Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Suez Crisis, July 26–December 31, 1956, Volume XVI

331. Telegram From the Mission at the United Nations to the Department of State¹

New York, October 11, 1956—9 p.m.

335. Eyes only for Hoover. The following suggested statement which you might make to NSC:²

Security Council convened October 5, and after four public sessions arranged October 9 for subsequent meetings to be closed for time being as means stimulating more constructive discussion problem in effort reach basis of settlement. These closed sessions³ have of themselves had limited utility but they have been brief and have been spaced so that a good bit of time of the Foreign Ministers primarily concerned could be devoted private conversations. There have been series talks among British, French and Egyptian Foreign Ministers in presence Secretary-General Hammarskjold. While nothing as yet has been reduced to writing there have been what may prove to be useful exchanges which give reason hope early agreement in principle is not out of question although success far from assured.

While Egyptians continue maintain they cannot in any circumstances accept “international control” of Canal, there are indications they may accept an arrangement providing for participation by Canal users to degree which might from technical viewpoint prove adequate to assure that interests of users can be safeguarded. They appear not to exclude direct collaboration with Users Association in achieving this objective, although neither they nor British and French visualize membership in Association as sine qua non to enjoyment by any country of facilities Canal. It thus appears possible that the SCUA can in fact be developed into mechanism of considerable importance in implementation of an arrangement agreed with Egypt.

We have been encouraged by moderation shown by the British. They seem to favor compromise settlement but they deeply concerned at how they could square such a compromise with strong positions which their government has taken publicly. The French on other hand appear to adhere more closely to original position and show little give to date.

It is, of course, too early to judge whether these negotiations will in fact result in agreement. We cannot be sure of extent of authority with which Fawzi speaks, and he may in fact be repudiated in part or in whole by Nasser. Nor can we be certain whether apparently moderate approach now being pursued by British will be supported by the UK Government, or whether French can in the final analysis be brought along. Indeed, even assuming that they are all backed by their governments, there remains a very wide area which must yet be covered before an agreement, even in principle, is assured. Nevertheless, progress report at the moment is not discouraging.

Meanwhile, British, French and we agreed upon urgency completing arrangements so that SCUA can be put into operation. Delegations of the participating countries now working together London are having some difficulty perfecting plans and main problem at moment seems to be selecting administrator willing to serve and whose government willing to have him serve. When organization in position begin doing business, expected that US will issue appropriate regulations denying payment tolls Egypt by US flag vessels and encouraging payment by all US owned vessels to SCUA which would operate as agents shipowners. Our final decision this regard, however, will also depend upon agreement (which not yet been forthcoming from French but which we have with British) that three of us will be operating on the same basis. We would hope that other countries would immediately, or soon after follow suit. We attach considerable importance to activating SCUA, since if agreement in principle reached with Egyptians, latter could deal with SCUA pending completion detailed permanent arrangements. If no agreement in principle reached highly desirable for SCUA to be in position discharge multiple purposes for which created.

At Security Council secret session held afternoon of October 11, consideration again was given request Israel and seven Arab states to be heard. Council considered proposal special session be held for this purpose October 12 while Foreign Ministers UK, France and Egypt continuing their private talks. Permanent delegates those three countries would sit in lieu Foreign Ministers. Suggestion not accepted majority Council, however, and decided postpone until later decision upon appearance Israel and Arab states.

SC scheduled convene again closed session October 12, time to be set by President. Further public meetings to be preceded by private meeting to inform SC outcome private talks Foreign Ministers. Decision when next closed session will be held presumably depends upon degree progress made UK-France-Egypt talks. Although Pineau seems anxious end session soon as possible, appears British and other delegations contemplate possibility meetings going into next week. Meanwhile decision whether UK-France will press for vote their resolution in abeyance and will depend upon developments. If they in fact decide press for vote, it estimated resolution would receive minimum seven, with Soviet veto almost certain.

Lodge

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/10–1156. Secret; Niact. Received at 10:09 p.m. The outgoing copy of this telegram indicates Rountree as the drafting officer. (Ibid., Conference Files: Lot 62 D 181, CF 786)
2. See infra.
3. The Security Council met in private at its 739th, 740th, and 741st meetings held on October 9, 11, and 12.