Signs Of The Times (Part 228 of 0)

Signs Of the Times – Part unknown

A Shaky Cease-fire

In mid-August, Israel agreed to a United States proposal for a 90-day cease fire in the Middle East. Secretary of State Wm. P. Rogers had authored the statement, and had previously succeeded in getting Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon (along with 5 other Arab states) to accept the proposal. It seemed at last to Washington officials that a way out of the potentially explosive situation in the Middle East was on the horizon. During the cease-fire, negotiations would be in progress between the warring factions presided over by U N. Mediator Gun­nar V Jarring. The ultimate end in view would be the withdrawal of Israel from territories captured in the ’67 war, while the Arabs will acknowledge Israel’s right to exist behind secure and mutually agreed borders.

Egypt’s Nasser first accepted the proposal after flying off to Russia to confer with Moscow. He was informed by Soviet officials that they would not back Egypt in another attack on Israel. Russia is worried about a possible confrontation with the United States. They also fear a loss of prestige among the Arabs if they are forced to back down by the U. S. Since he could not for the present count on Russian help, Nasser decided to go along with the proposal.

Israel responded positively a week later. They had been placed under pressure by the Egyptian acceptance, and by the United States. As Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan said, “We are strong enough not to be forced into accepting dictates of enemies or friends, hut we are not strong enough to dispense with our allies.”

Both Egypt and Israel agreed not to take advantage of the cease-fire to strengthen their own military posture. Israel would have preferred peace-keeping monitors, other than the U. N. forces, who failed to maintain peace in 1967, to keep peace. Although the U. S. and Russia have an unspoken agreement that neither will try to change the military balance in the Middle East during the cease-fire, there is strong evidence that the same week in which the cease-fire commenced, new SAM 2’s sites were moved into the effected areas. Israel’s remembrance of broken promises by the U. S. made them suspicious of their intentions. In 1956, when Israel was ordered to evacuate the territory in Sinai and the Gaza Strip captured during the lighting, they were assured by President Eisenhower that, in return for their withdrawal, the U. S. would support Israel’s right to passage through the Suez Canal and the Straits of Tiran. After Israel had agreed to withdraw, and had, indeed, pulled back, they were denied passage through the canal and the Straits of Tiran. The United States did nothing to keep its promise to Israel, a course, which eventually brought about the 1967 war.

What the Israelis Want

Israel claims that what they really want is security, not territory. They are willing to return less strategic areas like the West Bank and Western Sinai, but at the same time they desire to negotiate for new legitimately assured borders that would guarantee their nation’s security. If Sinai is to be given up, then it must be demilitarized and stationed with peacekeeping forces, other than United Nations. Sinai would then act as a buffer zone between the two belligerents. The Gaza Strip, packed with 358,000 Arabs, is still wanted by Israel to straighten out the border. At least, the Strip should come under international control. For to decades. Syrian guns had rained down death and destruction on Israeli kibbutzim. At a cost of 115 Israeli soldiers killed, the Golan Heights were taken jn 1967, and the guns silenced. Israel would not even consider giving up this area without the firmest of assurances that it had been demilitarized. In respect to Jerusalem, it is doubtful if Israel would ever he willing to give the East part back. The capture of this city in 1967 was the cause for great rejoicing and exultation among the Jews, who for the first time in almost two millenniums were able to touch the wailing wall.

What the Arabs Want

James Wallace of the International Staff of “U. S. News & World Report,” having just toured the area of the Middle East reported in the August 24th issue of the bitter hostility that continues to exist between the Arabs and the Israelis. The Palestinian commandos insist, “We refuse any peaceful solutions we absolutely refuse. We completely reject anything less than complete liberation of our homeland.” Such is the attitude of the Arabs towards Israel. Only because of the strong pressure from Russia have they agreed to a cease-fire. What they want from Israel is virtually all the land captured in ’67. This territory formerly occupied by the Arabs totals 25,477 square miles (more than three times as big as all Israel.) The population in the captured area is about 1 million, compared with 2.75 million in Israel.

