124.90G6/8–745

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs (Merriam)

Proposal To Elevate Legations in Arab Countries to Embassies

Recommendation

It is recommended that the American Government take immediate steps looking to the elevation of the American Legations in Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Lebanon to Embassies and to the establishment by the Governments of those countries of Embassies in Washington, all on a footing of equality.

Considerations Prompting the Above Recommendation

1.
The American Government has been following the practice of establishing and maintaining Embassies in those countries which have become members of the United Nations. On January 1, 1945 United States diplomatic missions to all European and American countries which have joined the United Nations, with the exception of Luxembourg, were Embassies. Iraq at that time was the only Arab country in the United Nations. Recently the other four independent Arab countries have become members of that organization. If the United States should fail to make the suggestions recommended above an impression is sure to be created that the American Government is less interested in the Near East than it is in other world areas. Such an impression would strengthen ideas, already unfortunately prevalent among small powers, that in spite of the lofty principles which the victors of the European war have been enunciating, they still contemplate a division of the world into spheres of influence or spheres of special interest. It may be added that President Roosevelt informed several foreign diplomats in Washington during the past year or two that eventually the American Government’s policy would be to eliminate the rank of minister, in keeping with our respect for the sovereign equality of states, a policy which has thus far been carried out with regard to members of the United Nations. United States diplomatic missions in Liberia and Ethiopia are also Legations at the present time. It might be advisable, in the not distant future, to give consideration to the desirability of elevating these missions also to Embassies. In view of a special problem with regard to Liberia this matter is not being raised at this time.
2.
The making of the suggestions above recommended would tend to encourage the Arab peoples who are hoping that the United States will continue to maintain an interest in the Near East after the war, and who without this hope are likely to turn away from the West for aid in their struggle to raise the social and economic levels of the Arab peoples.
[Page 22]

Possible International Repercussions from the Carrying out of the Recommendations

1. The Probable Attitude of the Arab Governments

It is possible that the five Arab states will consider such suggestions on our part as so important that they will desire to discuss them with one another. There is no doubt that all of them will be pleased at receiving these suggestions. Whether or not all of them will feel able, in the face of certain external restraints placed upon them, to accede to these suggestions is not as yet certain. Egyptian and Iraqi governmental and political leaders for some time have been informally expressing the hope that the United States would take the lead in proposing that Ambassadors be exchanged between those countries and the United States. They have pointed out privately that the Egyptian and Iraqi Governments, in view of British pressure, are not in a position to take the initiative. It will be recalled that Great Britain succeeded some time ago in incorporating in treaties with both of these countries9 stipulations to the effect that the British Ambassador in each of them is to have precedence over the diplomatic representatives of other powers. At present the Syrian and Lebanese Governments are resisting pressure from the French Government to enter into an agreement with France providing that the French diplomatic representatives in Beirut and Damascus shall have precedence over the diplomatic representatives of other foreign governments. Suggestions to the Syrian and Lebanese Governments of the character recommended would tend to strengthen their resistance to French pressure for a special position for a French Ambassador to Syria and Lebanon. The French hope that other countries will maintain only ministers. Ibn Saud10 will of course be flattered at receiving such a suggestion. Whether or not he accedes to it will depend to an extent upon the British attitude. If the British do not desire to raise their Legation to an Embassy and register serious objection to the establishment of an American Embassy in Saudi Arabia, he may ask us to postpone the elevation of the American Legation in Jidda to an Embassy until he has more assurance that the American Government will back him financially in case British financial support, which he has enjoyed for many years, should be withdrawn. In any event, it is believed that the suggestion should be made to him so that he will feel that American interest in Saudi Arabia is just as great as it is in other Arab countries or in countries of a corresponding size and importance in other parts of the world in which the American Government maintains Embassies.

