641.74/5–852: Telegram
No. 981
The Ambassador in Egypt (Caffery) to the
Department of State1
1965. I talked with His Majesty for some time this afternoon about the two messages I recd about his desire for my advice. He said that under no circumstances cld he agree to prior consultation with the Sudanese before recognition of the title by the Brit. He [Page 1800] insisted that if he is to stay in his present job he cannot agree to that. “Further”, he said, “neither this govt nor any other govt cld remain in office if they agreed to those conditions”. “In that case” I said, “There is not much for me to say, however, I do counsel Your Majesty to drop the thesis that a formula shld be agreed to by both parties before resuming negots. Get on with the negots. The Brit will never agree to the sort of formula your PriMin wants”. He did not commit himself but he did say “I understand what you mean and what you say is logical but I do not know just how the PriMin will react to it. The PriMin is a fine man, in fact all the members of the govt are fine men, they are the best available; but the PriMin is a temperamental individual and I might find myself with his resignation in my hands. For the first time since I have been on the job I wouldn’t know what to do. In every crisis in the past I have had a new Cabinet in one of the drawers of my desk, but I haven’t any now. The last time I saw you I told you this was the last chance and I tell you so again. I know that the Brit don’t really believe that and I don’t believe your people do either. Furthermore, I venture to say that you will all be sorry if I get turned out”.
He then put on a tirade against the Brit which he said frankly was meant for me to repeat to Stevenson. He said that the Brit had broken 65 promises to Egypt. He cld not rely on their word. They had no intention of reaching an agreement. He recited the past history of the Sudan and emphasized the aspect I have spoken of before, that in Egypt the change in the title was from Viceroy to Khedive to Sultan to King. In the Sudan, he said, “it has always been Sahib which is a broader title than King for it means sovereign-proprietor. It is nothing new we are asking for, we are merely asking them to follow the same logic and slip over from Sahib to Malik. I don’t want to threaten, or perhaps I do, but with things going as they are, to protect my own position in the country, or to reinforce it if you like, I may be forced to come out publicly soon with an all-around denunciation of the Brit”.
We ended on his reiterating that only the US can prevent a catastrophe; that he has confidence in us, etc., etc.
- Repeated to London as telegram 882, to Paris as 643, to Ankara as 492, and unnumbered to Rome, Moscow, Tel Aviv, Tripoli, Tehran, and the Arab capitals.↩