Office of the Historian

501.MA Palestine/7–1349: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Egypt

secret
Washington, July 14, 1949—11 p. m.

701. Reurtel 669 July 131 and others on same subject. Dept concerned lest Egyptians be given impression that US is insisting they agree to Gaza strip proposal. You shld make every effort to impress Egyptian officials that US position is that this is proposal which has merit, and shld not be summarily dismissed. For this reason USG believes it essential that it be discussed between parties at interest. Egyptian agreement to discuss question wld not involve commitment [Page 1229] to accept proposal. It wld be concrete statesmanlike gesture. However, outright refusal to discuss wld leave Egypt open to accusation from other side that it had refused to even discuss a matter of mutual interest and wld undoubtedly be used as opportunity for propaganda campaign against Egypt.

If Egyptians shld attempt to argue that question already discussed at PCC you shld point out that immediate negative reaction of Egyptian delegate at Lausanne did not constitute in the view of this Govt “discussion” of question.

Dept cannot understand your reference in first [last] para reftel2 to “USG’s complaisant partiality to Israel”. In interests of peace USG has on number of occasions made firm representations both sides, and has sought impartially to give advice whenever cause of peace in area cld be advanced thereby. Further comment on this and points raised in your A–746 July 13 will follow.4

Acheson
  1. Not printed.↩
  2. This paragraph gave the comment of Chargé Patterson after his conversation with Abdul Moniem Mustafa, head of the Egyptian Delegation at Lausanne, as follows: “I found Mustafa Bey’s position possibly foreshadowing that of Egyptian Government not in accord with realistic appraisal of situation. If Egypt is weak in military sense Egyptian lack of confidence in Israeli good faith in UN ability to enforce its resolutions and in USG’s complaisant partiality to Israeli should induce willingness to compromise and make best of bad bargain however unjust.” (867N.01/7–1349)↩
  3. Not printed.↩
  4. The Department, on July 14, sent to London a telegram broadly parallel to No. 701. The telegram queried whether the British Foreign Office “now contemplates extending dipl support US representations to Egypt” concerning the Gaza strip proposal (No. 2450, 501.BB Palestine/7–1449). Its content was discussed on July 15 with Michael Wright, who in referring to the British program set forth in telegram 2432, July 13, to London, p. 1223, stated that “it was Bevin’s belief that coordinated approach for whole program as embodied in British suggestions held most hope for success. Wright felt personally that to press Egyptians further on Gaza proposal, in isolation from other points, might well prejudice Egyptian acceptance proposals as whole.” (telegram 2790, July 15, 6 p. m., from London, 501.BB Palestine/7–1549)↩