611.85/11–453: Telegram

No. 723
The Chargé in Jordan (Lynch) to the Department of State1

secret

213. Developments during past few weeks seem to demand careful review of our current policy to make sure that through no ill-advised or precipitate action we make achievement of our objectives in the Middle East impossible.

Resentment in Jordan against US appears stronger today, November 4, [apparent omission] remaining reservoir of goodwill is lower than at any time since the US recognized Israel in 1948. Fact is our prestige here has struck new low.

Increased resentment stems mainly from three developments (Embtel 209)2 which Jordanians have interpreted to the distinct disadvantage of the US:

(1)
Secretary of State’s statement indicating US determination to support UN decisions by suspending US economic aid immediately to any Middle East country disturbing peace of area which defies or disobeys UN decisions. Jordanians are invariably omitting reference to qualifying phrase “disturbing peace of area” and believe US policy is now to use threat of economic sanctions as lever to secure acceptance of any UN decision. Because Jordanians are able to cite past evidence of the US having given little more than lip service to UN decisions, this new US policy line appears to them not only inconsistent but, because of its timing, to be aimed more at the Arabs than at Israel.
(2)
Alleged US action in Security Council October 29 preventing SC taking steps reprimand Israel for Qibya attack. I do not know what is meant by this allegation unless it refers to possible US efforts broaden scope SC resolution to include general border situation. In any event, Jordanians believe Qibya massacre in itself serious enough to deserve separate treatment.
(3)
News reports that US will withhold aid to states not prepared to accept US proposals for unified use of Jordan waters. Jordanians will hotly resent such a threat. Rather than surrendering to threats on matter of cooperation with Israel, they are prepared to continue to live at a level of sub-standard subsistence, as they have for thousands of years.

In view of increased presentiment provoked by recent US course of action, it might be well to review basis US objective in area. Although these objectives are taken from such highly classified documents as recent NSC papers, this is sufficiently self-evident to be [Page 1405] printed without damage on front-page of New York Times. Based on the premise that security of US would be endangered if Middle East were to fall under Soviet influence, these objectives are, generally speaking, to obtain:

1.
Stable, friendly governments in area capable withstanding Communist-inspired subversion.
2.
Settlement major issues between Arab States and Israel with view eventual peace.
3.
Change present anti-American trends in Arab world in hope of preventing increased Soviet influence.

Bearing in mind current trends in Jordan which are more and more adverse to position and prestige of west, is US making progress toward achievement of these objectives? I submit that we are not, that we are losing sight of our objectives and that we have reached in our thinking extremely unfortunate stage where, with a seriously dangerous lack of realism, we are prepared to disregard Arab psychology in the interest of what we consider “hard common sense”. This road, in my opinion, can only lead to disaster in our relations with the Arabs. For instance if we are to get anywhere we must accept as a reality the fact no Jordanian leader would dare adopt a policy which can be presented by his political opponents as meaning cooperation with Israel. Not only his political future, but his life, would be at stake.

Use of pressure in form of threats to withhold economic aid of our plan for use of Jordan waters is rejected would practically remove all possibility attainment our objectives and play into the hands of the Communists and rabid nationalists of area. Result of such threats will be that we will be told to keep our aid and withdraw Point IV as well. Believe we should stop and think before proceeding any further along such a dangerous path.

Lynch
  1. Repeated to London, Beirut, Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Jidda.
  2. Not printed.