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

296. Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation Between the Secretary of State and the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs (Rountree), Washington, April 22, 1957, 5:05 p.m.¹

Washington, April 22, 1957, 5:05 p.m.

TELEPHONE CALL TO MR ROUNTREE

The Sec called to say he was back and is there anything new.² R said he is meeting with Coulson and did meet with Caccia.³ The news has been reported to London and they are intrigued by the progress. Also they were made aware of Hare’s renewed estimate that all the progress would have been lost if we decided to go ahead and he mentioned someone’s talking for a Thursday meeting. Then followed a great discussion—the Sec did not see why everything would have been lost. R said Caccia called and where London is interested he felt we should go ahead. Hare has made plans to go ahead tomorrow. To avoid confusion we sent a confirmation to that effect. The Sec said that if the Egyptians put it out as a declaration inevitably they will start from that as a basis for future arrangements. Fawzi’s hope is that if it progressed to a point where Hare and we felt they were putting forth a good deal we would say so. The Sec said maybe we will. The Sec finally said something that it does not sound as if he and R are in agreement re what they are talking about. The Sec said we are taking it to the SC to report the state of affairs and make a statement that discharges us of our responsibility. R said that is precisely the basis on which we made the suggestion to the Egyptians that they join us. Then they said no. They said they are or were afraid progress would be vitiated. The Sec said it does not make sense and R agreed. R said they don’t want it reported to the SC at this time. They are vague and want to drag it out until people are using the Canal. The Sec said he told Wadsworth that he could let Hammarskjöld know this p.m. or tomorrow the way our minds are working on this. R is glad he did that. R said he thinks he understands (Hare that is) fully our thinking. The Sec said if it is by Thursday we have to get some high-pressure thinking re what to say and have different alternatives to prepare. R said the IO people are drafting a speech. The Sec asked if there is any reason Egypt should be invited to attend. R assumed they would be and the Sec asked why. It is all right if they want to come. If they are not there it makes it apparent we are not doing it for the purpose of trying to negotiate more out of them. R thinks the British would want them there and the Sec asked why. R said from the conversation with Caccia he assumed it though it was not discussed specifically.

There will be a meeting at 5:45 re Richards’ visit to Jordan and R agreed it would be nice to invite AWD to get his views.⁴

1. Source: Eisenhower Library, Dulles Papers, General Telephone Conversations. Transcribed by Bernau.
2. Earlier in the day, Secretary Dulles traveled by air to New York to address the Associated Press at its annual luncheon. (Dulles’ Appointment Book; Princeton University Library, Dulles Papers)
3. During the conversation with Caccia, the British Ambassador informed Rountree that his government wanted to notify the Security Council and call for a meeting to consider the Canal problem not later than Thursday, April 25. (Memorandum of conversation by Shaw, April 22; Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/4–2257)
4. The source text indicates that Dulles then telephoned Allen Dulles, who agreed to attend the meeting scheduled for 5:45 p.m. that day. See the editorial note, infra.