The most hardened attitudes exist among the Palestinian Commando groups –the guerrillas or feydayeen, and the political groups behind them. Ghassan Ka­nafani a leader in the increasingly influential Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine is reported by Wallace saying, “For 20 years the Palestini-ms were good boys. We thought the Arab armies would win our battle for us, or that we would get justice through the United Nations if we behaved, if we kept on being beggars in our miserable refugee camps. None of that worked. Now we know violence is the only answer.” The rout of the Arab armies in ’67 convinced the commando groups lhat they would have to do their on fighting. They feel now that the battle will go on for 15 to 25 years, during which Israel will be worn down. ‘The entire Arab world will be tired by the Palestine example of perseverance and sacrifice. “Thus united,” say the Fedayeen, “the Arabs will be irresistible, no matter how much help the U. S. gives Israel.”

Continued Violation of The Cease-fire

As the Tidings goes to press, the Israelis continue to accuse the Egyptians of violating the agreement that barred the introduction of new weapons into the 32-mile-wide strip along either side of the Suez. Israel produced photographs which indicated activity in the restricted area hours after the agreement was made. In the first meeting Israel’s U. N. Delegate Yoseph Tekoah repeated his country’s complaint that Egypt had violated the 90-day cease-fire agreement. Soviet built SAM-2 and SAM-3 missiles had been positioned on the west bank of the Suez Canal. He then shocked Jarring with the announcement that he was returning home that very night for consultation with his government. On a television broadcast Israeli Premier GoIda Meir’ declared, “Had we known that things would develop as they have, with the Egyptian contravention of the ceasefire, we would not have agreed to enter into the peace talks. We have been bitterly disappointed,” Moshe Dayan, in secret Cabinet meetings has been urging the Israelis to call off the talks until the Egyptians carry out the provisions of the truce.

As we type these words, we have be­fore us tonight’s newspaper, with headlines that read “Warning by Israel — Action against Suez Missiles Eyed”, Because Israel feels that the U. S. has failed in its assurances that the terms of the agreement would be enforced, they are seriously considering taking action against Egyptian missile bases which have been moved closer to lhe Suez Canal. Premier Golda Meir told meeting of labor members of Parliament that a situation may arise under which Israel may be compelled to take action against the SAM-2 bases. The United States now has conclusive proof that there has been movement of several batteries of SAM-2 anti-aircraft missiles in the standstill zone on the West bank of the Suez Canal. When asked what action, if any, the U.S. would take, the Presidential News Secretary Ron Ziegler replied, “We are continuing to re-evaluate the situation, and I have no indication to give.”

To this writer, it does not seem likely that Israel will hold fast to the cease-fire agreement for the full 90 days. The bitter enmity that exists between Israel and the Arabs will undoubtedly continue until the return of the Messiah, who alone is able to bring lasting peace between even the bitterest of enemies.

The prophets from earliest times various signs and portents by which those seeking the Truth of God’s purpose could relate their own experience and historical environment to the time of its ultimate fulfillment. It was always important that none of these signs, or combination of them, would explicitly pinpoint the exact time of the greatest of all world events the coming of Christ. This was to preclude the possibility of even the wisest and best intentioned believer of any era from being able to say with absolute confidence that he knew the specific day and hour when Jesus would first come or return. The wisdom of this is obvious, for if it was known that his coming was five, ten or twenty years ahead, there would certainly be a relaxing of the vigilance so important to maintain spiritual stamina. Human nature would revert to its natural tendency to put off until the last minute those things that should be done in preparation for the Master’s coming.

Prophecy, however, is not a matter of being able to identify days or hours, but of relating the plan and purpose of God to events in history as they happen. The prophecy which Jesus gave to his disciples on the Mount of Olives is probably the most familiar and comprehensive prediction of future events in the entire Bible. His disciples had gathered around him, and expressed their concern for the future in the question ”What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world ?’. Jesus answered them in depth revealing the events that would mark the passing of two very important epochs in history. We know how completely his words were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D. We are sure, however, the primary interest behind the disciples’ question was contained in the phrase ‘the sign of thy coming’. The disciples were practical men with a realistic viewpoint. They had been promised thrones and authority in God’s coming Kingdom, and this was their hope and expectation. It is not difficult to see why, after Christ’s resurrection, they should once again voice their eager anticipation regarding the establishment of his kingdom – “Lord, wilt thou at this lime restore again the kingdom to Israel ?” The answer Jesus gave regarding “the times and seasons which the Father has put in his own power” has always been a subject of great interest to those who, like the disciples, also eagerly await the return of the Master.

