544. Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation Between the French Ambassador (Alphand) and the Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs (Wilcox), Washington, November 7, 19561
SUBJECT
- Middle East Situation
Ambassador Alphand called me this morning to say that he had heard Ambassador Lodge’s speech in the General Assembly indicating that we intended to vote for the Afro-Asian resolution on the withdrawal of forces from Egyptian territory. He said he assumed this was our official position and inquired if his assumption were [Page 1055] correct. I replied that it was and that it was my understanding that certain changes had been made in the resolution in accordance with the suggestions that we had made to the sponsors.
Ambassador Alphand then inquired about our interpretation of withdrawal. He pointed out that the phrase “immediate withdrawal” in the resolution suggested the possibility that French and British troops might be expected to withdraw from Egyptian territory prior to the entry of UN forces. I explained to him that our concept of the withdrawal was that the two things should be related—that the withdrawal of British and French troops would be properly phased and coordinated with the entry of UN forces. It was not our interpretation that the word “immediate” would result in the withdrawal of French and British troops in such fashion that a vacuum would be created before UN forces were ready to move in.
Ambassador Alphand then called attention to the French request to convene an urgent meeting of the Security Council in order to consider Middle Eastern problems and to complete the work which the GA had been doing. He said it was the French view that the GA has neither the power nor the responsibility to deal with many of the questions which now need to be settled. The general guide lines have been established by the GA and it was now time to settle the more specific problems that remain. He hoped therefore that we would be in a position to support the French move to convene the Security Council. I told the Ambassador that we had not had an opportunity yet to give the matter careful study and that I was therefore not in a position to comment on his request. I pointed out, however, that inasmuch as the matter had been referred by the Security Council to the GA that any attempt to move it back to the Security Council might meet with some opposition from the smaller states.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 320.5780/11–756. Official Use Only. Drafted by Wilcox.↩