890F.7962/7–2049
The Chargé in Saudi Arabia (Bergus) to the Secretary of State
No. 179
Subject: Successful Termination of Dhahran Airfield Negotiations.
Sir: I have the honor, with reference to the Embassy’s telegram No. 419 of June 23, 1949,1 to report that the notes embodying the new Dhahran Airfield Agreement were signed and exchanged at 10:30 a. m. on Thursday, June 23, 1949—just three hours before the departure from Jidda on leave of Ambassador Childs.
There are enclosed, with reference to the Department’s unnumbered circular instruction of June 25, 1947 [1949],1 for the use of the Treaty Section of the Office of the Legal Adviser and of other interested offices of the Government, the following documents:
- 1.
- Original signed Arabic text of Note No. 10/4/68/2119 of June 28, 1949 from Shaikh Yusuf Yassin, Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs to Ambassador Childs.1
- 2.
- Original signed Arabic text of Note No. 10/4/68/2120 of June 23, 1949 from Shaikh Yusuf Yassin to Ambassador Childs.1
- 3.
- Certified copy of Ambassador’s reply dated June 23, 1949 to No. 1 above.
- 4.
- Certified copy of Ambassador’s reply dated June 23, 1949 to No. 2 above.
- 5.
- Parchment mat copy of No. 3 above.1
- 6.
- Parchment mat copy of No. 4 above.1
I worked closely with the Ambassador throughout these long, difficult, and at times irritating negotiations. Before the Ambassador’s departure, a discussion of the history of these negotiations was held with him, and we agreed that the following conclusions could be drawn from these events as of possible interest to, and future use by, the Department:
- 1.
-
The main source of difficulty would appear to have been the number of negotiators with whom we had to deal. The opening talks on this matter were held with Shaikh Yusuf Yassin, Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs in Jidda. These preliminary discussions appeared to be most successful, and it is felt that Shaikh Yusuf had been made fully aware of our position and was, in general, sympathetic to it. It seemed to us that just exactly the right sort of atmosphere had been prepared for beginning the actual clause-by-clause negotiation of the Agreement. Shortly after our first suggested draft was submitted to the Saudi Arabian Government, however, Shaikh Yusuf was sent off to Cairo on Arab League affairs, and the Ambassador was informed that the negotiations would be held in Riyadh with Fuad Bey Hamza, Royal Councillor.
There is a distinct possibility that Shaikh Yusuf may well have arranged to get out of the country at the time that the final negotiations were due to commence. Shaikh Yusuf negotiated the previous Dhahran Airbase Agreement, and it is understood that he was subjected to much criticism by Fuad Bey and others close to the King in this matter. Shaikh Yusuf’s critics stated that in the original agreement he had compromised Saudi Arabia’s sovereignty. The question of sovereignty is one of those delicate issues that can always provoke a sensitive reaction from the King. Whether or not there was any design in Shaikh Yusuf’s movements, the fact remains that he was not in Saudi Arabia during the actual negotiations nor did he return until complete agreement had been reached, just in time to sign the Saudi Arabian notes on behalf of his Government. Upon his return, Shaikh Yusuf was in the excellent position of being able to sympathize with the Ambassador over the many difficulties which the negotiations had entailed as well as to make the bland statement that if he had been here, the course of the negotiations would have been much smoother.
As reported fully in the Ambassador’s despatch No. 84 of April 2, 1949,2 the Ambassador arrived at Riyadh to find the King very much upset over what the Saudi Arabian Government looked upon as implications in our first suggested draft which would serve to undermine Saudi Arabian sovereignty. It is almost certain that while the [Page 1604] King’s first apprehensive reactions may well have been spontaneous on his part, Fuad Bey did not fail to play on the King’s uneasiness with the end in view of proving to Riyadh circles that Fuad Hamza was the most skillful negotiator in the Saudi Arabian Government. After over a week of exhaustive discussions, we finally arrived at the March 25 draft agreement which was to be augmented by the note from the Saudi Arabian Government requesting the appointment of Colonel Richard J. O’Keefe, USAF, to act on its behalf in the administration of certain functions at Dhahran Airfield.
The months of April and May were largely taken up by a series of discussions between the Embassy and the Saudi Arabian Government regarding proposed amendments by the United States Government to the March 25 draft and the Saudi Arabian Government’s comments on these amendments. The Ambassador discussed these questions with Khairadeen Bey Zirickly, then Acting Head of the Foreign Office. Khairadeen was completely unfamiliar with the background of the Rayadh negotiations and thus acted, on the whole, as a mere postbox, transmitting Embassy communications to Riyadh and presenting the Saudi Arabian Government’s replies, which also came from Riyadh to the Ambassador. I am quite sure, however, that despite his ignorance of the background, Khairadeen did not hesitate occasionally to add gratuitous comments to our communications when he transmitted them. This only served to muddy the waters further.
The Ambassador again visited Riyadh on Memorial Day, May 30, 1949 to acquaint the King with regard to the Department’s latest decision respecting military assistance to Saudi Arabia.3 At that time conversations were held regarding the agreement with yet another representative of the Saudi Arabian Government, Khalid Bey Gargani, Royal Councillor. Our sole points of difference at that time were the text of article five of the agreement as well as the exact wording of the note requesting the services of Colonel O’Keefe. When Khalid Bey indicated that the Saudi Arabian Government could not accept the United States proposal for the wording of these two points, the Ambassador, upon his return from Riyadh, telegraphed the Department asking that the Saudi text of article five be accepted and that the text of the note regarding Colonel O’Keefe be reworded in such a way as to meet most of the Saudi Arabian objections.4 The [Page 1605] Department did not fail to do this and our new proposals were submitted to the Saudi Arabian Government.5
It was therefore a matter of no little dismay to all of us when on June 14, 1949 the Foreign Office informed us, without explanation, that our latest proposals were unacceptable.6
- 2.