In the Mount Olivet prophecy we find that although Jesus eliminated any con-consideration of ‘the day or hour of his coming, he did give a number of vivid and quite explicit signs to guide his people in their analysis of the events that would herald his return. Other portions of scripture also help us to interpret the prophetic picture of the days in which we live. It is fascinating to see how accurately Bible prophecies, hundreds of years old, foretell the exact outcome of history in our troubles times,

Many excellent articles have been written connecting Israel, the Arabs, Russia and the United States with Bible prophet Their individual interests have been clearly defined. The parts they have to pay in the great conflict of the last days is certainly being verified by current events We see ”wars and rumors of wars”, “men’s hearts failing them for fear’ and the masses of people represented by “the sea and waves” roaring in perplexity and frustration. This fulfillment of the Master’s words in his Mount Olivet prophecy thus far is in its portrayal of the chaos and violence that engulfs the world today in its unprecedented distress.

It would seem from Luke’s account of this prophecy that a state of turbulence will continue until the time of the end as a sign indicating Christ’s imminent return. Matthew covers the same events in a somewhat more prosaic style of writ-and adds a considerable section of the Master’s words not found in Luke’s Gospel. These are worthy of some thoughtful consideration. We find that after Jesus had finished the prophetic portion of his discourse, he turned quite logically to words of warning and exhortation which, if heeded, would enable the disciples of the last days (whenever that might he) to survive the grave dangers that would surround them.

What are the dangers of the “last days”? There are many, of course, but the main cause for Christ’s concern does not seem to be the physical so much as the spiritual welfare of his disciples. If we think about it a little, we will acknowledged that when we are prosperous and things arr going well, we are more vulnerable spiritually than when we experience adversity Peace and prosperity provide the climate in which indolence and apathy flourish. The-stern warning of Jesus and his urgent exhortation are concerned with the dangers that exist under these conditions.

Let us consider a few emphasis points in Matthew chapter 24.

Verses 37-39  . . as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Sol of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

There w as violence in the days of Noah (Gen. 6-11,12) but Jesus makes no specific mention of it. His reference is to the “eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage”— the life that goes on as usual–” . . until the flood came.”

Verses 40-42 . . . Then shall two be in the field; and one shall be taken and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill: the one shall be taken, and the other left. Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

Everyday domestic activities occupy full time—the life that goes on as usual-until one was taken.

Vase 43 . . but know this, that if the Goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up .

The “Goodman” enjoys the apparent security—of a life that goes on as usual until his house was broken up.

Verses 48-50 . . But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming . . . The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looked, not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of.

The “evil servant” thinking his lord was delaying his coming, felt quite safe -in a life that goes on as usual until the day of reckoning.

The last parables of Christ in Matthew, chapter 25, are a continuation of his Mount Olivet prophecy, and are based on the same theme. The ten virgins in the first of these parables, though anticipating the coming of the bridegroom, are not aware of the exact time of his arrival. Because there seemed no immediate urgency, it is recorded -they all slumbered and slept”. The actual arrival was “in such an hour as ye think not”, and instead of it being a joyous occasion, it turned out to be a disaster for fifty per cent of the household!

The parable of the talents which follows is similar in its application. “After a long time” the lord of the servants returned, and the day to give an accounting came. In his displeasure, the lord condemned the unprofitable servant not only for his wickedness, but for being “slothful”.

A further indication of a deceptively dangerous period of peace prior to Christ’s coming is to be found in the fifth chapter of Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians:

But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

From this it is clear the Mount Olivet prophecy must have been a familiar source of reference in Paul’s time for he quotes the Master’s words when linking “the coming of the day of the Lord as a thief in the night” with the time when (according to the Twentieth Century New Testament Translation) people are saying “All is quiet and safe.”

