784.02/1–1750

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Stuart D. Nelson of the Office of African and Near Eastern Affairs 1

confidential

Subject: The Internationalization of Jerusalem, Palestinian problems in general and other matters in which the Government of Egypt is interested.

Participants: Egyptian Ambassador, Kamil Bey Abdul Rahim
Assistant Secretary of State, George C. McGhee
ANE—Mr. Stuart Rockwell
ANE—Mr. Stuart Nelson

Problem: An exchange of views on matters in which the Governments of the United States and Egypt are interested.

Action Taken: A discussion of these matters by Mr. McGhee and the Egyptian Ambassador.

Action Required: 1) A study by ANE/E of the problem of abolishing the quota for Egyptian long staple cotton.

2) A study by SA–M of the “bad press” which Egypt is allegedly receiving in the United States.

Action Assigned to: ANE

Summary: The Egyptian Ambassador opened the discussion by inquiring as to what had taken place at the Istanbul Conference in regard to the internationalization of Jerusalem.

[Page 693]

Mr. McGhee replied that not much had been done on this at the Conference since, at that time, the United Nations had not as yet taken final action in regard to a resolution on Jerusalem. He continued by stating that he wished to assure the Ambassador that it was, of course, the policy of the United States to abide by majority decisions of the United Nations whether or not this Government had supported them in the debate. As Mr. McDermott had stated to the press on January 16,2 we would make a bona fide effort in the Trusteeship Council’s work of carrying out the task given it by the Assembly. The Ambassador said that the Egyptian Government had been very pleased by Mr. McDermott’s statement. Mr. McGhee added that the question of implementing a statute for the full internationalization of Jerusalem in the face of strong Israeli and Jordanian opposition would be a difficult one. The Ambassador replied that the régime could be established if the United States and the United Kingdom would fully support efforts to do so.

Mr. McGhee then referred to the possibilities for creating stability in the Near East area through the mediums of the Economic Survey Mission and Point IV.3 He said that it was now expected that the United States Congress would appropriate $27,000,000 for work relief projects in the Near East as outlined in the Clapp Report. Mr. McGhee said that since this was a United Nations program he hoped that the other governments concerned would make proportional contributions. In this connection he mentioned that it was hoped that the Arab States would contribute about $6,000,000. The Ambassador replied that the Arab States had contributed to refugee relief in the past and that he expected these States to make further contributions, in kind or otherwise.

The Ambassador then declared that the Egyptian Government was very pleased by the Secretary’s letter to Congressman Javits4 on the question of the arms being supplied to Egypt by the United Kingdom. He was able to give categoric assurance that these arms were for defensive purposes only. Nahas Pasha had only that morning requested him by telephone to assure the United States Government that the Government of Egypt had no intention whatsoever of renewing aggressive warfare against Israel. The Ambassador stated that Egypt, which really had never had one, desired to establish an effective army of its own. He continued by saying that his country had appropriated only about 25% or 26% of the National budget for military purposes, and that this did not seem to be out of line with general practice. Some of the equipment Egypt was obtaining from Britain was second-hand. [Page 694] Some was new and modern, but this was being supplied in exceptionally small quantities and the present supply program would extend over a two or three year period. The Ambassador recalled that the Egyptian Foreign Office had recently issued a statement to the effect that the Government of Egypt considered that the Israeli-Egyptian armistice would remain operative until a final peace settlement was concluded. This statement had been issued to refute a report which had appeared in the newspaper Al Ahram stating that Egypt would announce the termination of the Armistice on February 15, 1950.

The Ambassador then questioned Mr. McGhee as to what took place in Istanbul in regard to the unification of Syria and Iraq.

Mr. McGhee replied that this matter had been discussed and that the position of the United States Government was the same as it always had been; i.e., we would not oppose such unification if it took place through the freely expressed will of the people.

The Egyptian Ambassador stated that the Egyptian and United States positions appeared to be the same. He then quoted former Prime Minister Sirry Pasha’s statement in regard to the fact that “Egypt would extend aid to any Arab State which was subject to external pressure.” He stated that this was still the position of his government in regard to the unification of Syria and Iraq against the will of the Syrian people. Mr. Rockwell inquired whether that statement meant that Egypt would take military action if other states intrigued to bring about the union. The Ambassador replied that this did not mean that Egypt would take military action. There were various forms of pressure which could be used.

Mr. McGhee asked the Ambassador if Sirry Pasha had in mind pressure originating merely in Iraq or if he thought that Britain was also involved. The Ambassador said he really did not know. Mr. McGhee stated the opinion that Britain was not applying any pressure for the unification of Syria and Iraq.

