774.00/3–2654: Telegram
No. 1306
The Ambassador in Egypt (Caffery) to the
Department of State1
priority
1168. Re Embtel 1167. Decisions announced by RCC were taken to avert internal crisis and possible internal strife. While RCC believed to feel early elections not really in best interests of country, their hand was forced by political maneuvering of Naguib. RCC was faced with decision whether to eliminate Naguib and his backers and assume tight dictatorial control or go along with return of parties and holding of elections.
Reasoning behind RCC decision possibly influenced by following considerations:
- 1.
- Naguib has demonstrated that apparently he is willing to play along with worst elements in country, including Wafdists, Muslim Brotherhood, and Communists to stay in power and any other decision risked possible immediate clash with this unholy alliance.
- 2.
- Continuation of split with Naguib could only maintain and increase unrest in general.
- 3.
- Settlement with UK impossible while unrest continued.
- 4.
- Seeming RCC capitulation on issue of parties and election would create atmosphere in which settlement might be possible prior elections.
- 5.
- RCC prestige would be restored and even enhanced by settlement to point where they could maintain an important role, direct or indirect, in future government of country.
Present move constitutes calculated risk in face of alternatives which could have spelled civil war at worst or continuation grave unrest at best with eventual collapse of regime in sight in either case.
- Repeated to London as telegram 387 and unnumbered to the Arab capitals, Tel Aviv, Tripoli, Khartoum, Alexandria Paris for Reinhardt, Bonn for Satterthwaite, Rome for Maffitt, and Valletta for Paddock.↩