501.BB Palestine/7–649: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin)
351. Fol Dept’s comments ur 804 July 6.1 Dept agrees visit Eban Tel Aviv wld be advantageous but desires point out no indication yet received Egypt will agree to proposed conversations. In conversation with McGhee July 7 Eban stated planned to leave for Israel this weekend but prepared delay departure if any signs received Egyptians desirous” undertaking discussions.
View shortage of time before fall GA session Dept considers it desirable that PCC reconvene if possible on schedule and that it and delegations proceed take decisive action re major issues.
Role of USG re Gaza strip discussions that of friend suggesting parties talk over proposal together. US will not participate as third party in discussions or act as mediator. If third party assistance desired PCC shld provide. Other members PCC have been informed that USG considers Gaza proposal shld serve as basis discussion between Israel and Egypt and that USG willing facilitate such discussion shld parties desire undertake.
[Page 1214]Agree that if discussions take place at UN headquarters it shld be understood they taking place within UN framework. UN further tied in by fact that Israeli Gaza proposal made during discussions held under auspices UNPCC. PCC cld consider any agreement reached between Israel and Egypt as having been accomplished accordance its terms of reference. Dept sees no need for formula proposed by Eban re role USG.
- Not printed; it reported that Mr. Eban had called on Mr. Boss
that morning to discuss the proposal regarding the Gaza strip.
The Israeli representative had stated that he would represent
his Government in conversations with Egypt and that he planned
to leave for Tel Aviv on July 10 for brief consultations.
Telegram 804 stated also that Mr. Eban “raised question whether USG acting with regard to Gaza strip discussions in its capacity as member of PCC, that is with knowledge and consent of other, members.… [He] considered it very important that UN be tied in. He thought best formula, if occasion should arise, would be that USG had been assigned by agreement among members of PCC to assist parties for this particular purpose.”
Mr. Eban spoke finally concerning the arms embargo. “As he saw it, there were two alternatives: First, conclusion of Syrian armistice would be final step in creation of whole new situation in which all bets would be off; in this case something very like an arms race would be very likely to start.
“As second alternative, SC might conclude that armistice phase had been completed, but that peace had not yet been achieved; therefore, arms embargo as contained in SC resolution should be continued until achivement peace Settlement. Eban expressed clear preference for second alternative as more prudent and giving less occasion to temptation of risking resumption of hostilities.” (501.BB Palestine/7–649)
↩