-
At this point the Ambassador felt that the United States Government had gone as far as it could and did not hesitate so to inform the Saudi Arabian Government. The Foreign Office was informed in the strongest terms that it was our belief that up to now we had done our best to meet Saudi Arabian desires and had conceded point after point.7 The American point of view was also presented to the all-powerful Minister of Finance, Shaikh Abdullah Sulaiman, and to Prince Mansour, Minister of Defence. These two officials quickly realized our positions and promised to lend every assistance. The Department graciously supported the Ambassador in his position and sent a firmly worded telegram to the effect that we could make no more concessions.8 The Ambassador felt that the time had come to take a strong stand. For one thing, the behavior of the Saudi Arabian negotiators had been such as to give the impression that they were no longer willing to make any attempt to appreciate the position of the United States. Furthermore, it was believed that any additional concessions on our part would only give to the Saudis the impression that they could expect a weak acquiescence to any of their demands, regardless of the reasonableness of such demands.
The Ambassador’s determined stand did not fail to have its effect. Fuad Hamza, who had left Saudi Arabia for the Lebanon on sick leave, was hastily summoned back to Riyadh for consultations and then sent to Jidda for further negotiations.9 It might be stated at this point that the illness which led to Fuad Bey’s departure from the Kingdom was not diplomatic. Fuad, who suffers from hypertension and nephritis, was certainly not the picture of health when he appeared in Jidda.
A final session of negotiations was held on June 21. It was obvious that Fuad had received definite instructions to conclude the negotiations and to come to agreement.10 After a few face-saving protestations and a few minor changes in the text of the note regarding Colonel O’Keefe (changes which would appear to be more favorable, [Page 1606] rather than otherwise to the United States) agreement was reached. The Department’s approval to the changes was received within less than twenty-four hours and the Saudi Arabian Government was so notified on June 22.11 At this juncture the Saudi negotiators telegraphed the entire text of both notes to Riyadh for the final approval of the King. This was forthcoming on the morning of June 23, 1949 and the notes were signed and exchanged at about 10:00 a. m. that morning; Shaikh Yusuf, who had just returned from Egypt, signing on behalf of the Saudi Arabian Government.12 All sides breathed a sigh of relief after the notes were signed and the Ambassador left within a few hours for his well-deserved leave with a clear conscience. Fuad Bey returned to Beirut on the next day.
- 3.
- The Ambassador stated to me before his departure that it was his belief that the Saudi Arabs had indulged in so much sparring because they were fully aware that this one-year agreement was only a stop-gap arrangement. They wished to arrive at an agreed document which could be used, to their advantage, as a basis for the negotiations which presumably will commence this autumn looking toward a long-term agreement. They wanted to give as little as possible in this short-term document in the hope that further concessions can be gained from the United States Government in the long-term arrangement in return for language more to the liking of our Government. In other words, as has so often been expressed by the King, the Saudi Arabian viewpoint is that once we are in a position to make a firm commitment of some kind with respect to assistance to Saudi Arabia in her defense problems, we can count upon receiving every necessary facility in this country. Until that time, we can only expect the Saudi Arabs to exact as hard a bargain as they can.
- 4.
- It would therefore seem to follow that the Department should not be too discouraged over what may have appeared to have been quibbling on the part of the Saudi Arabian Government in these negotiations. I have tried to set forth the Embassy’s analysis of the reasons behind this behavior. At the same time, despite the many surface struggles, there was never any indication on the part of the Saudi Arabs of a lessening of their earnest desire to strengthen the ties between our two countries. It is our belief that the Saudis, if anything, are even more eager to establish close relations with us and that if we are able to bring to the forthcoming negotiations for a long-term agreement tangible evidence of a like feeling on our part, we should be able to arrive at an arrangement highly satisfactory to both parties.
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Ante, p. 1589.↩
- Aide-mémoire, May 30, supra.↩
- Telegram 377, May 31, from Jidda (890F.7962/5–3149); not printed. The Department had already instructed Ambassador Childs that as a last resort the Department and the National Military Establishment were prepared to accede to the Saudi Arabian Government’s request that Colonel, O’Keefe be delegated to act in a joint capacity for the United States and Saudi Arabia provided he did not accept any rank, title, office, pay, or emolument from the Saudi Arabian Government (telegram 201, May 27, to Jidda, 890F.7962/5–2649; not printed).↩
- The proposals were presented in the form of a suggested letter prepared by the Department of the Air Force so that it would read from the Saudi Arabian Government to the United States Government (telegram 209, June 3, to Jidda, 890F.7962/6–349; not printed).↩
- Telegram 400, June 14, from Jidda (890F.7962/6–1449); not printed.↩
- Telegram 402, June 15, from Jidda (890F.7962/6–1549): not printed.↩
- Telegram 215, June 15, to Jidda (890F.7962/6–1449): not printed.↩
- Telegram 409, June 18, from Jidda (890F.7962/6–1849); not printed.↩
- Telegram 412, June 20, from Jidda (890F.7962/6–2049); not printed.↩
- Telegram 217, June 20, to Jidda (890F.7962/6–2049); not printed.↩
- Telegram 419, June 23, from Jidda (890F.7962/6–2349); not printed.↩