Carter's press conference was devoted to the question of Palestinian representation in the peace talks. While stating that the U.S. would not deal with the PLO as long as it adheres to its position denying Israel's right to exist, the President warned that there could be no Peace in the Middle East without an adequate Palestinian representation in Geneva. On another matter he told the press conference that the Soviet Union has shown a cooperative attitude and have been flexible in their attitudes. While the President was referring to SALT and other issues of U.S.-Soviet relations, on 1 October it became clear that he was also referring to the Middle East. Excerpts from the 29 September press conference follow:
September 30, 1977
Question: There have been a lot of confusing statements from the White House and from leaders who have seen you recently on where exactly the United States stands in terms of Palestinians, PLO participation in a Geneva Peace Conference if one comes about. Can you really clarify this point?
The President: ...What we are trying to do now is, as a first and immediate goal is to bring all the parties in the Mideast dispute to Geneva for a conference. We are dealing with Israel directly; we are dealing directly with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. We are trying to act as an intermediary between Israel and each one of those Arab countries that border their own country.
There are some differences among the Arab nations which we are trying to resolve concerning a unified Arab delegation or individual Arab delegations, and the format which might be used to let the Palestinian views be represented.
At the same time, we have a further complicating factor in that we are joint chairmen of the Geneva Conference along with the Soviet Union. So in the call for the conference and the negotiations preceding the format of the conference we have to deal with the Soviet Union as well. So on top of all that, and perhaps preeminent in my own mind, is we are not an idle observer or bystander, or mediator. We have a vital national interest in the ultimate peace in the Middle East. It is obvious to me that there can be no Middle Eastern peace settlement without adequate Palestinian representation.
The Arab countries maintain that the PLO is the only legitimate representative of the Palestinian interests. The Israelis say they won't deal with the Palestinians, certainly not the well-known PLO members, because they have been identified in the past as committed to the destruction of the nation of Israel.
So we are trying to get an agreement between the Israelis and the Arab countries with widely divergent views about the format of the meeting, and also who would be welcomed to the conference to represent the Palestinians.
This is something that is still in the negotiating stage and I cannot predict a final outcome. We have no national position on exactly who would represent the Palestinians or exactly what form the Arab group would take in which the Palestinians would be represented. I just can't answer that question yet because the question has not been answered in my mind.
Question: Does the United States recognize - "Recognize" is the wrong word - but accept the PLO as a representative of the Palestinians?
The President: We have pledged to the Israelis in the past, and I have confirmed the pledge, that we will not negotiate with, nor deal directly with the PLO until they adopt United Nations Resolution 242 as a basis for their involvement, which includes a recognition of the right of Israel to exist. We have let this be known to the PLO leaders through various intermediaries, through the United Nations, leaders in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, and so forth. They know our position.
If the PLO should go ahead and say, "We endorse UN Resolution 242," we don't think it adequately addresses the Palestinian issue because it only refers to refugees and we think we have a further interest in that, that would suit us okay.
We would then begin to meet with and to work with the PLO. Obviously they don't represent a nation. It is a group that represents, certainly don't think they are the exclusive representatives of the Palestinians. Obviously there are Mayors, for instance, and local officials in the West Bank areas who represent Palestinians. They may or may not be members of the PLO. So we are not trying to define an exact formula that we would prescribe for others. We are trying to find some common ground on which the Israelis and Arabs might get together to meet in Geneva.
I think, by the way, that both groups, the Israelis and the Arabs, have come a long way. They are genuinely searching for a formula by which they can meet. They want peace. I think they are to be congratulated already because in the past number of years they have made very strong and provocative statements against one another, and now to move toward an accommodation is a difficult thing for them and we are trying not to make it any more difficult.
Question: Mr. President, what are the assurances given to the PLO in the event of accepting 242?
The President: If they accept UN 242 and the right of Israel to exist, then we will begin discussions with the leaders of the PLO. We are not giving them any further assurance of that because we are not trying to prescribe, as I said, the status of the PLO itself in any Geneva Conference. But it would give us a means to understand the special problems of the Palestinians. And, as you know, many of the Israeli - some of the Israeli leaders have said that they recognize that the Palestinian question is one of the three major elements. But I can't and have no inclination to give the PLO any assurances other than we will begin to meet with them and to search for some accommodation and some reasonable approach to the Palestinian question if they adopt 242 and recognize publicly the right of Israel to exist.