Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Source Description

Records pertain to the Middle East Peace Process.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
285341859
label
CO074 Case Number 225403 Scanned
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285341859
contentType
document
title
CO074 Case Number 225403 Scanned
description
Records pertain to the Middle East Peace Process.
collections
Records of the White House Office of Records Management (George H.W. Bush Administration)
Subject Files on Israel
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285341859
generalNotes
Title terms were applied by White House staff.
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6d3620bddf42434c
ocrText
ID # 225403 WHITE HOUSE COOTH CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET O OUTGOING H INTERNAL I INCOMING Received (YY/MM/DD) Date Correspondence 91/03/27 Name of Correspondent: MR. JOHN D. BECKETT MI Mail Report User Codes: (A) (B) (C) Subject: submitting two "White Papers" on issues that are on the front burner - Israel and Baltic states - to help President as he seeks wisdom and counsel ROUTE TO: ACTION DISPOSITION Tracking Type Completion Action Date of Date Office/Agency (Staff Name) Code YY/MM/DD Response Code YY/MM/DD TC high Ann Metzger ORIGINATOR 9/103/27 C 91,03,28 Referral Note: 0402 IC NSC Exec Sec. D 9103,28 C LJ Dos Referral Note: R 9104,15 NAN C9/04/22 Referral Note: Su memo / / / / - Referral Note: / / / / - Referral Note: ACTION CODES: DISPOSITION CODES: I - Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary A Answered C Completed A Appropriate Action C Comment/Recommendation R - Direct Reply w/Copy B - Non-Special Referral S Suspended D Draft Response S For Signature F - Furnish Fact Sheet X Interim Reply to be used as Enclosure FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE: Type of Response = Initials of Signer Code = "A" Completion Date = Date of Outgoing Comments: Beckett in chairman of an influential prayer organization- strong supporter of POTUS' Gulf policies - and met wl him at 3/7/91 religious leaders meeting in Roosevelt Room Keep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter. Send all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB). Always return completed correspondence record to Central Files. Refer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590. 5/81 RECORDS MANAGEMENT ONLY CLASSIFICATION SECTION No. of Additional Correspondents: Media: Individual Codes: . . Prime Secondary Subject Code: . Subject Codes: - - - - - - PRESIDENTIAL REPLY Code Date Comment Form C Time: P- DSP Time: Media: SIGNATURE CODES: MEDIA CODES: CPn - - Presidential Correspondence n - 0 - Unknown B Box/package c Copy n - 1 - . George Herbert Walker Bush D Official document n - 2 - George Bush G Message n - 3 - George H Handcarried L. Letter CLn - First Lady's Correspondence M Mailgram O Memo n - 1 - Barbara Bush P. Photo n - 2 - Barbara R - Report n - 3 - Bar S . Sealed n - 4 - - Mrs. Barbara Bush T. Telegram V. Telephone CBn - Presidential & First Lady's Correspondence X Miscellaneous Y - Study n - 1 - - Barbara & George Bush n - 2 - Barbara & George UNCLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF STATE EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT TRANSMITTAL FORM S/S 9106564 Date April 22, 1991 FOR: Mr. William F. Sittmann Executive Secretary National Security Council Staff The White House REFERENCE: To: President Bush From: Mr. John D. Beckett Date: March 22, 1991 Subject: Submitting Two " White Papers " on issues that are on the front burner - Israel and WH Referral Dated: April 15, 1991 NSCS ID# (if any): 225403 The attached item was sent directly to the Department of State. ACTION TAKEN: A draft reply is attached. A draft reply will be forwarded. A translation is attached. An information copy of a direct reply is attached. X X We believe no response is necessary for the reason cited below. The Department of State has no objection to the proposed travel. Other (see remarks). REMARKS: Any response reflecting USG policy is likely to satisfy the correspondent. As no response is requested, we do not believe it is necessary to send one. for Sastin Secretariat Director Staff Sailus UNCLASSIFIED S/S-8106564 THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE REFERRAL APRIL 15, 1991 TO: DEPARTMENT OF STATE ACTION REQUESTED: DIRECT REPLY, FURNISH INFO COPY DESCRIPTION OF INCOMING: ID: 225403 MEDIA: LETTER, DATED MARCH 22, 1991 TO: PRESIDENT BUSH FROM: MR. JOHN D. BECKETT CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD INTERCESSORS FOR AMERICA 1860-201 OLD RESTON AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 2639 RESTON VA 22090 SUBJECT: SUBMITTING TWO " WHITE PAPERS " ON ISSUES THAT ARE ON THE FRONT BURNER - ISRAEL AND BALTIC STATES - -- TO HELP PRESIDENT AS HE SEEKS WISDOM AND COUNSEL PROMPT ACTION IS ESSENTIAL - -- IF REQUIRED ACTION HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN WITHIN 9 WORKING DAYS OF RECEIPT, PLEASE TELEPHONE THE UNDERSIGNED AT 456-7486. RETURN CORRESPONDENCE, WORKSHEET AND COPY OF RESPONSE (OR DRAFT) TO: AGENCY LIAISON, ROOM 91, THE WHITE HOUSE, 20500 SALLY KELLEY DIRECTOR OF AGENCY LIAISON PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE 225403 INTERCESSORS FOR AMERICA March 22, 1991 Gary Bergel President President George Bush BOARD OF DIRECTORS The White House John D. Beckett Chairman 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Ern Baxter Washington, D. C. 20006 Warren Black Jay Fesperman¹ Dear President Bush: John Heard Jimmy Owens Subject: Memoranda on the Baltic States and Israel Derek Prince John Talcott I deeply appreciate the opportunity that you provided to meet Larry Tomczak with you in the small ecumenical gathering that you sponsored at Executive Committee The White House. It was truly gratifying to hear your heart, so BOARD OF REFERENCE thankful to the Lord for His mercy upon our nation during the Dr. Ben Armstrong Persian Gulf War. Senator William Armstrong Dr. Robert J. Billings The Proclamation on Three Days of Thanksgiving is brilliant, Dr. Bill Bright and we are doing everything that we can to encourage its Rev. Gerald Derstine distribution and observance. Dr. Richard C. Halverson Rev. Jack W. Hayford I'm taking the liberty to submit to you two "White Papers." Dr. E.V. Hill These are brief memoranda on issues that are on the "front Rt. Rev. John Howe burner," and on which critical decisions are being made. Mrs. Dee Jepsen Dr. Tim LaHaye Mr. Ralph Martin One is on the Baltic States, and was prepared in conjunction Mr. E.E. (Ed) McAteer with the Free Congress Foundation and reflects our combined views. Mr. M.G. (Pat) Robertson Mrs. Edith Schaeffer The second is on "The Significance of Israel," prepared by a Mr. Paul Weyrich very sound pastor and writer in Elyria, Ohio. While somewhat Dr. B.J. Willhite longer, it is so rich in content and insight, I hesitated to edit it down. We trust that as you seek wisdom and counsel, the views contained in these papers will be of some significant help. Yours, with great respect and appreciation, John D. Beckett Chairman of the Board JDB/gam Enclosures: Memoranda on "The Baltic States" and "The Significance of Israel" 1860-201 Old Reston Avenue Post Office Box 2639, Reston, Virginia 22090 703/471-0913 Fax 703/471-0745 RECEIVED 91 APR 2 PI. 28 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON ORM OPTICAL DISK NETWORK ID# 225403 Hardcopy pages are in poor condition (too light or too dark). Remainder of case not scanned. Oversize attachment not scanned. Report not scanned. Enclosure(s) not scanned. Proclamation not scanned. Incoming letters(s) not scanned. Proposal not scanned. Statement not scanned. Duplicate letters attached - not scanned. Only table of contents scanned. No incoming letter attached. Only tracking sheet scanned. Photo(s) not scanned. Bill not scanned. Comments: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ISRAEL: A Biblical Perspective A paper presented to President George Bush by Dr. David R. Walls, Senior Pastor The Church of the Open Door March 19, 1991 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ISRAEL: A Biblical Perspective More than history, the story of the Jews is high drama---drama with a divine component. It is really the merging of two agendas, human and divine, widely diverging but oscillating throughout history. As a result, the current dilemma is by no means limited to Jews and Arabs living in the land; it affects the entire world. Evangelical Christians have an interest in the affairs of Palestine. Besides a historical regard for its past and a moral concern for its present, they have a theological interest in its future. They see Israel's return to the land as an integral part of Bible prophecy and consider her place on the world scene an essential part of the end-times, in whatever timetable that is construed to be. Jewish resurgence in Palestine has, in fact, a two- fold significance: it confirms the accuracy of the Scriptures, and it alerts the church to the sovereign activity of the Lord as He works in international affairs to fulfill His program. Before embarking on the biblical perspective regarding Israel's right to the land, one prevailing myth that must be addressed is the assertion that it is Zionism which has been the unsettling and fevered infection in the Middle East the belief that without Israel there would somehow be a natural harmony throughout the Middle East and Arab world. This viewpoint twists reality to suggest that it is the democratic tendency of Israel which has injected discord and dissension into the Near East. Even by the coldest calculations, the removal of Israel would not alter the basic crisis in the area. For, if there is any lesson to be learned from history, it is that although Arab states are generally united in