[Page 23]

2. The Probable Attitude of the British

Certain officials of the British Government will probably be displeased if the suggestions recommended are made, because of their feeling that the Arab countries, with the possible exception of Syria and Lebanon, fall into the British sphere of influence and that, therefore, the American Government should not take measures calculated to emphasize its interest in those countries. Other British officials, however, who believe that an increase of American interest in the Arab countries would be to the benefit of Great Britain, in that it would strengthen the influence of the Western world in the Near East, would undoubtedly welcome suggestions of the character recommended. It will be recalled that when Mr. Stettinius and Mr. Murray were in London last year they suggested that the American Government might raise its Legation in Egypt and Iraq to Embassies.11 The British officials with whom this matter was discussed pointed out that under existing treaties their diplomatic representatives in these two countries were entitled to take precedence over diplomatic representatives of other countries. No decision was reached at the time. The British suggested later, however, that the matter be postponed until the conclusion of the war. It is believed that following the termination of hostilities in Europe the time has come for the American Government to act.

3. The Probable Attitude of the French

The French Government will probably be displeased at the making of such suggestions to Syria and Lebanon, since it hopes to have an Embassy in those countries, while other Governments will maintain only Legations. It is not believed that it would be in American interest or in the interest of world security for France to succeed in its plans of holding a special position in the Levant States, bolstered by such an artificial and outmoded method as the stipulation in a treaty to the effect that the French diplomatic representative is to be given precedence over other representatives.

The Problem of the Stipulations in the British Treaties with Egypt and Iraq Providing that the British Diplomatic Representatives are to be Given Precedence

In view of the strong belief that United States diplomatic representatives should rank as high as those of any other power, the American Government probably would have established Embassies in Egypt and Iraq in 1943 had it not been for the existence of the treaties between those countries and Great Britain which provide that the British diplomatic representatives in them are to take precedence over the diplomatic [Page 24] representatives of other countries. As regards the situation in Egypt and Iraq, there seem to be three courses of action open to the American Government in this situation:

(a)
Not to suggest that either of the American Legations in Baghdad or Cairo be raised to Embassies.
(b)
To urge that the British Government inform the Iraqi and Egyptian Governments that the stipulations of the treaties giving the British Ambassadors precedence are not to be applied to the American Ambassadors in Baghdad and Cairo.
(c)
To suggest, regardless of the treaty stipulations, that the American Legations in Cairo and Baghdad be elevated to Embassies.

We have consulted our Chiefs of Mission at Beirut, Cairo and Baghdad, all of whom feel strongly that it would be a serious mistake for the United States Government to appoint Ambassadors to Egypt and Iraq so long as the British Ambassadors to those countries have the right to precedence. They consider that our acquiescence in this present arrangement would be beneath the dignity of this Government and would constitute concrete evidence, in the minds of the Near Eastern peoples, that we are willing for the British to continue to have preferential rights in those countries. Moreover, if we were to acquiesce it would be difficult to prevent the French from securing a similar preferential position for the French representative in Lebanon and Syria.

For the reasons advanced, it is believed that we should immediately take steps looking to the elevation of American Legations in all the Arab countries to Embassies, on a footing of complete equality.

We have received indications to the effect that the British would not be unwilling to yield their preferred diplomatic position in Egypt and Iraq, but they desire to be informed before we move to appoint Ambassadors to those two countries, and we have informed them that we would do so.

It is suggested, therefore, that as a first step we should inform the British: that we desire to exchange Ambassadors with the five countries above mentioned; that we are unwilling to appoint Ambassadors to Egypt and Iraq so long as the British representatives there have a preferred position; that we hope the British will abandon such position; that we desire to appoint Ambassadors to all five countries at the same time, but that, if the British are unwilling to yield the preferred status of their representatives in Egypt and Iraq, then we propose to appoint Ambassadors to Saudi Arabia, Syria and Lebanon and leave Ministers in Egypt and Iraq.

  1. For text of Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of Friendship and Alliance, signed at London, August 26, 1936, see League of Nations Treaty Series, vol. clxxiii, p. 401.
  2. Abdul Aziz Al Saud, King of Saudi Arabia.
  3. Wallace Murray, Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs accompanied Under Secretary of State Stettinius on his mission to London in April 1944, to discuss problems of mutual interest with the British.