Office of the Historian

Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 111

No. 988
United States Minutes of the Fourth United States-United Kingdom Ministerial Talks, London, British Foreign Office, June 28, 1952, 12:30 p.m.–1:30 p.m.

secret
MTL USUK–4
London, June 28, 1952, 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

Present:

  • United Kingdom
    • Mr. Eden
    • Mr. Selwyn Lloyd
    • Sir William Strang
    • Sir Pierson Dixon
    • Sir Roger Makin
    • Mr. Scott
    • Sir James Bowker
    • Mr. Allen
  • United States
    • Secretary Acheson
    • Ambassador Gifford
    • Ambassador Jessup
    • Mr. Perkins
    • Mr. Nitze
    • Miss Kirkpatrick
    • Mr. Battle
    • Mr. Ringwalt
    • Mr. Palmer

[Here follows discussion of a British observer to the Pacific Council and United Nations facilities in Japan.]

Mr. Eden said that the Foreign Office has now prepared preliminary drafts of 2 papers. The first is a proposal for an international commission to supervise elections in the Sudan and the second is a proposed new agreement between the UK and Egypt for the administration of the Sudan. He was hopeful that these proposals might break the deadlock which presently prevails between the UK and Egypt.

[Page 1824]

At Mr. Eden’s request, Sir James Bowker provided further elaboration regarding the relations between the UK and Egypt. He said that the UK feels that the recent conversations between the Sudanese and the Egyptians may provide a back door for getting conversations underway. At least, the UK feels, Egyptians eyes have now been opened to the fact that the question of the King’s title is not a simple issue. If the UK recognizes the title without consulting the Sudanese (which it can’t do), its actions would be repudiated by the Sudanese. There is, moreover, the problem created b’sy Egypt having created a legal vacuum with respect to its position in the Sudan by its unilateral determination of the 1899 Agreement. The UK thinks that Egypt would like to see some means of legitimatizing its position once more. These thoughts, together with the submission of the proposed new constitution for the Sudan to both Co-Domini by the Sudan administration, have been foremost in British thoughts in studying the whole question and have resulted in the 2 drafts mentioned by Mr. Eden which were sent yesterday to the British representatives in Khartoum and Cairo for comment.

Mr. Eden said that Ambassador Amr regards the tearing up of the 1899 Agreement to have been a blunder, since it deprived Egypt of its position in the Sudan. Mr. Eden thought that the course of action outlined above might commend itself to Egypt, since the purpose of it would be to bring Egypt back into the situation with a legal standing.

Mr. Acheson asked how these new proposals tied in with what Mr. Eden and he had been talking about in the first and second Bilaterals, particularly with the question of encouraging an expansion of contacts between the Sudanese and the Egyptians.

Sir James Bowker said that the new suggestions are somewhat different. The UK is willing to let the Egyptians know of its willingness to bring the Sudanese into conversations on these questions at any time. The British understand, however, that Hilali is presently awaiting SAR’s reply to the matters discussed at Alexandria with the latter’s representatives before deciding whether the consultation should be expanded to include other segments of Sudanese opinion.

Mr. Eden said that the Foreign Office should have Khartoum’s and Cairo’s comments within a week. The whole question is under urgent study and he would let the US have copies of the proposals as soon as possible.1

[Page 1825]

Mr. Allen indicated that the UK has now dropped the idea of an interim reply to the Egyptian Government’s communication containing 3 formulae on the King’s title. The Egyptian Government is not pressing for an answer at the present time and the UK therefore hopes to take further time to complete work on the foregoing papers before giving any reply. He hoped that the proposals would be in shape to put forward in about a fortnight. Both Howe and Stevenson had seen the 2 drafts and had approved them, but wanted their staffs to study them.

Mr. Acheson summed up by asking if he was correct in understanding that we were agreed that although the situation in Egypt is quiet now, it perhaps would not be by fall. Also that the question of the title is the most difficult one from the Egyptian point of view. Iraq, Pakistan and Greece have recently recognized the title and Italy, Belgium and Turkey might have to do so. The US and the UK have discussed the possibility of the UK talking to the Sudanese and encouraging them by means short of pressure to take a more forthcoming attitude. We understand that it is the UK desire that the Sudanese decision on the title should be as close as possible to what the Egyptians want. We also understand that the British are evolving proposals, of which the 2 documents mentioned by Mr. Eden are part, to open the back door by seeing what can be done about the title and about getting Egypt back into the administration of the Sudan.

Mr. Eden said this corresponded with his understanding of what had been agreed and discussed. He added that the British hoped that if conversations with Egypt could be gotten underway, they could be expanded into 3–Power talks. It may be difficult to get the Sudanese to come in, but further bilateral Egyptian-Sudanese conversations may help pave the way. Difficulties may also be encountered in finding Sudanese who would be representative of all points of view in the Sudan, but he was hopeful that this too could be overcome.

[Here follows discussion of MEDO, the situation in Iran, and the situation in Trieste. The text of the portion on Iran is scheduled for publication in volume X.]

  1. Ambassador Gifford transmitted copies of the preliminary drafts of these two documents along with Foreign Secretary Eden’s comments regarding them to the Department of State in telegrams 15 and 16 from London, July 1, neither printed. (745W.00/7–152)↩