Secretary’s Letters, lot 56 D 459
No. 563
Memorandum of Conversation, by the
Officer in Charge of Palestine-Israel–Jordan Affairs (Waller)
Subject:
- American-Israel Relations
Participants:
- The Under Secretary1
- Ambassador Abba Eban, Israel Embassy
- Minister David Goitein, Israel Embassy
- Mr. Waller-NE
Ambassador Eban, accompanied by Minister Goitein, called on the Under Secretary at 11:30 today to present a review of the present position of American-Israel relations. He left an aide-mémoire of the conversation, together with a note (AE/804) renewing Israel’s request for grant military assistance and a note (AE/806) requesting that Israel’s productive and industrial potential be taken into consideration in the formulation of offshore procurement programs in Western Europe for the fiscal year 1953–1954.2 The notes have been referred for action to the appropriate offices of the Department. A copy of the aide-mémoire is attached.
In summary, the Ambassador listed eight “guiding principles” which the Israel Government believes have guided United States policy towards Israel and the Arab states. These are:
- Support of Israel’s statehood.
- Support of the general armistice agreements between Israel and Arab neighbors.
- Support of direct negotiations between Israel and the Arab states to reach peace settlements.
- Support of the settlement of Arab refugees in Arab countries while encouraging Israel to do everything possible to alleviate the plight of the refugees.
- Support of minimum conditions for internationalization of Jerusalem and opposition to drastic proposals for territorial internationalization.
- Assistance to all countries of the Near East in need of economic and technical assistance.
- Support for the ratification and implementation of the German-Israel Compensation Agreement.
- Special interest in the development of stable democratic governments in the Near East.
The Ambassador said his government assumes that the above policies were formulated by American leaders after consideration of all responsible points of view, since many of them were presented to international tribunals as articles of national policy. His government therefore hopes that the new American Administration will find it possible to issue an early statement making clear that abandonment of these policies is not contemplated, in order to counteract the tension created by the expectancy of some Arab leaders and newspapers that the United States will somehow turn its back on its undertakings and assurances to Israel.
The Ambassador said his government believes there are opportunities for a new development of American policy in the interests of [Page 1127] Middle East and world peace. He had in mind a reiteration by the US in favor of direct negotiations between the Arab states and Israel and that no statement of American friendship for the Arab world should be made that could inadvertently encourage the Arab states to increase their pressure on Israel or condone their refusal to negotiate directly for a peace settlement.
Ambassador Eban said that his government hopes the US will give some public opposition to Soviet and Communist attacks on Israel as a state. He gave notice that his government intends to raise in the UN the matter of Soviet and Communist anti-Semitic charges against the Jewish people.
Ambassador Eban said that his government is apprehensive that an attempt may be made to establish a Middle East Defense Organization to include all the Arab states but excluding Israel. In conclusion, he expressed the hope that the views outlined in his aide-mémoire would be taken into account in any examination of US policies for the Middle East.
(Military aid and arms supplies were the subject of one of two notes left by the Ambassador. The subject of economic aid, which is covered in paragraph five of the aide-mémoire, was not mentioned orally by the Ambassador. It is noted from the aide-mémoire, however, that the Government of Israel anticipates a financial crisis in March and April of this year and that the Department’s assistance may be requested if a loan application is made to the Export-Import Bank.)
Early in the conversation General Smith interrupted the Ambassador and stated he trusted the Ambassador was not going to suggest that Israel was being discriminated against by American policy. The Ambassador replied that no such contention was meant and then went on with his remarks. When the Ambassador finished, General Smith said that his familiarity with the problems raised by the Ambassador was rather superficial but that the Ambassador’s remarks sounded to him like a severe indictment of American policy. He stated that surely the US Government is neither so blind nor so warped in its views that it would pursue policies consistently detrimental to any particular country. He said that he would go over the questions very carefully with his colleagues but that he could say categorically that Israel, as a key entity in the Near East, would not be overlooked. The US realizes that Israel has the only really effective military force in the Near East and that Israel also has other assets of use to the US.
General Smith stated that the US deplores the sudden wave of anti-Semitism which has recently emanated from the Soviet Union and satellite countries. The Under Secretary then referred to his long association with some of Israel’s present-day leaders, including [Page 1128] his long friendship and affection for Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, whom he has known since before Israel became a state. The Ambassador would therefore understand the friendly feelings which he has towards Israel and its problems. In this context, the Under Secretary said he wished to say privately that the Israel Government does not make it easy for the US to be helpful and that our problems are complicated by military action on the part of Israel forces raiding neighboring territory and by military counteraction against Arab neighbors.
Ambassador Eban said he had not intended to present an indictment of American policy. He had, in fact, meant his remarks to show Israel’s appreciation for American support in many fields. In analyzing American policies toward Israel he wished to express the hope that those policies would be carried forward still further, but that his government was particularly unhappy about US Near East defense planning.
General Smith replied that the Israel Government should weigh any dissatisfaction in this regard with the many other policies that were undoubtedly pleasing to Israel. He said he wanted to emphasize that Israel would not be disregarded in plans for a Middle East defense organization if for no other reason than because of Israel’s military effectiveness.