Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Arab-Israeli Dispute; United Arab Republic; North Africa, Volume XIII

159. Telegram From the Embassy in Turkey to the Department of State¹

Ankara, July 20, 1960—10 a.m.

124. Embassy telegram 77.² Re proposed PCC mission to Mid-East capitals, Foreign Minister Sarper told me during dinner at residence July 18:

GOT does not wish to make any move along lines proposed mission at this time, but is not opposed to project in principle. Sarper explained GOT is trying improve relations with UAR, Arab states. Later in conversation, Sarper expressed personal desire exchange Ambassadors with Israel, but added this did not seem propitious time such move.

Just last week, however, Turks learned UAR National Union General Congress [met] in Cairo and passed resolution to “work for the return of Hatay and other Arab lands” to Syria. For Turks to make any move at this point in direction PCC proposed mission would, Sarper opined, have very bad effect. “We would rather not do anything at this time.” (Re Union Congress resolution, Sarper added that GOT had vigorously protested in Cairo and to UAR Ambassador Ankara.)

Comment: Above seems constitute definitive Foreign Office position on PCC mission project at this time. Embassy firmly believes nothing to be gained by further pressure now but will keep matter in mind to raise at best opportunity, In present circumstances, Department suggestions and views would be appreciated.³

Warren

1. Source: Department of State, NEA Files: Lot 62 D 435, Palestine Refugees. Confidential. Repeated to Cairo, Tel Aviv, Amman, and Beirut.
2. Telegram 77, July 13, reported that Foreign Minister Sarper had been handed an aide-mémoire based on circular telegram 1602 (Document 154) but speculated that Turkish desire for closer relations with the Arab States might preclude the Turks taking any initiative. (Department of State, Central Files, 325.84/7–1360)
3. Attached to the source text are two notes: the first from Jones to Meyer reads: “We must do something even if it should only be a low-level UN’er made available by Secgen.” The second, typed by Meyer on July 27, states that the Turkish response was “keenly disappointing” and suggests the United States might try someone from the UN Secretariat, an Indian or Scandinavian, or someone like Labouisse who had good standing on both sides.