Office of the Historian

369. Memorandum From the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs (Rountree) to the Deputy Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (Murphy)1

Washington, May 26, 1956.

SUBJECT

  • Ambassadorial Committee Meeting on May 28, at 3:00 p.m.

Discussion:

Following the recent NATO meeting in Paris, the Secretary had a meeting with the British and the French regarding various Middle East questions. One of these questions related to the Ambassadorial Committee. At the suggestion of the French Foreign Minister, it was agreed that the Committee would review the procedures of NEACC with special reference to the orders placed by Israel with the different Western powers. It was clear that the French wished a common decision regarding which Western powers would supply which Israel orders. During the Tripartite discussions, the US concurred in a French proposal to supply Israel with a final twelve Mysteres. The French also said they planned to sell Israel twelve Mysteres II, to which the Secretary said he saw no objection. (Tab B)2

Mr. MacArthur later discussed with the French Ambassador a French request for an Ambassadorial Committee meeting, regarding the work of the military experts of NEACC. Mr. MacArthur said it [Page 678] would be more useful if an Ambassadorial Committee meeting took place after the military experts had completed their work; otherwise, there would be little basis for discussion. Our principal concern was that a meeting might become known publicly and have a disquieting effect. At that stage there was some excitement in the Near East following the French shipment of Mysteres to Israel.

It was finally agreed that the Department, as secretariat of the Ambassadorial Committee, would circulate a French request that the military experts of NEACC complete their work by June 4. This request was scheduled for discussion at the May 22 meeting of NEACC. (Tab C)3 However, the British and Italian representatives had not received their instructions by this date. The French Ambassador has therefore requested an Ambassadorial Committee meeting for the purpose of formally instructing the NEACC to arrange that its military experts complete their work by June 4. The French wished the military sub-committee to analyze the military strength of Israel and the Arab States, to estimate in what respects Israel or the Arab States were deficient in military strength and to inventory all Israeli orders. (Tab D)4

An Ambassadorial Committee meeting, under your chairmanship, has been arranged for May 28 at 3:00.5 This date has been set because the French Ambassador is scheduled to leave Washington for Paris on May 29 and wishes to be in a position to report to the French Foreign Minister that he has been successful in having an Ambassadorial Committee meeting with respect to arms shipments to Israel.

Recommendations:

That you speak at the Ambassadorial Committee meeting on May 28 along the lines of the attached talking paper. (Tab A)

[Tab A]

TALKING PAPER FOR AMBASSADORIAL COMMITTEE MEETING ON MAY 28

(1)
The United States has been happy to respond to the French request that an Ambassadorial Committee meeting be held. May 28 [Page 679] was selected because of the imminent departure of the French Ambassador for Paris on May 29.
(2)
You recall that neither the existence nor the membership of the Ambassadorial Committee is known to the public and that for it to continue to perform a useful function it is essential that its existence and its activities remain on a highly confidential basis.
(3)
The agenda consists of a request from the French Ambassador: Instructions to NEACC regarding the work of its military experts. Extra copies (Tab C) are attached for distribution.
(4)
The United States supports these instructions, with the following suggestions:
(a)
As it is now May 28, it is doubtful that the military experts of NEACC will be able to complete their work by June 4. It is therefore suggested that no date be set at this time but that the military experts be asked to indicate how much time will be required for their work.
(b)
It is suggested that the military experts of NEACC be asked to express an opinion whether they will be able to supply an evaluation as requested in paragraph (b) of the French request.6 If the military experts find this evaluation would not now be possible, further discussion regarding the subject of paragraph (b) might be reserved for a later meeting of the Ambassadorial Committee.
(c)
It is understood that it may not be possible for some members of the Committee to submit an inventory of all Israel requests. The United States, for example, only submits to NEACC those orders which are approved within the U.S. Government. To submit all requests might create the impression they have been approved. Furthermore, in some cases requests are made to the United States Government on a confidential basis. Therefore, it would be difficult for the United States to reveal these requests to NEACC. Paragraph (c) of the French request is satisfactory to us if it is interpreted in this light.
(5)
The instructions, as amended, should be forwarded to NEACC for action by its military experts.
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 480.008/5–2656. Secret. Drafted by Wilkins.↩
  2. Tab B, a copy of Document 336, was not attached to the source text.↩
  3. Not attached to the source text. Tab C consisted of two diplomatic notes from the French Embassy: No. 247 of May 18 and No. 258 of May 23; copies are in Department of State, Central Files, 784A.56/5–1856 and 480.008/8–2356, respectively.↩
  4. Not attached to the source text. Tab D consisted of a French diplomatic note. No. 257 of May 22, filed Ibid., 480.008/5-2256.↩
  5. See Document 373.↩
  6. See footnote 3 above.↩