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

169. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, February 28, 1957, 5:36 p.m.¹

Washington, February 28, 1957, 5:36 p.m.

SUBJECT

• Israeli Situation

PARTICIPANTS

• The Secretary
• Sir Harold Caccia, British Ambassador
• Mr. Arnold Heeney, Canadian Ambassador
• Mr. Lucet, French Minister
• Mr. Coulson, British Minister
• Mr. Laboulaye, French Counselor
• Mr. Wilcox
• C. Burke Elbrick

The Secretary said that he thought it desirable to review with the representatives of the three countries the developments in connection with Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza strip and the Gulf of Aqaba. He read to them portions of a draft statement which the Israeli representative would make on the following day in the General Assembly regarding the withdrawal of Israeli forces. As for the U.S. position, our attitude toward the problem of the Gulf of Aqaba remains the same as expressed in our aide-mémoire to the Israelis of February 11. As for the Gaza strip we hope that the UN will continue to administer the area in the period prior to the final settlement of the Israeli-Egyptian problem and we would hope that conditions could be created during the interim period which would make a final settlement possible. We hope that there will be no withdrawal of the UN Emergency Force without consultation with the Advisory Council in the UN. If there should be any change in the situation resulting from forceful action on the part of Egypt, following Israel withdrawal, we believe that this would create a new situation calling for UN consideration.

The Secretary said that the statement to be made by the Israeli representative in the General Assembly will make certain assumptions which have already been embodied in UN resolutions and in reports by the Secretary General. The statement will also express certain “expectations” on the part of the Israeli Government. Israel will announce, in effect, its unconditional withdrawal in the areas now occupied, and the Secretary emphasized that Israel will not receive anything in return except what has been provided for in prior UN resolutions. The Israeli Government would not find it easy to make this statement regarding withdrawal and it is entirely possible that the announcement in the General Assembly might cause internal disturbances within Israel. The Secretary pointed out that the successful implementation of the Israeli announcement would be subject to Egyptian acceptance as well as to Hammarskjold’s reaction regarding Israel’s “expectations” as outlined in the statement.

The Secretary said that it is obvious that the Arab states wish to create a breach between Israel and the United States and for this reason they had been highly pleased by President Eisenhower’s recent speech. He felt that they would be disappointed now that Israel plans to comply with the conditions laid down in the President’s speech. The Secretary said he wished to make it very clear that there had been no private understanding of any kind between the U.S. and Israel in developing this solution of the problem.

In reply to Ambassador Caccia’s question, the Secretary said that it was hoped that as many governments as possible will make statements in support of the Israeli statement. Ambassador Heeney asked how Hammarskjold could be expected to react to the Israeli statement. The Secretary said that he had spoken to Hammarskjold yesterday and had informed him of the way matters were progressing. The Secretary felt that Hammarskjold should not make any comments on, or reply to, the Israeli statement and he felt that Foreign Minister Pearson of Canada could be very helpful in this connection. Ambassador Heeney asked if the Secretary expected a violent reaction from the Afro-Asian countries. The Secretary said that Egypt may challenge the concept of an international waterway in the Straits of Tiran. While it is true that the Straits come within the territorial limits of the bordering states they have an international character due to the fact that they provide access to an international waterway, namely, the Gulf of Aqaba.

It was agreed that it would be useful to carry on further discussions and consultations on this matter in New York. The Secretary said that Ambassador Lodge had been authorized to discuss with other delegations the question of additional statements in support of the Israeli declaration.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 674.84A/2–2857. Secret. Drafted by Elbrick. The time of the meeting is from Dulles’ Appointment Book. (Princeton University Library, Dulles Papers)