Peter in the third chapter of his second epistle is also writing about the same time period. The “all things continue as they were” attitude and the general apathy is brought out by reference to the scoffers who say “Where is the promise of his coming?” Peter—like Paul forcefully takes the words of Jesus “The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night” to refute the complacent cynicism of the latter day skeptic.

A further premise that seems to justify a consideration of a period of “peace and safety” is found in the thirty-eighth chapter of Ezekiel. We read there that the powerful Gog-dominated confederacy mounts an invasion in the form of a sudden attack on the Holy Land. This is triggered by a God-inspired

thought” or motive, and is directed against a people who are at rest, that dwell safely”—without adequate defenses. The Blitzkrieg technique, which depends on surprise, is acknowledged to be essential tor success in modern warfare. The sense of security on the part of the victim is the factor which gives tremendous advantages to the aggressor. The incursion of the Northern armies is irresistible and the element of surprise is again shown in the impotent protest of a rival alliance sympathetic to Israel in the words “Art thou come down to take a spoil, hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey’?” It is important to realize that the time and circumstance under which these events take place are decided and controlled by God. The phrases “I will turn thee back” will bring thee forth” etc., throughout the chapter clearly show previous planning. From creating the conditions under which Israel can dwell safely, to her final deliverance through the destruction of the Northern invader, confirm that all is under God’s invincible power.

The- situation which prevails in the Middle East at the present time is certainly incompatible with the foregoing outline of prophecy regarding peace and security for the embattled State of Israel today. But we must remember that prophecy moves at an accelerated pace in these last days, and conditions can change quickly. Press Reports indicate that terms acceptable’ to both Israel and the Arab States can be negotiated. Israel has stated her minimum requirements are: recognition by the Arab League of an independent Jewish State and firm guarantees that her territorial rights will be acknowledged and ratified by Treaty commitments. The Arabs, on their part, demand the return of the areas taken by Israel in the Six Day War. It seems highly improbable, however, that the Jews will ever give up Jerusalem, and may insist upon retaining the Golan Heights and the Ga­za Strip as a security measure.

The Soviet Union and the United States are justifiably reluctant to face the consequences of a confrontation over the Middle East problem The present stalemate has been maintained by a balance of power which has been an economic dram on both countries. The explosive situation that does exist cannot continue indefinitely, and reports indicate that private discussions are taking place to explore ways and means to negotiate a settlement. Under a July 2nd dated Associated Press headline “U.S., Russia seen Closer on Mid-East” we read:

Diplomats at the United Nations say there are indications that the Soviet Union and the United States have moved closer together on how to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict. Diplomatic Sources said Wednesday that both countries recently made proposals indicating they had softened their requirements for a Middle East peace settlement.

The June 29 issue of U S News and World Report in in uncle entitled World Danger Zones U S Appraisal states The Middle Last not Southeast Asia is regarded as the No flash point. But it adds the belief is that there is still t little time for all parties to sit don and try to reach some sort of peaceful agreement in the Mid east before big war flares and threatens to in yoke the major powers

The chief deterrents to a confrontation between the United States and Russia at this time are probably the United States deep commitment in Southeast Asia and Russia s uneasiness about her ideological conflict with her mere asingly belligerent neighbor ( tuna There is no doubt that Russia intends to maintain and to expand her investment in the Mediterranean Area but she may feel that her long range interests it this time will best he served by a peaceable settlement of the Arab Israeli differences.

