684A.85/3–1450: Telegram
The Minister in Syria (Keeley) to the Secretary of State
116. Re Cirtel March 8, 3 a.m. Circumstances behind Reuters report as follows: According local editor Syrian Prime Minister in press conference March 6 voluntarily introduced subject of reported Jordan-Israel [Page 805] negotiations and expressed government’s deep concern this development. Stated conferring with other Arab Governments on matter. In emphasizing seriousness of démarche, Prime Minister pointed out that most effective Arab weapon against Israel was economic blockade which was currently undermining Israeli economy. He added Jordan-Israel agreement would constitute breach in blockade, permit flow of Israeli goods throughout Arab world and provide life blood for Israel. Prime Minister concluded that in the circumstances Syrian Government is seriously considering closing its frontiers with Jordan should such an agreement be implemented.
Assume “Damascus for action” at end reftel1 does not mean Department desires Legation to endeavor to dissuade Syria. To attempt to do so could have only adverse result as Syria unsympathetic to what it considers our greater concern for Israel’s economic plight than for threat to Syria’s sovereign existence inherent to Israel’s declared destiny.2
Sent Department 116, repeated Baghdad 23, Beirut 11, Jerusalem 3, Jidda 16, Tel Aviv 9, Department pass Amman 9, Cairo 26, London 13, Paris 12, Ankara 5.
- Note that the words “Damascus for action” do not appear on the Department of State copy of the circular telegram of March 8.↩
- Legation Beirut, in response to the circular telegram of March 8, noted that “Unless adverse reaction is taken by Arab League believe there is at least possibility that Lebanon may start trade with Israel if Jordan agreement becomes effective. Among Christian statesmen here, there is desire to open Lebanese Israeli frontier if Syria continues maintain its restriction against goods from Lebanon, but I believe such action could not be taken now because of fear of Arab retaliation which is strong factor in all Lebanese policy.” (Telegram 106, 684A.85/3–2350)↩