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

684A.85/10–1753: Telegram

No. 694
The Chargé in Israel (Russell) to the Department of State¹

secret
niact

Tel Aviv, October 17, 1953—10 p.m.

472. At request Foreign Minister Sharett, met with him at his residence Tel Aviv this afternoon. Referring to Israel-Jordan border situation, he stated following:

Did not wish say word in justification anything which had happened. Wished repeat, however, that the latest incident treated in isolation would distort picture. Latest events must be understood against recent rising tide border lawlessness including thefts, firing at transport, and such incidents as that at Yehud. This situation intolerable, he said. Israel hoped for sign Jordan agreed situation was intolerable and would agree meet with Israel leaders on highest level in order find means reduce border tension.

Of late, Foreign Minister stated, Israel has “met with imputations of very serious design”. Had just received report of conversation between Byroade and Nahum Goldmann, according to which Byroade said that underlying rationalization of all that has happened in last few months is “grim design on part of Israel to unleash furies in region by provoking war”. Foreign Minister stated he hoped that report was inaccurate since there could be “no more fantastic misreading”.²

Said it was true Israel does not accept state of economic stagnation and will make use of its sovereignty to explore all possible schemes of development. Has been true Israel not willing cease pursue this course just because part of project is in demilitarized zone. To cease for this reason will not only guarantee stagnation of zone, but prevent other kinds development. To conclude from this, however, that Israel is deliberately bent on “producing first-rate catastrophe in Middle East is too fantastic for words”. Foreign Minister said he wished “completely disabuse Assistant Secretary Byroade’s honest and clean mind of such pollution which can only affect the attitude of trust and sincerity in Israel-United States relations”.

He argued that coincidence of many developments may have produced most unfortunate situation in area, but claimed that United States policy, specifically in its effort to make up to Arab world and show that Israel will not get what it wants, was factor in this development. As illustration, contrasted United States reaction in three different situations as follows:

1. Despite Egyptian defiance of Security Council resolution on Suez, United States has not taken position that American aid to Egypt contingent upon its compliance with the United Nations resolution.

2. In Trieste dispute when Yugoslavia assumed threatening attitude and there were rumors United States would withhold economic aid, United States immediately denied it.

3. In case of Israel’s questioning Bennike’s right order cessation of work until agreement reached with Syria, United States stopped economic aid and there are reports that Syria informed of that fact.

Foreign Minister stressed view that United States policy as illustrated in above examples “encourages Arab appetites and makes it doubly unnecessary for them to come to agreement with Israel”.

In answer to my query as to whether in his opening remarks about not wishing justify anything that had happened he had meant that Israel disavows the Qibya raid, Foreign Minister replied that he could not say before tomorrow’s Cabinet meeting that Israel disavowed incident, that what he meant to say was that “it was tragic that things had come to such a pass”.

With regard to reported Byroade-Goldmann conversation I replied that I had no information concerning it, but I had never heard of Byroade saying the things Foreign Minister attributed to him. I knew, however, that both Byroade and Secretary felt that since their visit here there had been series of events which have made it more difficult to carry out United States objective of helping reduce tensions in area. I said Secretary’s trip indicated that Middle East problems had high priority on his agenda. Fact that Johnston coming into area further confirmed not only United States interest, but fact States has been giving serious study to problems. Against this background such events as sudden move of Foreign Ministry to Jerusalem, refusal comply with Bennike’s request and Qibya raid were source of grave concern. Rather than putting Arabs in receptive frame of mind, they have had effect of convincing them Israel attempting make unilateral policy in area by series of faits accompli. I recalled to Foreign Minister that in August (Embassy telegram 249)³ I had raised question of whether it was Israel’s intention to continue pursue reprisals as instrument of national policy; that first reply from Israeli Government had been Qibya reprisal attack last Wednesday.⁴ I added that policy of deliberate reprisals involving killing of innocent persons inevitably created revulsion among American people, was violation of every moral standard.

All of these things taken together, I suggested, raised serious question whether Israel’s policies are calculated to bring about reduction in area tension. This I said was probably what Byroade had pointed out.

With regard to question of withholding economic aid, I said that release immediately after Israel had rejected United Nations recommendation would have given a most unfortunate impression of endorsing Israeli Government’s position.

Foreign Minister interjected that decision on aid had effect of making it much more difficult influence behavior of Arab countries, who were encouraged by it to intensify their activities against Israel.

Gideon Raphael, who was present at meeting, commented that while United States has excellent record with regard compliance United Nations resolutions, its record with regard to noncompliance of member states was not uniform. He cited as examples: (1) Suez resolution; (2) what he described as Syngman Rhee’s defiance of will of the United Nations; and (3) the partition resolution. Re latter, said United States had waivered under threat of violence as result of which Arabs launched hostilities in area. Present situation, he said, was similar. At same time, present United States policy has dangerous effects on Israeli population, whose feeling of isolation and lack of friendship tends to lead to despair. Foreign Minister underscored latter stating Israel forsaken by its friends creates “a disastrous mentality”.

I pointed out that United States policies, which it was implied were creating feeling of isolation among Israelis, emerged only after Israeli actions I had mentioned. I stressed that the friendship of both the people, and the Government of the United States was as strong as it ever was subject only to questions that have been raised by these actions.

Raphael mentioned that Israel had conclusive reports of Arab Legion troop movements last few days in Irbid and in Jericho regions, I replied that this bears out that such actions as Qibya raid inevitably serve only to heighten tension.

Russell

1. Repeated to London, Amman, and Paris; sent by pouch to the Arab capitals.

2. In telegram 309 to Tel Aviv, Oct. 19, 7:16 p.m., Byroade advised Russell as follows:

   “Statement attributed by Nahum Goldmann to me, urtel 472, was made with introduction ‘I cannot believe it could be true, but sometimes I am forced to wonder if underlying rationalization of all that has happened in last few months is grim design on part of Israel to unleash furies in region by provoking war.’ Think you handled conversation great skill in spite of propaganda thrown your way about state of my mind.” (684A.85/10–1753)

3. Dated Aug. 24, not printed, but see footnote 4, Document 650.
4. Oct. 14.