If peace in the Holy hand does materialize as the result of negotiation it does not necessarily follow that the problems of the entire world can also be quickly solved It would be unrealistic to assume that political economic social and moral conditions will universally improve and that peace and security  will become an established fact in all parts of the earth It is impossible to dos our eyes to the t set of the Inevitable deterioration by pollution of human environment which makes life possible on this planet Nor can a solution for in exploding population be found the most depressing of all problems however is the contemplation of the totally demoralizing effect of social system that is rapidly abandon mg ill its ethical and moral standards throughout the world No peace talks or international conferences can save the world from this but God can and If  we go back through Bible history we will find the most hazardous periods for God s people were the times of peace and affluence It was always times of physical danger that united the Christian community and strengthened their mutual dependence upon God and each other the age in which we live is so spiritually dangerous that ‘without any doubt it definitely compares with what we know of the times of Noah and Lot just is Christ said it would Let us then in the short tune that still remains, take every opportunity we can to fortify ourselves against these dangers by heeding the lessons of prophecy in this final period of writing for the Master s return these lessons admonish us is well as encourts us to be actively alert as we see
the day approaching let us be constantly aware of Christ’s hast warning recorded in Revelation

Behold I come as a thief
Blessed is he that watcheth has
he walk naked
and they See his shame. As Pride-

Behold I am against thee, 0 Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal: . . . and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of Armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords: Persia, Ethiopia. and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet: Comer. and all his bands . .  Eze. 38:-3-6)

The nations outlined here as allied with Russia in the time of the end are today preparing themselves for the roles they must play in the closing scenes of the world’s stage. At an ever increasing pace the stage is being set for the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy.

In the last two issues of the Tidings considerable space was allotted to show how Libya is slipping into the camp of Arab Radicalism. The sudden coup abruptly turned the direction of its government and shows how quickly and yet how precisely world events can change to conform to Bible prophecy. Recent developments have indicated the course two other nations are to follow in the last days as pointed out by the unerring finger of Divine fore-knowledge.

Ethiopia

In all Africa, the small (23,000,000 pop.) country of Ethiopia has proved to be America’s best friend. Haile Selassie has ruled his country with an iron hand since 1930. His ultimate objective is to raise the standard of living of his people and make it keep pace with the twentieth century. Though great strides have been made in education, agriculture and industry, many of Selassie’s critics feel that the pace is too slow.

Student Unrest

As in all parts of the world the leaders of the wide protests against his regime are the thousands of students who attend the universities. Their demands for immediate reforms have virtually paralyzed progress in the Addis Ababa’s Haile Se­lassie University. During lengthy periods in 1969, the schools remained closed, opening again one month after Christmas. Among the protesters can be seen anti-Americanism. Some U.S. Peace Corps teachers have been beaten. As a result, it has been necessary to cut back the U.S. program there, and recall some of its volunteers.

Communist Inspired Rebel Activity

Experts maintain that a hard core Communist movement is behind the harassment whose goal is to “Drive out the Americans, topple the monarchy, and destroy the whole fabric of Ethiopian life.” The country is surrounded by serious threats to Ethiopia’s future stability. The rebel activity in Eritea, backed by a guerrilla force of 6000, is striving for independence of the strip of land bordering the Red Sea. The rebel movement calls itself the Eritean Liberation Front (ELF), who receive their arms from Arab states as well as Communist countries and the Palestinian Commandos.

The training of the guerrilla fighters is done mostly in Arab and Communist lands. The weapons (many from Red China) are quite modern and pose an ever increasing threat to Selassie’s regime. As one Ethiopian military officer, commenting of the ELF stated It is a clear danger to Ethiopia, and can be expected to become even more so as arms flows increase from more radical governments in neighboring states.”

Us. Interests — Strong

The United States has a special interest in Ethiopia. Over 1600 American military personnel are stationed there, 1500 of which are in Kagnew Station at As­mora. The Americans have invested $60 million in the communications relay center and consider the center to be indispensable to the United States, Kagnew Station is some 7,500 feet above sea level, and is sufficiently distant from any other major electronic complex as to make it virtually free from interference.

This station is an important part of the Pentagon’s world wide communication relay system. Contact with the desk of the “Chief of Staff” is clear at all times. the President’s plane when flying over the Eastern Atlantic, Europe or Africa can receive and transmit messages through the Kagnew Station.

United States officers are attached to Ethiopia’s four army divisions — not involved in combat operations — for the training of Ethiopia’s armed forces. From 1950 through 1968, the U.S. has poured upwards of $135 million in military aid to this small African state. Amounts since that time are classified. The Americans count heavily on using sea and air bases in that country if needed.