opposition to Israel, their political unities do not rise above this negative posture. The basic rivalries within the Arab world, the quarrels over boundaries, the tensions involved in lifting their economies from stagnation, the cross pressures of nationalism---al of these factors would still be there, even if there were no Israel. The Arab states, although some have had significantly varying lines of development, have all too often used Israel as a scapegoat and anti-Zionism as a policy to divert attention away from the hard tasks of national and regional development, and from special area problems. The historical fact is that until the defeat of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire in World War I, there was no geopolitical entity called "Palestine." No Arab nation ever set historical roots on this soil and no national claim was ever made to the territory by any national group other than the Jews. They are, in fact, the sole survivors of the ancient inhabitants of Palestine, who have maintained an uninterrupted link with the land since the dawn of recorded history. It is one of the failures of our media today to give little, if any attention, to the fascinating story of the Jewish families and communities who have resided in the Holy Land without interruption since Biblical times. These people have, throughout hundreds and thousands of years, kept their national claim to God's ownership of their homeland. Now having said that, let me suggest that...the basic Jewish claims to Palestine may be summarized in five propositions, both historical and religious: 1. Their ancient and continuous residency in the land. 2. The Balfour Declaration which guaranteed the Jews a national home in Palestine. 1 3. Their need for a haven from Holocaust. Without a land of their own, the Jews were at the mercy of every genocidal madman and no national government to which to appeal for justice. 4. Their appeal to the covenants. Israel's divine right to Palestine rests on two Old Testament covenants. The first was that given to Abraham and later confirmed to Isaac and Jacob. The land of Canaan (Palestine) was promised to Abraham and his seed forever (Genesis 12:7;13:5). This first covenant is the bedrock of Israel's claim to the land, both religiously and historically. Even the boundaries of the land were specified in the covenant: from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates and from the Mediterranean Sea to the desert beyond Jordan (Genesis 15:18; Exodus 23:31; Numbers 43:1-12; Joshua 1:4). That property was called a "land which the Lord has given to you and your forefathers forever and ever" (Jeremiah 25:5). The second covenant was the Palestinic covenant, given to Moses before the nation entered the promised land (Deuteronomy 28-30). It elaborated on the Abrahamic treaty and in this lengthy treatise God itemized the conditions under which Israel could occupy the land, but the promise of the land was unconditional. There are several reasons for this. First, it is called by God an eternal covenant (Ezekiel 16:60). Second, it is only an amplification and enlargement of parts of the Abrahamic covenant, which itself is an unconditional covenant, and, therefore, this amplification must be eternal and unconditional also. Third, this covenant has the guarantee of God that He will effect the necessary conversion which is essential to its ultimate fulfillment (Romans 11:26-27; Hosea 2:14-23; Ezekiel 11:16-21). Fourth, portions of this covenant have already been fulfilled literally. Israel has experienced the dispersions as judgments for unfaithfulness. Israel has experienced restorations to the land and awaits the final restoration. Israel's history abounds in examples of her enemies who have been judged. These partial fulfillments, which were literal fulfillments, all indicate a future literal fulfillment of the unfulfilled portions in the same manner. From the original statement of the provisions of this covenant, it is clear, Israel must be converted as a nation, must be regathered from her world-wide dispersion, must be installed in her land, which she is made to possess, must witness the judgment of her enemies, and must receive the material blessings promised to her. Certainly the full restoration of Israel to its land with complete peace and security will not come until the return of the Messiah, Jesus Christ at the Second Coming. However, it is important to understand that since these things have not yet been fulfilled, and an eternal and unconditional covenant demands a fulfillment, we must provide for just such a program in our outline for the future. 