96. Telegram From the Embassy in Afghanistan to the Department of State0
459. For the Secretary. Your helpful message (Deptel 260)1 encoded Washington Monday night arrived at this post on Thursday morning. Hannah and I saw Naim and Etemadi at noon today.
[Page 200]Certainly agree that first alternative proposed by Department preferable solution and ordinarily would have been prepared stick at this as negotiating tactic in first meeting. However, in view of several local factors, including deplorable state situation as regards our contractors, decided to seek complete agreement today if at all possible. Following Naim’s negative reaction successively to proposals contained in paragraphs A and B of Deptel 260, I therefore proceeded to that of paragraph C. Based on broad authority given me by your telegram, I have reached agreement with RGA along following lines: RGA note will be published and our reply will remain confidential. In finally agreeing to this alternative, I insisted upon change in last substantive paragraph of RGA note, as felt we should not accept phrase “on receipt of confirmative reply to this note” as this would imply that confirmation reply to entire contents had been made on behalf USG, whether privately or publicly. Naim agreed to following substitution: “on receipt of confirmation of the above mentioned statements made by Ambassador Byroade, the Royal Ministry, etc.” It seems to me that this is acceptable from our point of view as it in effect excludes our association from objectionable phrases RGA note and does not even indicate our reply given in write up. Of far less importance, the words “the traditional route of” were inserted between the words “through” and “Pakistan” in second paragraph Afghan note. The commencement date in numbered paragraph three was changed to January 29.
The text of our note remains in substance the same except for slight modification first sentence paragraph 2 which now reads as follows:
“The Embassy notes that the RGA agrees to make arrangements for the entry of the above mentioned goods, and to cooperate fully in this effort.”
No other changes made except minor ones without substance for grammatical reasons or for assistance in translation. Order that exact text be available, Embassy will cable complete text to addressees this message. Both Afghan and Embassy notes will be dated January 18. Publication date for Afghan note was set for evening January 21, Kabul time.
Naim and I had rather confusing discussion on subject separate press release by US. This, of course, would merely be placed in USIS bulletin here and would not have normal significance in view absence International Press. It might, of course, be carried locally and picked up by Pakistanis. I agreed to wording given below for such possible statement. RGA does not care whether we use it or not. Will therefore leave decision up to Department, with comment that I would prefer to drop press release idea rather than try to renegotiate [garble]. It would not be published here until next Monday and would appreciate early guidance to post as to whether to use or not. Text follows:
[Page 201]“In recent discussions between the Royal Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ambassador Byroade, the American Ambassador reaffirmed the desire of the US to continue its aid programs in Afghanistan. The US has also stated that it is willing to utilize the transit route running through Iran while continuing to hope for resumption of transit via the traditional route through Pakistan.
“The Royal Afghan Government has decided to admit all US aid goods under the title of the USG or American or other foreign contractors, which are destined for the different aid projects in Afghanistan and which have been consigned through the port of Karachi but have been held up since September 6,1961. The USG has indicated its willingness to utilize its offices and its facilities to move these goods. The RGA has indicated its willingness to allow 8 weeks, beginning January 29, 1962, for the movement of these goods.”
I depart Kabul tomorrow morning2 convinced it was in our overall interest make this particular agreement, and greatly appreciate under-standing and help of Department to make agreement possible. I am sorry my clients seem so difficult to get along with. One can, perhaps, understand them a little more easily if he lives here but not much.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 689.90D/1-1862. Secret; Niact. Repeated to Karachi and Tehran.↩
- Document 94.↩
- Byroade was replaced as Ambassador by John M. Steeves, who was appointed on February 7 and presented his credentials on March 20.↩