Office of the Historian

683.84A/6–951: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom 1

secret
priority
Washington, June 9, 1951—5 p. m.

5771. Re Embtel 6451 June 82 and approach Brit Emb rep Dept has informed latter as fols:

Dept understands FonOff concern re course of action which Riley intends pursue, but feels that if he were now dissuaded, his position with Israelis wld be undermined and Syrians wld take this as further evidence they can block drainage operations demilitarized zone indefinitely. While we agree that effect Israel compliance SC res May 18 wld have been better if it had been given more promptly and gracefully and if permission resume operations on Israel or concession-owned lands not granted so soon after compliance, facts remain: a) Israel has complied; b) Syria elects ignore sponsors’ interpretation SC res; and c) Riley’s position technically sound.

In our view SC res designed primarily to strengthen authority chief of Staff TSO and Chairman MAC and nothing shld now be done which wld weaken their authority. We do not think that question of who owned lands cld have affected res one way or other since point at issue was compliance not ownership.

[Page 707]

For above reasons we are disposed support Riley in his intended course of action.

Re FonOff thinking correct procedure para three reftel we believe this wld be mistake since it wld have immed reopened entire question in SC thereby vitiating one of the principal objectives SC res—let MAC do the job. However we shld be disposed support further SC action shld Riley so request.

Acheson
  1. Telegram drafted by Mr. Stabler, cleared for UNP by Mr. Ludlow, and approved for transmission by Mr. Jones. Repeated for information to Beirut, Damascus, Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv.↩

  2. In this telegram the Embassy had described the reaction of the Foreign Office to General Riley’s position on the resumption of work on the Huleh drainage project (see telegram 731 from Beirut, June 7, p. 703). Paragraph 3 of telegram 6451 reads as follows:

    “FonOff thinks that correct procedure for Riley to have followed under circumstances wld have been to state that he was afraid SC action might have been based on his erroneous info re actual position but to have called Israel to stop all work until such time as SC cld again consider matter and reaffirm or alter its decision.” (683.84A/6–851)

    ↩