641.74/8–3153: Telegram
No. 1215
The Ambassador in Egypt (Caffery) to the
Department of State1
priority
273. British Embassy denies abandoning proposal on agreement time (numbered paragraph 1 Department’s 239 repeated London 1063). Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 coincide my information that Egyptian request next meeting moved up to September 1 (mytel 267).2 Nasir only partially confirms Egyptian Ambassador’s statements as reported reference telegram. He says he told Ambassador that he expects next meeting will be last of informal contacts if British position [Page 2131] on “duration” remains unchanged and asked that his views be transmitted to Byroade.
When asked whether Egyptians could not make some further concessions as regards “duration” and/or technicians, Nasir and Amir recalled with some bitterness that at our inducement Egypt had made substantial concessions for Washington conference. In their view, British have simply taken Egyptian concessions on points which suited them and started bargaining from new ground on other issues.
Nasir again voiced his conviction that RCC have gone as far as they can go and still hope to win battle for public acceptance of agreement (mytel 263).3 He pointed out that in accepting five-year base agreement, 4,000 British technicians for three years and liberal “availability” formula, this government will be putting Egypt squarely in western camp. Nasir said, “I asked General Robertson if British really think it is wise to undermine this regime by trying to extract concessions beyond our powers to give. I could sign ten-year agreement tomorrow but it would not be honored by the nation, especially after evacuation of British troops”. He concluded by expressing hope that British would be far sighted enough to give concessions which government can publicly point to in justification for substantial concessions it has made to British.
Embassy officer urged that discussions not be broken off when basis of agreement seemed so near and received indication from Nasir that if impasse is reached at next meeting no public announcement of breakoff would be made without prior notice to me.
We have further urged that in event of no progress, time be allowed for Robertson’s scheduled visit to London before any final decision is taken by GOE. I have reason to believe this suggestion will receive favorable consideration.
In light of foregoing I believe intervention with British not yet advisable. I shall of course, inform Department immediately if developments warrant change in this judgment.