Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The Near and Middle East, Volume IX, Part 1

974.5301/7–3053: Airgram

No. 646
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Egypt

secret

Washington, July 30, 1953.

A–29. Reference minutes United States-United Kingdom-French discussions on freedom of transit of Suez Canal, Deptel 113, July 27¹ and Cairo’s 137, July 28.¹

Possible Egyptian unilateral declaration quoted Deptel 113 tabled by United States at meeting July 29. French and United Kingdom delegates stated would transmit draft to their Governments, and ask for instructions.

In informal discussion of draft, British and French delegates stressed two points:

1. Disadvantages of eliminating numbered paragraphs contained in United Kingdom-French draft (Deptel 108 to Cairo)² which spelled out principles upon which freedom of transit based, and substitution as last paragraph of general statement of those principles. Both delegates felt principles should be fully stated so that all parties would know where they stood. They were particularly disturbed at omission from United States draft of intent underlying Paragraph Number Four of their draft. They argued that principles, including Paragraph Four, should be detailed in first approach to Egypt and that if Egyptian resistance encountered, general statement could be substituted.

United States delegate replied that, even if United Kingdom-French suggestion on tactics adopted, he would be unable to agree to inclusion Paragraph Four since Egyptian rejection certain.

2. Urgency of problem. Both delegates emphasized some reaffirmation of principle of freedom of transit essential before evacuation of British troops. United Kingdom delegate insisted this should be obtained before agreement on evacuation is signed.

Request Ambassador Caffery’s views by telegram on following two points:

1. Would inclusion of detailed enumeration of principles governing freedom of transit in first approach to Egypt prejudice prospects Egyptian consent to issue unilateral declaration?

This approach would be adopted only on understanding that a general statement similar to one in United States draft would be substituted if Egypt objected.

2. Provided progress is made in Anglo-Egyptian negotiations on Suez Base and this problem approaches a solution, could the approach to the Egyptians be made before actual signature of agreement?

Dulles

1. Not printed.
1. Not printed.
2. Document 643.