278. Report Prepared in the Executive Secretariat of the Department of State1
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENTS IN SUEZ SITUATION
British-French Draft Resolution
Miss Salt, Counselor of the British Embassy, gave to Mr. Wilcox yesterday the text of the British-French draft resolution to be proposed in the Security Council.2 She said the draft was still under discussion by the Ministers in Paris and it had not been decided [Page 601] whether the item would be regarded as coming under Chapter VI or VII, or be dealt with as a general matter not necessarily coming under either. She remarked that the British are quite happy about the handling of Egypt’s complaint; they consider that the debate on the British-French item will become so all-embracing that there will be nothing much left to say about the Egyptian item when it is reached.
The draft UK-French resolution: 1) reaffirms the principle of freedom of navigation of the Canal under the 1888 Convention; 2) considers that Egypt should restore to all Canal users the rights and guarantees which they enjoyed under the system on which the Convention was based; 3) endorses the 18–nation proposal of August 22 as representing a just and equitable solution; and 4) calls on Egypt to cooperate by negotiation in working out, on the basis of these proposals, a system of operation to be applied to the Canal and, pending the outcome of such negotiations, to cooperate with SCUA.
French Position
Embassy Paris has just transmitted the French reply to our aide-mémoire3 on France’s forthcoming Security Council presentation. It states that the French Government expects the complete support of the US “to defend and to win acceptance from the Security Council of the principles defined in the proposals of the 18 powers, and to prevent any amendment or proposal advocating a formula which would be a retreat from the original proposals”. The French Government also wishes prior consultations to be held between the US, UK and French delegations in New York on the procedures and tactics to be used in the Security Council.
Attendance at Security Council Meeting
So far, the following Foreign Ministers are expected to attend the Security Council discussions next week of the Suez situation: Lloyd (UK), Pineau (France), Spaak (Belgium), Shepilov (USSR), and Popovic (Yugoslavia). Egyptian Foreign Minister Fawzi is also expected to be present, accompanied by Ali Sabri.
[Page 602]Anglo-French Talks
British Ambassador Jebb in Paris has told Dillon that Eden is very pleased with the results of the Anglo-French talks on the Suez crisis.4 Eden was reported to have been highly impressed by Mollet but received a poor impression of Pineau whom he suspects is preparing an eventual attack on the British for having betrayed the French. Agreement was reached on maintaining a firm position, limited to the extent necessary by world and domestic opinion. Both the UK and France would maintain their forces in the Eastern Mediterranean but military action could not be resorted to unless canal traffic were almost totally interrupted or there were serious disturbances in Egypt.
The UK and France have agreed to accept the US offer to pay canal dues into SCUA. They also feel strongly that the US should use every effort to persuade American-controlled shipping under foreign registration to abide by the same practices which will be prescribed for American flag shipping.
SCUA Meeting
The Foreign Office has told Embassy London that the following countries have indicated they will attend the conference next Monday and join SCUA: US, UK, France, Netherlands, Denmark, Italy and Norway.5 No country has yet refused the invitation to attend, but many have not yet replied. Ethiopia has agreed to attend the meeting, but on the specific condition that it not be bound to join the association. Warren has reported from Ankara6 that Turkey will attend the conference and will support SCUA.
The British view is that the Ambassadors’ meeting would itself constitute the Council of SCUA and that Lloyd in his opening remarks on Monday, after declaring SCUA to have come into existence, would then state that the Council as of now was constituted of representatives of adhering states. As all countries present on Monday will not yet have signified their intention to join SCUA, the British consider that the initial meeting should appoint the Executive Group provisionally for a period of, say, one month subject to reconfirmation by the expanded Council at a later meeting. Embassy London reports that the British wish the Executive [Page 603] Group to have the broadest possible geographic representation. The UK will, however, insist on membership thereon. The British feel that the Executive Group should probably nominate someone for the Council to appoint as Administrator. (No alternate has yet been proposed to the British suggestion of the Norwegian Lars U. Svendsen.) The British consider the best alternatives for SCUA’s headquarters as The Hague or Rome.
US Position
The Secretary and his advisers decided this morning that: 1) as the proposed resolution given to us by the UK has no chance of Council approval, we should try to work out a better resolution with the UK and France; 2) we should make very clear our position that payments for transit should be made from SCUA to the Egyptian Government; 3) it would be most desirable to defer voting on Israeli representation during the SC sessions. The Secretary has informed the French Ambassador that he will be available on Sunday for tripartite discussions.
(Summary closed 1:30 p.m., September 28, 1956)
- Source: Eisenhower Library, Whitman File, International File. Top Secret; Eyes Only for Designated Recipient.↩
- The memorandum of this conversation is not printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 330/9–2756) The British Foreign Office gave the Embassy in London a copy of the draft resolution on September 27. (Reported in telegram 1698 from London, September 26, not printed; ibid., 974.7301/9–2656) The Embassy in Paris received a copy from the French Government on September 28 and transmitted it to the Department of State in telegram 1490, September 28. (Ibid., 974.7301/9–2856)↩
- The U.S. aide-mémoire was transmitted in telegram 2217 to London, September 25, not printed. The text of the French aide-mémoire was transmitted in telegram 1489 from Paris, September 28, not printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/9–2556 and 974.7301/9–2856)↩
- Reported in telegram 1485 from Paris, September 27, not printed. (Ibid., 974.7301/9–2756)↩
- In telegram 1724 from London, September 27, Aldrich reported on a meeting concerning SCUA, which was held among French, British, and American representatives, at the British Foreign Office. (Ibid.) Telegram 1709 from London, September 27, transmitted the text of a paper distributed at the meeting, which contained the British tentative thinking on the inaugural meeting of SCUA scheduled for October 1. (Ibid.)↩
- In telegram 706 from Ankara, September 27, not printed. (Ibid., 974.7301/9–2756)↩