105. Memorandum of Conversation, American Embassy, London, May 18, 19551
PARTICIPANTS
- Mr. Evelyn Shuckburgh, Foreign Office
- Mr. Michael Rose, Foreign Office
- Mr. Kenneth Simpson, Foreign Office
- Mr. Geoffrey Arthur, Foreign Office
- Mr. Arthur Gardiner, Department of State
- Mr. Evan M. Wilson, AmEmbassy, London
- Mr. Dayton S. Mak, AmEmbassy, London
SUBJECT
- Progress Made in Jordan Waters Negotiations
Mr. Gardiner explained that Mr.Eric Johnston was prepared to return to the Middle East in early June and act as intermediary between the Arabs and the Israelis in arriving at a solution of the water distribution and storage problems in the Jordan Valley, provided the Israelis would present him with a firm and reasonable offer which he can take to the Arabs. It is hoped that the Israelis will make, formally, a proposal to Mr.Johnston that meets these requirements and is reasonably close to the position reached with the Arabs in Beirut in February 1955. Talks have been held in Washington to this end and were still continuing.
Whereas the Israelis previously were prepared to consider the idea of using Lake Tiberias for storing water for Israel and the Arabs, they now wish to delay a decision regarding the storage of water for the Arabs in Tiberias, until the year 1960. The reason for this change in attitude is the failure of the Israelis to find adequate alternate reservoir sites at Sahl Battauf, and elsewhere in Israel. The Israelis have, however, indicated that they would be willing to permit the storage of 300MCMs of Arab water in Tiberias if Israel could be provided (at no cost to her) with alternate storage facilities. [Page 198] Mr.Johnston is seeking Israeli agreement to provide this space for the Arabs at an expenditure not exceeding provable costs of increasing the capacity of the lake to 1,000MCMs, a 300MCM increase over its present capacity. These costs have been estimated by the Israelis possibly as high as $5 million, although other estimates are considerably lower. The Israelis have also indicated that they much prefer the erection of a high storage dam on the Yarmuk River which the Arabs could utilize for complete control of its waters as an alternative to their using Tiberias for this purpose. This is very likely unacceptable, as such a dam would probably cost around $60 million.
Mr.Johnston wishes the Israelis to agree, as an interim measure, to permit the Arabs to utilize water now wasted from Tiberias, by passing it into the proposed “feeder canal” from the Lake to the Eastern Ghor Canal, prior to the date when the Israelis agree to storage of Yarmuk water in Tiberias.
Mr. Gardiner said that the Israelis and Mr.Johnston had made progress on ideas for a neutral control authority. The Israelis wish to limit the judgmental powers of the authority, and it is believed that much of its work can be limited to carrying out delivery schedules set in advance, and modified only by prearranged sets of calculations.
Mr. Gardiner remarked that Mr.Johnston was prepared, as an intermediary, to approach the Arabs with a schedule of division of water less favorable than that agreed upon tentatively in Beirut. He thought there was some chance of Arab acceptance, as limitation of Tiberias storage carried the implication that a high Yarmuk Dam would be a requisite to prevent wastage of water; this the Arabs were most desirous to secure. Problems of quality of water, i.e., its salinity, also remain to be solved.
Mr. Gardiner remarked that Sir Anthony Eden’s messages to the Jordanians and Israelis urging their cooperation with Mr.Johnston had been helpful.2 Mr.Shuckburgh replied that the Foreign Secretary would be happy to assist Mr.Johnston’s mission on his next visit to the Middle East if he were asked to do so.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 684A.85322/5–2355. Confidential. Enclosure to despatch 3477 from London, May 23. Drafted by Mak.↩
- Ambassador Lawson informed the Department on April 6 that the British Ambassador on April 5 had transmitted a personal message from Eden to Sharett in which Eden had “referred to fact that he was encouraged reports of progress in Jordan Valley water negotiations and stressed importance which he attached to their successful conclusion.” (Telegram 863 from Tel Aviv, April 6;ibid., 684A.85321/4–655)↩