Editorials
Tuesday, May 12, 1998

Mrs. Clinton’s support
for a Palestinian state

HILLARY Clinton's public endorsement of a Palestinian state probably contributed to the collapse of the administration plan to hold an Israeli-Palestinian summit conference. The first lady's comments last week appeared to be an administration effort to force Israeli concessions in negotiations with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. If so, the effort backfired.

Administration officials insist Mrs. Clinton's remark did not represent either U.S. policy or President Clinton's views. The official position is that the question of a Palestinian state is a matter to be decided by Israel and the Palestinians as part of an overall peace settlement.

Despite the administration disclaimers, Israel is taking the statement seriously. David Bar-Illan, a top aide to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said that the "damage is irreversible" from Mrs. Clinton's comment. It would be difficult to believe that Mrs. Clinton, who is not given to careless remarks, was not speaking for her husband. If she was not, it was foolish of her to speak out in a way that she should have known would cause an uproar.

Netanyahu rejected Clinton's invitation to a summit, which was tied to his acceptance of a U.S. proposal that Israel withdraw from 13 percent of the occupied West Bank in addition to the 27 percent already relinquished. The proposal wasn't unreasonable, but it was a blunder for the United States to publicly attempt to impose such a precondition for the meeting. Under the circumstances, it is hardly surprising that Netanyahu refused to attend.

However, Mrs. Clinton's statement, dealing with one of the most sensitive issues in Israeli-Palestinian relations, could have only added to Israel's suspicion of being drawn into a diplomatic trap. Since the 1993 accord between Arafat and the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Israel has accepted the establishment of the Palestinian Authority and ended its occupation of all Arab communities in the West Bank, but terrorist attacks on Israelis have continued unabated.

A Palestinian state may indeed eventually emerge, but Israel will not accept one without firm conditions that would prevent it from becoming a launching point for invasion. For the first lady to make a public statement in favor of a Palestinian state at this time, when the peace process is barely breathing, compromises the U.S. role as a mediator and makes it more difficult for any Israeli leader to make concessions.

Airplane maintenance

INVESTIGATORS have yet to determine what caused the 230-fatality crash of TWA Flight 800 near New York two years ago, but the probe has not been futile. Their findings have led to heightened scrutiny of aircraft maintenance. New inspections ordered by the Federal Aviation Administration have found signs of abrasion in wiring on older aircraft.

The TWA explosion could have been caused by electrical sparks igniting vapor in its center fuel tank. The FAA has concluded that wing vibration produces shaking of wires carried in metal conduits through the wing tanks. This can erode the wire coatings and cause sparks. The agency is asking operators to apply a second wrapping of Teflon tape to the wires where needed.

Last week, the FAA gave airlines 60 days to inspect the wiring in their Boeing 747s and 767s. They were given a week to inspect their oldest 737s. Exposed wires and holes were soon found in a Continental Airlines 737 and both barren wire and signs of sparking in a United Airlines 737. The agency then revised its order, grounding the oldest 737s until inspections could be completed.

United canceled 54 flights Sunday to make the emergency inspections. Any inconvenience to passengers was more than offset by safety considerations and increased passenger confidence that the inspections should instill. "While we are concerned about (the inspections) and the disruption it may have on the system, the No. 1 concern of the FAA is safety," said Thomas McSweeney, FAA director of aircraft certification.

As it should be. Safe skies are taken for granted by most travelers, but an erosion of that confidence could be devastating both in the air and on the ground. Aggressive monitoring of aircraft maintenance is necessary to avoid future catastrophes.

India’s nuclear tests

THE world has suddenly become a more dangerous place with India's three underground nuclear test explosions. China and France conducted nuclear tests in recent years, but neither is likely to use nuclear weapons in any current dispute. India and Pakistan have fought three wars, and the threat of war between them is never very remote. The next one could be nuclear.

The Bharatiya Janata Party took office in March declaring that India would take all steps to protect its territory, including building nuclear weapons, to counter adventurism by Pakistan. The announcement of the test explosions -- the first by India since 1974 -- contained the first confirmation that the government now has the ability to build such weapons.

The only reason for India to make nuclear weapons is to use them against Pakistan. That government unsurprisingly responded by vowing to make its defenses "impregnable against any Indian threat, be it nuclear or conventional." Pakistan is known to have a nuclear weapons program of its own and may now decide to conduct its own nuclear tests in response to the Indian announcement.

The victory of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party in India has added a destabilizing element to the fragile peace between India and Pakistan. Washington must use its influence with both countries to prevent the potential for nuclear war from becoming reality.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor