258. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Egypt1
3253. ReDeptel 3238.2
- 1.
- Request following be communicated in writing soonest to GOE:
“The Government of the United States has carefully studied the draft memorandum furnished by the Government of Egypt with reference to the future status of the Suez Canal. We appreciate the opportunity to consider this proposal and to comment thereon in advance of any final decision by the Government of Egypt.
“In response to the suggestion of the Government of Egypt, the Government of the United States makes the following observations:
“The problem, as we see it, is the reestablishment of confidence that the Suez Canal will, as contemplated by the Treaty Convention of 1888, provide a permanently dependable way of transport as between East and West, so that the nations of the world may develop their economies in reliance thereon. This was indeed the purpose of the 1888 Convention which called for a “definitive system intended to guarantee, at all times and to all the powers, the free use of the Suez Maritime Canal’.
“Recent events have shaken confidence in the dependability of use of the Suez Canal. The question which confronts the world, and, not least of all, Egypt and the neighboring Arab States, is whether and how such confidence can now be reestablished.
“It is the considered judgment of the Government of the United States that the proposals contained in the draft memorandum now put forward by the Government of Egypt are inadequate to reestablish confidence that the Suez Canal can safely be depended upon to provide a permanent, secure and economical way of transport.
“Even though this may not have been intended, it seems to us in legal effect the memorandum represents a unilateral statement of Egyptian intention subject to unilateral change at any time; it fails to implement adequately the six requirements which the Security Council on October 13, 1956 unanimously agreed ought to be reflected in any settlement; it does not provide for organized cooperation between the Government of Egypt and the Users as contemplated by the Security Council Resolution and the ensuing correspondence between Secretary General Hammarskjöld and Foreign Minister Fawzi.
“Accordingly, the United States, in response to the invitation of Egypt, is prepared to suggest specific changes which, in our opinion, are needed to constitute an acceptable international agreement which can reestablish confidence that the Suez Canal can be dependably relied upon by the countries of the world. We are prepared immediately to discuss these with you.”
- 2.
- FYI, you may in your
discretion use orally any or all of the following considerations
in your discussions with GOE:
“Suez Canal has been largely used because it provides cheapest way to move cargoes between East and West. Of these cargoes the most important is oil which is abundant in ME and is relatively cheap to bring to surface and to transport.
“But this natural and historic fact does not mean that under any and all circumstances Suez Canal must be relied upon for future as it has been relied upon in past.
“New sources of oil are being discovered and alternatives to oil, notably in form of atomic energy, are being developed. New means of cheap transport are constantly becoming available.
“It inevitable that alternatives to ME oil and alternatives to its transport through Suez Canal will be intensively sought if there is not confidence in future dependability of transport on reasonable terms through Suez Canal.
“Of course, these alternatives cannot be instantly developed and no doubt GOE can count temporarily upon considerable use of Canal irrespective of whether confidence in dependability of such use is or is not restored. But such a “success’, if it can be called such, would be short-lived. Egypt and neighboring Arab States, which now feel that they are located at crossroads of world and are possessors of great potential riches, will tend to be bypassed and what could become one of the most prosperous areas of the world would increasingly tend toward stagnation. ME nations themselves cannot provide a market for their natural resources nor can such market be provided by Soviet Union, which is itself large producer and substantial exporter of petroleum products.
“It is, of course, inevitable that, under impulse of commercial considerations, new sources of oil should be sought and new means of transportation should be developed. It is, however, one thing that this should occur merely under the impulse of commercial considerations; it is another thing that important nations should feel that such developments are imperative for reasons of security.
“Government of US accordingly ventures suggest to GOE that future prosperity of Egypt and of its neighbors would be enhanced by international arrangements which, fully recognizing sovereignty of Egypt and its right to profit from maintenance and operation of a canal on its territory, would accord the Users the international rights which would be conducive to a restoration of confidence.”
- 3.
- You should use as basis of your discussions with GOE modifications of Egyptian memorandum as transmitted Deptel 3238. In connection paragraph 6 (C), assume working Egyptian memorandum was “Capital and Development Fund” rather than “Capital Land Development Fund” as indicated reftel. Please make appropriate correction before proposed revisions given to GOE.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/3–3057. Confidential; Niact. Drafted by Rountree; cleared by Dulles, Dillon, and Phleger; and approved by Rountree who initialed for Dulles. A first draft indicates Dulles as the drafting officer and bears handwritten changes presumably by Rountree. (Ibid.)↩
- Document 255.↩