5. The Jews' religious attachment to Jerusalem. This city is central to all the Jewish historical and religious traditions. The "City of Zion" is essential to the Zionist movement and always has been central to the nation. In fact, Jerusalem and the Jewish people are indispensable to each other. Now then, measured today by the divine standard, modern Israel has a human and international right to the land, but she falls short of her covenant obligations. The promise of the land ultimately is tied to the nation's response to the Messiah, Jesus Christ. At this moment, that response is anemic. However, that does not therefore mean, that she should be expelled from the land she now occupies. Obviously, in order for the biblical promises to be fulfilled, there must be a beginning point of occupation. The statehood of Israel, as determined in 1948 certainly is that beginning point. Any recapitulation here is a step backward. 2 The promises regarding the possession of the land are not new. But the very number of them seems to indicate God anticipated that people would not accept these promises at face value. God repeated the promises again and again in such contexts and in such ways that it not only demonstrates the promise is true--that a literal land was promised--but it also demonstrates it is unconditional, in the sense of certainty of fulfillment. It is God's purpose, in spite of human failure, ultimately to give the land to Israel. The same Bible which predicted that Israel would go to Egypt and return, was literally fulfilled; the same Bible which foretold they would be carried off by the Assyrians and Babylonians and then return, was exactly fulfilled; the same Bible which declared the temple would be destroyed and they would be scattered all over the earth, was literally fulfilled; that same Bible predicted that they also would be regathered from all over the world. What then is the theological significance of the return of some Jews to Palestine and of the establishment of the modern state of Israel? It is hard not to see this return as a sign of God's further fulfillment of His promises to Israel. Yet this affirmation needs to avoid implying that the Arab peoples (many of them Christians) are outside God's direct concern and avoid inferring that Christians should offer unequivocal support for the policies of the modern state of Israel. Since the land has been ethnically mixed throughout its history, there is no reason why it should not be so today. We may grant that the passions of the moment make Arabs suspicious of Israelis, and Israelis suspicious of Arabs, but there can be no real peace and no just solution to the 'Palestinian problem' as long as the rights of both Israelis and Arabs to live in peace in the land are not recognized. With the many issues involved, any resolution will require something of a balancing act. Though the historical claims of the to the land are irrefutable, the Palestinians have a hammerlock on the issue of residency themselves. They live there, the covenant to Abraham notwithstanding, and they constitute a growing force both in Israel and in the occupied territories. Likewise, appeals to the British Mandate agreements are moot, whatever their original intentions. The fact is that both Jews and Arabs defaulted on those agreements. As the Jews violated the property rights of the Palestinians, the Arabs violated the rights of the Jews in Arab lands. Yet the most loudly proclaimed issue in the Middle East today, even underlying the Iraqi war, is the cry of the Palestinians for justice and repatriation. This they deserve, but not without similar justice on all sides. Other peoples in the Mideast have suffered disenfranchisement of property at the hands of the invaders, such as the Kurds who were overrun by Iraq. A reasonable solution to the problem of occupation and land appears to be the option of Palestinian autonomy under Israeli sovereignty. Under such a plan the resident Palestinians would have a measure of self- rule and also retain some of the prosperity many have come to enjoy in Israel. The plan would give Palestinians a non-military autonomy in which they would govern and police themselves, building a unique society of their own. It would allow Israel to maintain secure borders around the territories and would enhance world peace by preventing the growth of another launching pad for terrorists. Many variations of this plan have been suggested. Its viability lies in the fact that such an arrangement would fully conform to Palestinian history, for the Palestinians have always enjoyed local autonomy under a larger sovereignty. 