Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The Near and Middle East, Volume IX, Part 2

741.56374/4–2254: Telegram

No. 1325
The Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom¹

top secret

Washington, April 22, 1954—5:21 p.m.

5580. We would prefer bilateral UK–Egyptian agreement for operation (Embtel 4640)² and maintenance of Base. Should both Egypt and UK desire USG become party to tripartite agreement, we prepared consider specific suggestions.

Single comprehensive Anglo-Egyptian agreement with technical annex detailing arrangements for maintenance and operation appears to offer certain advantages. (Drafting of comprehensive agreement and negotiation of technical annex would follow agreement in principle and subsequent moves mentioned second para Deptel 5367.) RCC might prefer presenting to Egyptian people one agreement in which “achievement of Egyptian’s national aspirations” could be emphasized and future arrangements played down. Separate agreement on future operations would have to stand on its own feet and might prove more difficult for RCC to defend. Also might be more susceptible to attack in future.

As stated Deptel 5367, we prepared participate on technical committee working out arrangements for maintenance and operation if desired both by Egypt and UK. We have no objection US firms participating on commercial basis but unable make commitment they will wish to do so.³

Smith

1. Repeated to Cairo as telegram 1306. Drafted by Burdett and approved by Jernegan.
2. In telegram 4640 from London, Apr. 22, not printed, the Embassy informed the Department that the Foreign Office would appreciate receiving the Department’s views regarding the proposal for a tripartite agreement which would have detailed arrangements for the operation and maintenance of the Suez Base. (641.74/4–2254)
3. The Embassy in London reported in telegram 4694, Apr. 23, not printed, that the substance of telegram 5580 had been conveyed to the Foreign Office, and officials did not understand how the United States could be associated with the proposals for the maintenance of the base if these were covered only in a technical annex to the Anglo-Egyptian agreement. Since close American association was an essential feature of the accord, the Foreign Office thought a tripartite agreement along the lines it had suggested was preferable and asked that the Department reconsider this matter. (741.56374/4–2354)