Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Arab-Israeli Dispute, 1955, Volume XIV

463. Telegram From the Embassy in France to the Department of State¹

Paris,December 17, 1955—1 a.m.

Secto 8. Tripartite meeting at Quai d’Orsay December 15² opened by Pinay, who stressed gravity of problems in Middle East and necessity for common policy by three governments in that area. Following general review of Soviet methods of penetration in area by Secretary, discussion took place on following subjects:

Control of Arms to Middle East.

Secretary recalled agreement at Geneva 3 countries would cooperate on delivery of arms as between Israel and immediate neighbors.³ Said US has received IG request for considerable quantity ($55 million) of arms, greater part for planes and tanks. US intends bring matter before Ambassadorial Committee. Said that Department has informed IG in view attack on Syria it does not wish decide on request now.⁴ Under US legislation cannot sell to country carrying on acts of aggression. Although Israel has signed reimbursable aid agreement that it will not use arms for aggression, we must take into account its actions as well as its words. May decide sell $10 million of defensive type weapons and delay on remainder to see what IG area policies are.

Pinay said French Government being constantly pressed by IG to make deliveries of planes and found position very difficult. He stressed need for common policy respecting deliveries.Macmillan said UK had held up delivery of Meteors and urged that plane deliveries to Israel be suspended until Ambassadorial Committee had been established and had had opportunity to consider problem. He pointed out that introduction of such new types of equipment as French Mystere would alter entire character of armaments situation in area and felt that this should be studied by Ambassadorial Committee before any decision taken. It was agreed by three Ministers that plan [e?] deliveries to Israel should be suspended pending consideration by Ambassadorial Committee and that IG would be informed that cessation of deliveries had been made in light of Syrian incident. It was further agreed that existence of Ambassadorial Committee would be kept secret.

French stressed difficulties caused in North Africa by illegal imports of light arms from Arab countries in area and urged that Ambassadorial Committee should have jurisdiction over such shipments.Macmillan pointed out that problem of illicit arms traffic was different problem from that for which Ambassadorial Committee created, i.e., implementation of tripartite declaration to prevent arms race between Israel and Arab countries. Both Secretary and Macmillan pointed out practical difficulty of three governments trying to control trade in small arms in view of number of other countries which manufacture such arms and highly organized illicit arms traffic. After lengthy discussion it was agreed to instruct Ambassadorial Committee to establish sub-committee to study problem.

Aswan Dam.

French raised this point, stating they were in dark as to exactly where matter stands. They had been informed that they would be given opportunity to participate but had no information as to what exact arrangements were. Therefore, found it difficult to consider financial aspects and how they might take part. Secretary and Macmillan reviewed developments to date and present status of discussions in Washington.Macmillan explained that British-French-German consortium had been unable arrange financing of project and that IBRD procedures required competitive bidding. He said that it appears likely, however, that some form of invitational bidding can be devised which will exclude Iron Curtain countries. He thought consortium, which he hoped would be expanded to include American participation, would have excellent chance of getting contract. Massigli indicated that French desire to be associated with project for political reasons, i.e., relations with Egypt and Arab countries, and wished to obtain information in sufficient time to permit them to make decision on participation.

Dulles

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 786.56/12–1755. Secret. Drafted by Russell and Reinstein. Received at 2:14 a.m. Repeated to London, Cairo, and Tel Aviv.
2. According to Secretary Dulles’ Appointment Book, this meeting began at 6 p.m. (Princeton University Library, Dulles Papers)
3. See Documents 404 and 409.
4. See Document 454.