784A.5/8–3054: Telegram

No. 879
The Chargé in Israel (Russell) to the Department of State

confidential

212. Embtel 209,1 Deptel 114.2 At meeting with Prime Minister his office Jerusalem this noon, I said I wished to reiterate, with full authorization to Department, that we intended, as possible, to make full effort to utilize our improving position with Arab countries, and particularly Egypt, to induce them to take steps leading toward peace with Israel. Also interested in Israel’s efforts to continue secret contacts with Egyptian leaders, especially as we are convinced that first-hand information which IG may gain from situation in Egypt will lead it to understand the basis of US approach which is based on careful and gradual measures as opposed to all-or-nothing, take-it-or-leave-it approach. US attaches greatest importance to timing and tactics in approaching our common objectives of peace and stability in Near East. Any action which interferes with or prevents this approach would inevitably be regarded in US as obstruction of our efforts to build up area security in face of Communist threat. It is our fundamental conviction that American security is deeply involved in current developments in Middle East as well as Israel’s. It would be gravest disappointment to American people if Israel were to block our attempts to encourage Near East leaders who are seeking to identify their people’s destiny with that of the free world. While no further statement in connection with border guarantees or US arms aid policy possible now, am authorized give assurance that fullest attention being given to following up on Secretary Dulles statement of sympathetic appreciation of Israel’s sense of insecurity and isolation. It is our conviction there is no necessary conflict between objective of relieving Israel’s sense of insecurity and measures which US as leader of free world deems necessary to take to forestall further acts of Communist aggression. [Page 1636] Present moment offers opportunity such as we have not had before and may not again for some time to work toward both objectives. It is desire of USG to have IG’s cooperation in seeing that opportunity is not lost.

Prime Minister said he regarded this as an important and helpful statement; appreciated its tenor and our friendship and effort to understand Israel’s position; does not doubt sincerity of US intentions; differs with respect to possible unintended effects of POC; would welcome translation of assurances into concrete facts to offset facts which operate to Israel’s detriment. There is no intention on IG’s part to obstruct US; what it does it does to preserve Israel’s vital interests; with respect to effort we are making with Egyptian leaders, he wishes us luck but has misgivings. He does not make any request that we try to further secret personal contacts between Egypt and Israel but would be interested in anything we can do provided we are satisfied that our intervention would in fact help; present Egyptian Government has been more difficult in this respect than its predecessor. He said he would be especially interested in any information I had with respect to reports of imminent Iraq-Syria merger. I said I had none. Prime Minister said if it is in fact brewing it would be a most serious matter for Israel; to have Iraq on its border would create new geopolitical situation. Said he hopes US will do what it can to keep political entities in area as they are. He said speech he would give to Knesset this afternoon might be regarded by USG as sharp with respect our policies in Egypt but it was result of full cabinet discussion and he would balance those remarks by expression of appreciation for our economic aid to Israel and for Secretary’s sympathetic statements. He concluded by saying that he would wish to fully digest my statement.

Embassy comment: It is my impression there is continuing sharp cleavage between Sharett and Lavon on position which IG should take toward US; that Sharett regarded by statement as helpful to his position in cabinet; that his speech to Knesset will represent present resultant of strength of varying views in cabinet.

Russell