3 In all of this, it should always be remembered that God's first promise to Abraham contains an important statement: "I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse" (Genesis 12:3). This divine promise is not limited in time. It is stated categorically and permanently. Even though Israel should fall into sin, and should seem no longer to be a recipient of God's blessing, it would still be true that God has promised that those who bring blessing to His earthly people will themselves be blessed, while those who curse His earthly people will themselves suffer the results of God's displeasure. Israel's basic need today is not peace with the Arabs; it is peace with God. Israel's deepest need is not economic, political, or military, but one she yet firmly resists---a historic encounter with her covenant Lord. That meeting will do what no military victory could accomplish--inaugurate permanent peace with good will toward all. For this "peace of Jerusalem" all God's people are exhorted to fervently pray (Psalm 122:6). It is the grand climax of the biblical drama of Israel, through whom God will bring the full blessing of Abraham to all the world. Dr. David R. Walls, Senior Pastor The Church of the Open Door 43275 Telegraph Road Elyria, Ohio 44035 (216) 323-4644 4 THE BALTIC STATES A paper presented to President George Bush by The Free Congress Foundation in conjunction with Intercessors For America Washington, D. C. March 19, 1991 BALTIC STATES OUR FREEDOM As you well know, our country was founded by people seeking freedom -- religious freedom, economic freedom and political freedom. Subsequently, our Founding Fathers put their lives on the line for those freedoms in the War for Independence. Their deep commitment to freedom inspired the great words which comprise our Declaration of Independence - - including a listing of God-given "unalienable rights." BALTIC SIMILARITIES The people of the Baltic States have been on an odyssey somewhat similar to that of our Founding Fathers, except that they have not gone to a new land in search of their freedoms. After years of involuntary enslavement, the citizens of the Baltic States have experienced the fresh breezes of freedom, awakening within them the same hopes and yearnings which drove our forefathers to their irreversible quest. They, too, see life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as part of their God-ordained "unalienable rights." The mirage of freedom under the Gorbachev regime has only heightened these innate longings for real freedom -- freedom to worship God as they choose; freedom to seek improvement in their quality of life through hard work, incentive and entrepreneurial creativity; and freedom to choose their own political leaders and system of government. This quest, so like our own over 200 years ago, is at a critical juncture. What comes of these hopes and aspirations will depend, in large measure, on the response by our nation, and specifically your leadership. 1 OPTION 1 Acquiesce to Gorbachev's determination to douse the flames of freedom by forcefully suppressing Baltic independence. RESULT: Civil war will be inevitable. Much blood will be spilled. A central government victory will be temporary, at best. In the long run, freedom WILL prevail. Those seeking freedom will have seen no evidence of support from America. In fact, they will have duly noted that America supplied economic assistance to the Central Government, support which was then used in the process of suppression of the Baltic people. When freedom is eventually achieved by these people, what then will be their attitude toward the great proponents of democracy in America? OPTION 2 Diplomatically tell Gorbachev that the U. S. will not be a party to the involuntary servitude of the Baltic people. People have a right to freedom, and even though we desire a friendly relationship with the central government, we cannot do anything to aid and abet its repressive actions in the Baltic states. We will have to terminate our economic aid to the central government. RESULT: Gorbachev will probably raise a fuss and test our resolve. We must stand firm. He needs us more than we need him. Certainly, after Gorbachev's failure to provide ANY resources in the Persian Gulf and his subsequent effort to dictate the terms of settlement, he has no basis for threatening us with the loss of his cooperation. This approach would at least mitigate animosity toward the U. S. by the Baltic people who do greatly desire our friendship and will eventually win over communism. 2 OPTION 3 Go one step further than Option 2, by giving direct aid to the Baltic States. RESULTS: This would undoubtedly upset Gorbachev, but it would give a major boost to those seeking freedom. It would produce short-term animosity from the central government but reap long-term support for and from the people. We would have materially aided freedom fighters and we would be on the right side, and the winning side. More importantly, we would be setting a clear record for all the world to see that we believe in freedom, both in America and elsewhere. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Denounce measures which suppress pursuit of freedom. 2. Terminate economic aid to the USSR central government. 3. Open serious discussions directly with Baltic State leaders regarding economic aid directly to the Baltic States. 4. Make a major speech stating our intention to encourage democratic change and pursuit of freedom wherever people indicate such desires. 5. Do it now. 3