Change In Policy Imminent

The big question now is, who will succeed Haile Selassie to the throne. The dictator, now 77, has reigned for 40 years, and his policies have been pro-Western. The student dissent, leading the call for drastic changes in Ethiopia is a powerful factor in the shaping of Ethiopia’s future. The heir-designate to the throne is Selassie’s eldest son, Crown Prince Asfa Wassen. Many doubt his ability and strength to preserve his country’s present policies.

Regardless of the present outlook, changes must come about in Ethiopia which will cause it to join forces, whether willingly or out of compulsion with the Communist forces set for the invasion of Israel.

France

In Ezekiel’s prophecy, Gomer has long been recognized as answering to modern day France. Though in the last two World Wars France has been allied with the West, prophecy has indicated that she will embark on a course which is to take her into the camp of Communism beside whom she is to stand in the last days.

Expanding Her Influence in the Mediterranean

One of the thorns in the recent talks between France’s Georges Pompidou and President Richard Nixon was France’s decision to sell not 50 Mirage jets to Libya, but 108. Many consider this act to be the most serious mistake Pompidou has made since entering office. The motivation for arranging this deal with Libya is to increase the French presence throughout the Western Mediterranean. Pompidou declared that his country’s diplomacy is concentrating “on those parts of the world which are geographically close to her, such as Europe, Africa—whether it is North Africa or Black Africa. It is in these regions that I am trying to accentuate France’s presence and give it greater reality.”

France has moved in quickly to fill the vacuum left by the Americans. Their sale of arms to Libya is defended by her insistence that it is better that Libya be supplied with weapons from the West than from Russia. Though Paris states that French interest lies heavily in stopping the Middle East Arms escalation, it is difficult to understand how the sale of 108 Mirage jets and 200 armored tanks to Libya can help.

The recent Libya coup provided France with the opportunity to expand her influence in the Mediterranean. The stipu­lation in the sale of the fighter jets that they could not be used in any offensive action against Israel does not offer any assurance that they will not. The French government is convinced that no amount of restrictions and arms rationing will be effective in keeping the lid on the Mideast War.

Libyan Oil

French interest is not confined to the sale of arms. Libyan oil exports have doubled since 1967 due to the closing of the Suez Canal. Libyan high grade oil now lies closer to Europe than does most Arabian oil. Presently, 38 companies (mostly American and British) pump 3.7 millions of barrels a day, making this small country the third largest oil exporter.

A Widening Gap

The reception and discourtesy shown to Pompidou during his visit to the United States last month was undoubtedly the worst ever shown the head of a state considered as an ally. Street demonstrations, organized protests and pickets against Pompidou’s anti-Israel policy made a shambles of his tour. In New York, where reside some 2,400,000 Jews —the largest Jewish population of any city in the world—the French leader met with further hostile demonstrations. Both Governor Nelson Rockefeller and Mayor John Lindsay were conveniently absent during his visit. Both rely heavily on Jewish support at election time, and finding excuses for being away at this time underscored Jewish enmity for Pompidou. President Nixon’s impromptu visit to New York to attend a dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria, honoring Pompidou helped restore cordiality.

The Jewish show of hostility may prove to be to Pompidou’s credit in his own country. Many of the French people who are sympathetic to Israel and against the sale of French arms to Libya, may resent the discourtesy shown to their President. In the long run, this incident could very well strengthen Pompidou’s position.

This whole episode is surely another important step in widening the gap between France and the West. Regardless of the direction French diplomacy may dictate, she will eventually be numbered among the bands that will accompany Gog in his assault and conquest of Israel.

Still an open question to Nixon is Israel’s request for 24 additional Phan­tom jets and 80 Skyhawks. As the Tid­ings goes to press, the decision promised by the President the first of March is still forthcoming. Israel needs the newer jets to replace old equipment in her air force, and to replenish the planes shot down since the 1967 war. Those who oppose the further sale of arms to Israel point out that the Jews presently enjoy air superiority in the Middle East because of their pilots skill. The probable outcome will be a compromise in which limited sales of jets to Israel will be made with pledges to maintain her armaments to a degree that will insure her security.