641.74/11–1251: Telegram

The Ambassador in Egypt (Caffery) to the Secretary of State 1

top secret
niact

689. I talked again yesterday evening with Serageddin Pasha, the all-powerful SecGen of the Govt Wafd Party. Having in mind all the discounts anyone wld like to make this is what he said after a lengthy preliminary conversation:

We can accept your four power proposals on condition that they do not go further than Stevenson’s offer in his conversation with Salaheddin prior to end of last summer. Stevenson agreed that only Brit troops to remain actually in zone wld be “technicians” in Art VI of the MEC proposals you talk of “forces” and not “technicians”. I realize of course that a “technician” cld cover various categories. I must be able to say to the Egyptian people that the Brit “forces” will begin immed to evacuate and evacuation of their “forces” will be completed at the end of say a year; and you must not leave behind too many “technicians”. I explained was different re our proposals but he stuck to his point. (Salaheddin insisted then that even “technicians” [Page 422] shld evacuate in maximum 18 months. Serageddin yesterday did not mention time-limit.)

The second condition covers the airplanes in the zone. The Egyptians had suggested to Stevenson that the airplanes no matter how many wld be “Egyptian” airplanes even if flown by Brit pilots, and even though they realized there might be some camouflage in this.

He said that in any event they wld insist that some Amer “technicians” be included in those stationed at the base. He said that they have confidence in us but have no confidence in anyone else, much as they dislike our present stand.

He insisted and emphasized the importance of extreme secrecy in connection with these conversations, if anything shld leak he cld not proceed with them. Because of this I am not repeating this to other capitals.

Caffery
  1. Source text was originally transmitted to the Secretary of State only. A handwritten notation on the source text reads: “Repeated info London 315 and Paris 173.” Presumably this action was taken in the Department of State.