The rejection of the Israeli model set the talks back by at least six months, according to Dr. Burg. The possibility of another summit meeting to speed up the talks was raised. Mr. Begin did not reject the idea, but said on 18 January that no such invitation has so far been extended by President Carter. Little progress was made at the eighth round of the talks, and when they concluded the following communique was issued:
The 8th plenary of the autonomy negotiations was held in Herzliya on January 31st and February 1st 1980.
The Egyptian, Israeli and American delegations held formal and informal meetings during that time. During the course of the sessions reports were submitted to the plenary by the two working groups on powers and responsibilities and election modalities. The reports will be discussed further.
Israel and Egypt presented their respective models.
All three delegations agreed that they will compile a mutually agreeable list of powers and responsibilities to be exercised by the self-governing authority (administrative council) pursuant to the Camp David accords. During intensive discussions, tentative understanding was reached among the parties on a number of issues.
In order to reach rapid agreement, it is necessary to accelerate the negotiations. It was therefore agreed that the working group on powers and responsibilities would meet on an accelerated and intensified schedule.
It is further agreed that the working group on powers and responsibilities shall establish a sub-group on economic issues, and such other sub-groups as may be deemed necessary by the three heads of delegations to deal with the areas on which further consideration is required, if needed special meetings or working groups on a ministerial level.
The plenary expressed its satisfaction with the substantial work and innovative recommendations of the working group on election modalities. It directed the election modalities working group to state the areas of agreement and, where no agreement has been reached, to define the respective positions of the parties. In the latter case the plenary directed the working group to present to the plenary, where possible, a range of options for resolution of each outstanding issue.