The Suez: "Shalom" and "Salaam"

FOR much of the day, Egyptian artillery pounded Israeli positions across the Suez Canal, and Israeli jets roared into Egypt to drop their bombs. As usual, with the onset of darkness the firing slackened. Then, at 11:30 p.m.. an Israeli patrol heard a sudden burst of gunfire and dived for cover. "We thought they were shooting at us," said the patrol leader. "But then we realized that they were shooting into the air. They were shouting. They were happy for the first time in many months."

Within another 30 minutes, it was official: a cease-fire was in effect between Israel and Egypt. That night Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, who normally tours the bunkers and fortresses of the Bar-Lev Line in an armored car, drove to the front in an open Jeep. With him was Captain David Halevy, who told TIME's Marlin Levin: "The quiet along the canal was deafening for anyone who had been there when the artillery was in full blast. We never saw Dayan more relaxed, smiling more easily. He talked to the men about tactics and morale during the ceasefire. Dayan sat on the top of a bunker where Egyptians could have seen him. Some of the men played chess; others were in an open field cleaning rifles or writing letters. In one fort they opened two bottles of wine supplied by the chaplain and drank a I'chayim [to life]."

At daybreak a few Egyptian soldiers strode past their dusty outposts and bathed in the canal's waters. Some of them shouted "Salaam" (peace) to Israeli soldiers, who returned the greeting with "Shalom." The Egyptian troops waved, but the Israelis were ordered not to wave back. Israeli commanders, who have seen the fragile hope of peace destroyed before, cautioned their troops against doffing flak jackets and helmets, even in the 95DEG heat. "The Egyptians know that when we say that we will keep the cease-fire we mean it," said one Israeli commander. "Some of us are not so trustful of them." On the other side of the canal, Egyptian officers were undoubtedly saying the same words.

Commando Ambush. On that note of suspended hostility and suspicion, Israel and Egypt entered into at least a 90-day ceasefire. Jordan and Lebanon, who supported Nasser's agreement, have reaffirmed their willingness to abide by previous cease-fire arrangements. But neither the current truce nor talks have been formally agreed to by two of the Arab combatants (Syria and Iraq). Another serious threat is the Palestinian guerrilla movement, which promised that "our operations will continue as usual--perhaps more than usual." The fedayeen did not wait long to take the spoiler's role and just six hours after the ceasefire, commandos fired on an Israeli patrol on the occupied Golan Heights, wounding three soldiers. The Israelis, naturally, intend to defend themselves against such sneak attacks, and the opportunities for either side to provoke a new outbreak of fighting, even unintentionally, are painfully obvious.

The ceasefire, which was drafted according to a U.S. proposal, covers a 100-km.-wide area, or roughly 31 miles on either side of the canal. Both sides are obligated to refrain from strengthening their military position in that area, which on the Egyptian side includes the points where Soviet crews would be most likely to install any new SAM missile launchers. It also includes numerous SAM sites already in existence. Theoretically, both the Arabs and Israelis are free to build up their military strength behind these lines. Whether they do so, of course, depends primarily on their big-power arms suppliers.

Responsibility for enforcing the cease-fire falls primarily to the two countries involved. The width of the nonfiring zone permits each to keep an eye on the other through "oblique reconnaissance." The camera-carrying planes fly high enough to photograph enemy territory without crossing the border, though some direct overflights are permitted. In addition, about 100 U.N. truce observers, who have spent most of their time since the 1967 Six-Day War ducking the Suez crossfire, remain to supervise the truce on the ground.

The next step for both sides will be indirect negotiations under Gunnar Jarring's supervision. Working inside his customary cocoon of secrecy, the Swedish diplomat last week began sounding out Arab and Israeli U.N. ambassadors in Manhattan about arrangements for the meetings. The Israelis, who are eager to begin face-to-face negotiations as soon as possible, reportedly want to keep the indirect ones close to home (perhaps on Cyprus). The Arabs, who refuse to bargain at the same table with Israel, prefer New York. One possible compromise might be to begin the talks on Cyprus, then move to New York when foreign ministers start arriving for the General Assembly session in September.

Domestic Problems. In accepting the peace initiatives advanced by Secretary of State William Rogers, both Arab and Israeli leaders have been forced to sacrifice wartime unity and take issue with militant minorities. In Israel last week, the long-awaited showdown finally occurred between Mrs. Meir and the hawkish Gahal faction of her Cabinet. At the first mention of the word "withdrawal" in her speech to the Knesset (parliament), Gahal Leader Menahem Begin rose from his Cabinet seat and walked slowly past Golda to the members' benches, thus fracturing the three-year-old government of national unity. Nonetheless, the Premier easily won support for her peace stand by a vote of 66 to 28.

The Arabs had many more serious problems in their ranks. A meeting of the main Arab combatants in Tripoli was boycotted by Iraq and Algeria and criticized by Arab commandos. Nasser, clearly stung by recent demonstrations against him in Baghdad, took an angry swipe at Iraqi military performance, asking sarcastically: "Why has the enemy not been attacking your forces?" In Amman, pro-Nasser and anti-Nasser guerrillas clashed twice, killing at least two of their number and taking rival prisoners. As the splits in Arab unity grew deeper each day, Beirut Columnist Adel Malek declared: "What is really needed now is a cease-fire among the Arabs."

Even if the cease-fire should hold between the Israelis and the Arabs, there is no guarantee that the two sides can move any closer to the final settlement, which has eluded them through three wars and nearly a quarter-century of bitterness. "The chances of success on the U.S. proposals," Nasser reportedly calculated, "are only half of 1%." Golda Meir admitted that "ahead of us still lie difficult trials." Nonetheless, Washington sees greater hope than in many years for some kind of Middle East settlement--or, at the very least, a prolonged cooling-off period. For one thing the cease-fire's earliest expiration date is Nov. 5, when the U.N. General Assembly will be in session. That will place strong pressure on both sides to extend it. Moreover, the Russians, who have apparently concluded that further conflict in the Middle East is not in their own interest, have continued to give strong backing to Rogers' effort. One example: after the Iraqis violently criticized Nasser for accepting the U.S. truce proposal, the Soviets summoned a high-level delegation. In Moscow, First Deputy Premier Kirill Mazurov told the Iraqis flatly that Russia holds the "profound conviction" that peace in the Middle East "meets the genuine interests of the Arab peoples."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.