147. Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation Between the Secretary of State and the Minister of the Israeli Embassy (Shiloah), Washington, February 25, 1957, 4:41 p.m.1
TELEPHONE CALL TO MIN. SHILOAH
The Sec said Rountree told me about his talk with S. The Sec wants him to know and perhaps he will tell Eban if your govt’s position was there had to be a de jure extinction of Egypt’s rights in Gaza the Sec does not think it obtainable. As the Sec said yesterday she has rights under the Armistice Agreement and may be acquiescent but the Sec does not think she will renounce those rights and hopes your govt will not ask for that because he thinks that may be the point where the whole thing will break down. S has talked to Eban and [Eban?] was glad to hear what S said and his impression in the first [Page 272] talk was less clear on the reserving of rights and not exercise them.2 There was no distinction according to his impression between de jure and de facto arrangements where the Sec Gen was very reluctant to discuss the practical implication and they concentrated on it. S’s impression was the issue was not so much the formalistic one but the practical one. There may be more clarity when they meet at 6. The Sec asked if S could answer and S said he would rather consult before answering. The Sec said to do that because there is not much use in our working on the paper until this is resolved.
- Source: Eisenhower Library, Dulles Papers, General Telephone Conversations. Transcribed by Bernau.↩
- The Israeli account of the conversation of February 24 varied considerably from the memorandum prepared by Rountree (Document 143 and footnote 1 thereto) as to what Dulles had said in regard to the Gaza Strip. According to the Israeli working paper, Dulles said that it was difficult to imagine Egypt formally consenting to abrogate its rights under the 1949 Armistice Agreement, but it was possible to envisage Egyptian agreement to the non-exercise of these rights, and acquiescence in their exercise by the United Nations. Dulles then noted, according to the Israeli document, that Hammarskjöld’s report of February 22 (see Document 137) indicated this possibility and that it might be possible for Egypt to reserve its rights without exercising them until the future of the Gaza area was finally determined. An unsigned handwritten notation on the Department of State’s copy of the Israeli document indicates disagreement with the Israeli version.↩