Ambassador Rahim then said that he thought the whole project was cooling off, and that the new Iraqi Government would probably not “pressure” Syria in a manner similar to that employed by former Prime Minister Nuri Said. He was of the opinion there were not as many differences between the Arab States as press reports would lead one to believe. He said that he felt that Iraqi-Egyptian relations were quite good, and that there was a well developed element of solidarity among all the Arab States. He expected the new Egyptian Government under Prime Minister Nahas Pasha to carry on friendly relations with Iraq. In his opinion it was quite possible that Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, might be replaced in the near future, a move which would please Iraq.

[Page 695]

The Ambassador then inquired as to whether Anglo-Egyptian relations had been discussed at Istanbul.

Mr. McGhee stated that they had been discussed in a general sense, and then asked the Ambassador what he thought about the possibilities for the renegotiation of the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936.

The Ambassador said that he felt that the Wafdist Government under Nahas Pasha will proceed immediately with treaty negotiations with Britain. He recalled that Nahas Pasha had recently stated that the British must evacuate the Canal Zone.

Mr. McGhee then asked the Ambassador if the Egyptian people really wanted the British to depart from the Canal Zone.

The Ambassador replied that this was a historical problem and that the Egyptian people ardently desired that the British should evacuate Egypt completely. He stated that the British could more efficiently defend the Canal Zone from Malta, Cyprus, Cyrenaica and Jordan.

Mr. McGhee said that he wondered if sufficient consideration had been given to the fact that even though the British troops were small in number in the Canal Zone area, they were most certainly a symbol of strength and thereby lent a degree of stability to the area. He emphasized that he was not defending the British position but wished to bring out further all considerations in order to ascertain whether the Egyptians really felt that they wanted the British to evacuate the Canal Zone.

The Ambassador reiterated his previous statements concerning the desire of the Egyptian people. He stated that the presence of the British reminded the Egyptians of past defeats by the British and produced a sense of “moral insecurity.”

The Ambassador then inquired as to the United States Government’s feelings in regard to regional pacts in the Near East.

Mr. McGhee said that the topic of Near East regional pacts had been discussed at Istanbul and that it had been decided that while military aid should continue to go to Greece, Turkey and Iran under the MDAP program, it was not necessary to extend such aid to the other Near East states or for the United States to associate itself with any regional security pacts. He added, however, that it was this Government’s policy to favor any regional grouping which would bring peace and prosperity to the people concerned.

The Ambassador stated that he was happy to hear this opinion and that he wished to assure the United States Government that the Arab League Security Pact5 was intended to be a mutual defense pact and not one of aggression toward any state.

The Ambassador then stated that the Counselor of his Embassy had recently called at the Department in regard to the possibilities [Page 696] of increasing Egypt’s supply of dollar foreign exchange. He referred especially to the import quota on cotton and said that he hoped that the United States could find it feasible to eliminate this quota since long staple cotton which Egypt exported to the United States was not in competition with the cotton raised by United States growers.

Mr. McGhee replied that the Department had this problem under consideration and realized that it was a matter of great importance to the Egyptian Government. He stated that this was an intricate problem which was complicated by the fact that many of our people misunderstood the situation and therefore opposed the elimination of the quota. Mr. McGhee told the Ambassador that the Department would make a very active study of this matter and do what was possible to remedy the situation.

The Ambassador then handed to Mr. McGhee clippings from several magazines and newspapers relating to recent stories about King Farouk and his contemplated marriage. He stated that in his opinion Egypt was receiving a very bad press in the United States and he wondered if the Department could not make some semi-official approach to the press in an effort to avoid any repetition of such stories in the future. He stated that he had worked for 18 months in an effort to improve United States-Egyptian relations and he felt that such news stories as these were ridiculing Egypt in the eyes of the American people and undoing all his efforts.

Mr. McGhee replied that this was a difficult situation to handle since if the matter were called to the attention of the American press in a reprimanding manner, there would most likely be an unfavorable reaction by the press and further stories in regard to this subject. He told the Ambassador that the best approach might be an informal one directly to the various publishers. He said that he would talk this matter over with the members of the press division in the Department to see if anything could be done about this situation. Mr. McGhee thought that if the stories about King Farouk were not true, a convincing denial would be given wide press coverage.

  1. Drafted also by Mr. Rockwell.
  2. See footnote 5, p. 690.
  3. For documentation on the latter subject, see pp. 279 ff.
  4. Dated January 12, p. 684.
  5. For information on this Pact, see Foreign Relations, 1949, vol. vi, pp. 1486 ff.