867N.01/1–1049: Airgram
The Minister in Syria (Keeley) to the Secretary of State
A–8. Following almost day-long Cabinet meeting PriMin Khalid al-’Azm sent for me at seven p. m. Sunday for hour’s “general exploration of situation with particular reference to Palestine.” Explaining that since upon US insistence Egypt had accepted Cease Fire and agreed to open armistice talks Palestine situation had taken on new aspect calling for reexamination Syria’s position, and it was therefore important to know UN and particularly US attitude toward further probable Zionist aggression such as feared along Lebanese-Syrian frontier where Zionists following Negeb attack pattern were now refusing access to UN observers. Israeli plane that had recently over flown Syrian lines had dropped tracts charging Syrian officials with misleading their people and promising independence to Druze, Circassian and other minorities if they would revolt. Everything seemed to indicate that Zionists instead of being peacefully inclined still threaten integrity Arab states by dream of empire and intend take each on in turn. As his predecessor had indicated (Legtels 666 Oct 23, 678 Oct 29 and 679 Oct 301) Syria has since beginning truce anxiously waited for UN to take effective action to curb Zionist expansion but on contrary has seen repeated aggression go unchecked while Zionists flagrantly flaunt [flout] truce and UN authority.
PriMin said British Minister had confirmed to him that after loss several planes through unprovoked Israeli attack in air over Egypt, UK has taken firm stand against Zionists’ attempt at aggrandizement and is moving troops by sea to Akaba. What did US proposed to do?
I took occasion to stress our opposition to aggression and our support of conciliation mentioning our recent representations to PGI and Egypt in favor of peaceful negotiations (Deptel 2 Jan 4 [3]2) sense of which had already been communicated to FonOff. He said that was good as far as it went and he hoped this latest démarche indicated change in our former marked pro-Zionist policy, but he wondered just how far US could be counted upon in the long run effectively to aid in [Page 638] checking Zionists’ pretensions. Heretofore US to disadvantage of Arabs had usually appeared to favor Zionists who cynically violated truce, whereas Arabs conscientiously endeavored to observe truce while working in UN for recognition of right of Palestine inhabitants to self-determination. Even when cautioning PGI about aggression in Negeb, US had coupled its representation with protest to Egypt on shelling of Tel Aviv which he said was only normal act of war in retaliation for Zionist attacks upon Egyptian territory.
Saying Palestine conflict colored all thinking, his Govt considered its solution necessarily matter first importance particularly as Soviets are using people’s disgruntlement over Palestine to undermine confidence in his Govt which Soviets label Anglo-American tool. In his opinion forthcoming Israeli elections would demonstrate strength of Commie influence in Israel and he hoped this would convince US of danger inherent in uncritical support of PGI. Although strict measures taken to prevent Commie-inspired demonstrations, failure his Govt to take firm action against Zionists, particularly if further feared aggression occurs in Lebanese-Syrian frontier area, might well precipitate widespread disorders that would play into Soviet-Zionist hands and further threaten peace.
I interjected to say that our concern was to serve cause of peace and suggested that distinguished record of our representative on the Conciliation Commission, The Honorable Joseph B. Keenan, should be an assurance to all parties in the Palestine conflict that our influence would be for peace without fear or favor. He asked me to report to my Govt his concern over Palestine developments and to keep him informed of my Govt’s attitude and probable course of action, particularly if Zionists continue their militant course.
Although PriMin did not mention Syrian and other Arab military weakness and disunion and their consequent inability forcibly to bring Israeli to terms, he referred to Abdullah’s aspirations and popular clamor for renewal hostilities to curb Zionist threat and indicated his hope that US would join with UK in taking firm position against further Zionist expansion and thus presumably create better atmosphere for Palestine solution that would save Arab face, implying that popular temper unlikely support peace negotiations with militant Zionists.
It is significant, I feel, that at no time during discussion did PriMin make usual Syrian assertion that they could never recognize Israel or even acknowledge its existence as would be implied by negotiations, When I suggested that any settlement seemed to me preferable to continued situation, he neither acquiesced nor objected, but I gained [Page 639] the impression that he personally would favor negotiations if given sufficient prior assurance, similar to UK’s recent stiffened attitude, that Israeli will be kept within reasonable bounds by western influence and force if necessary. He repeatedly said regretfully that Syrians had learned that they could not count upon UN alone whose authority the Zionists do not respect.
Dept may consider time now ripe to give informally assurances suggested in Legtel 618 Sept 24, 11 p m,3 which I respectfully repeat at this time, as inducement to Syrians to use facilities of Conciliation Commission to extricate themselves from present impasse and thus serve cause of peace.
In conclusion PriMin said his Govt believing Syria’s destiny lies in Anglo-American orbit hopes for closer collaboration with US not only in cultural and economic fields but in political and strategic which latter he considers very important in present state of world order.
- None printed.↩
- This was a repeat of telegram 2 to Cairo, p. 602.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1948, vol. v, Part 2, p. 1421.↩