BROADENING THE DIALOGUE ON MIDEAST PEACE PROCESS

Should American troops patrol the Golan Heights?

This is not an idle question. United States Secretary of State Warren Christopher arrives in the Mideast today to try to assess whether there is hope for the tenuous peace accord signed in September between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Afafat. As today's headlines suggest, not much is peaceful in the territory that is supposed to change hands from Israeli to Palestinian rule on Dec. 13.

Since the accord was signed in Washington two and a half months ago, nearly four dozen Israelis and Palestinians have been killed as extremists on both sides try to scuttle the agreement to establish a Palestinian-controlled state.

In the complex web of Arab-Israeli relations, it is expected that without promise of broader accords -- between Israel and Syria, for example -- the prospect for peace in the occupied territories is slim.

This is what brings us to the possibility of American troops patrolling the Golan Heights.

Until Israel captured them in the war of 1967, the heights were used by Syrian gunners to fire down into Israeli villages. American as well as Israeli generals have said for decades that the heights are strategically vital. One option suggested for providing Israeli security, while returning the heights to Syria, is that a United States peacekeeping force be stationed there.

One of Warren Christopher's main goals is to sound out the possibility of serious negotiations between Syrian leader Hafez al Assad and Israeli Prime Minister Rabin. President Clinton indicated Thursday that he might meet with Assad next month if a peace accord between Syria and Israel seemed workable.

The issue most likely to be discussed by Christopher this week is what will happen to the Golan Heights.

When asked on the CBS program "Face the Nation" the question, "Do you recognize that U.S. troops on the Golan might have to be part of any Syrian-Israeli agreement?" Christopher responded, "Absolutely."

If so, we suggest that the president soon begin communicating with the American people on this matter.

Complicating factors abound. American troops on the Golan will likely be targets for every terrorist gang in the Mideast. What better way to gain publicity and disrupt the peace process than to kill a few American troops? After our tragic experience in Lebanon a decade ago and the confusion of Somalia this summer, we need to have clear understanding of what our involvement would mean.

Frankly, we are not confident that our president will be able to offer the American people clarity in purpose. Three episodes in foreign policy this week underline this question.

The first episode revolved around the president's meeting a week ago with the author, Salman Rushdie, who has been living under a death threat since publishing the novel, "The Satanic Verses." As Americans, we should strongly condemn the threats against Rushdie and the murder of others who played a part in the publication of the book. But we should also encourage our president to make sense of his actions.

After the Muslim world reacted furiously to Clinton's meeting with Rushdie, Clinton tried to downplay the event in a press conference on Tuesday, calling it a brief encounter in a hallway, too short to be described a meeting. The New York Times reported Wednesday, "By seeking to emphasize the brief duration of the exchange, Mr. Clinton...seemed to display a hope to have it both ways."

In international affairs, Mr. Clinton will need to learn that he can not have it both ways, or he will squander United States' influence in shaping world events. As examples are the two other episodes of this week. First is North Korea, perhaps the most critical security issue facing the United States today.

Few experts doubt that North Korea is developing a nuclear weapons capability. So far, President Clinton's plan has been to offer small carrots to North Korean leader Kim Il Sung, with the threat of a stick if North Korea does not cooperate. Now that it appears the North Korean government is ignoring the small carrots and continuing to develop nuclear weapons, the president has decided to really get serious. So he's offering bigger carrots. What message does this send to dictators in the rest of the world? To get your share of American aid, threaten our allies with nuclear missiles?

The final episode is not really new. It's Bosnia. On Monday, Secretary Christopher made it clear that the United States would send more aid to help those suffering in that torn and tragic land, but that Washington would do nothing to end the 19-month old war.

We don't criticize this policy, but we deplore the administration's diminution of American power in arriving at this point. From words of bluster in last year's campaign, to threats of NATO air strikes this summer, to the invisible non-policy today, the president has talked tough one day only to reverse himself the next.

It is not easy to be the American president in today's post-cold war mess. Mr. Clinton should begin by leveling with his own country. A potential Mideast deployment of U.S. troops suggests he should address us sooner rather than later.