Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Near East Region; Iraq; Iran; Arabian Peninsula, Volume XII

53. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Turkey⁰

Washington, January 19, 1959, 7:10 p.m.

2282. Baghdad Pact. Ankara’s 2048 rptd Tehran 242 Karachi 205¹ As stated Deptel 2258 to Ankara rptd Tehran 1778 and Karachi 1711² we intend approach forthcoming Karachi Council session in most constructive spirit possible. Further we do so in firm belief that proposed US positions on major items are markedly positive. US objectives at Council session outlined in separate telegram which accompanies this message.³ In context these objectives our anticipated positions on various major items, some of which suggested reftel and related messages, are outlined below for your background info:

1. Deptel 2256 rptd Tehran 1776 Karachi 1708 shows extent to which we willing go accept substance joint counterdraft Article IV.⁴ Believe moreover our proposed rearrangement this Article strengthens form bilaterals even though limitation existing authorization precludes giving blanket support desired by regional states. We awaiting further comment from Ankara on negotiations and Pakistani draft and, to extent legally permissible and politically desirable will continue explore possibility developing mutually acceptable formulae.

2. We have approved Defense-proposed position re establishment Permanent Military Representatives Group (PMRG) and Military Staff Headquarters purpose of which is reorganize CMPS into more meaningful organ consistent with objective Turk-proposed Standing Group.⁵ By thus agreeing to what will in effect be present Military Deputies group in permanent session, we believe pace Pact defense planning can be usefully accelerated.

3. We have participated in past BP joint military exercises and will wish explore possibility doing so in future joint exercises as they develop.

4. While for reasons of which you aware we will not be able at Karachi extend invitation hold next Council session in Washington, we do not rule out possibility holding next meeting here. Once it is again feasible for us do so, we expect actively explore possibility inviting Council meet in Washington later this year, perhaps in September.

5. We exploring possibility sending Presidential message to Council⁶ as suggested reftel and hope obtain favorable response.

6. We have agreed participate in proposed BP Multilateral Technical Assistance Fund.

7. Re Ankara’s 2044⁷ rptd Karachi 204 Tehran 241, present non-availability DLF funds precludes us making any firm offer Turk-Iranian railroad at this time. However USDels Economic Committee and Ministerial Council have been authorized state that if our current examination Turk-Iranian loan application convinces us of economic and technical feasibility this project, US prepared render DLF support for it subject to appropriation FY-60 funds which are being requested by Administration.

8. We have concurred Defense proposal that USDel Military Committee accept CMPS Land Force Goals Study for planning purposes, as written, even though we not able underwrite proposed force goals.⁸

Additionally, we firmly believe our substantial military and economic assistance programs with ME member states have made decisive contribution their military defense postures and their sound economic development. While ME member states’ desires understandably exceed what available resources and US global obligations permit us give and will probably continue do so, they should be kept aware that we have gone long way meet their legitimate requests.

Bearing above observations in mind, we wish addressees strike strongly positive note in discussing forthcoming Karachi meeting with local officials. US emphatically supports BP and its objectives and, as in past, will do everything feasible further its progress. We see no need for apologia and, despite hard bargaining techniques individual ME members, believe that they not unaware benefits flowing to them from Pact membership and US support of Pact association.

FYI. Reftel suggestion Vice-President of Secretary fly Karachi address Council not possible End FYI.

Dulles

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 396.1–KA/1–1659. Secret; Prioity. Drafted by Eilts; cleared by Charles S. Whitehouse, Dillon’s Special Assistant, and Bell; and approved by Rountree. Also sent to Karachi, Tehran, and London.
1. In telegram 2048, January 17, Ambassador Warren expressed serious concern “over mounting feelings discouragement attending build-up for Karachi meetings,” because of differences between the United States and the regional members of the Baghdad Pact on funding economic projects, the unwillingness of the United States to host the next pact council meeting, and dissatisfaction over the wording on a series of bilateral agreements for mutual security and defense. Warren suggested that the United States agree to the regional pact members’ wording for the bilateral agreements, reorganize the military committee of the pact, host the next council meeting in Washington, and send to Karachi a message of Presidential support to be delivered by Secretary Dulles or Vice President Nixon. (Ibid.)
2. January 16. (Ibid., 780.5/1–1659)
3. Reference is to telegram 2290 to Turkey, January 19, which provided U.S. objectives for the Karachi meeting as follows: (1) to increase awareness of the benefits and obligations of collective security; (2) to reaffirm U.S. support of the pact’s collective security efforts; (3) to emphasize that current U.S. aid programs were designed to enhance defense and economic development; (4) to exchange views on current Middle East developments, without committing the United States; (5) to counsel restraint against possible actions against Iraq; (6) to promote better relations between Afghanistan and its free world neighbors; and (7) to dissuade the pact from involving itself publicly into intra-area disputes. (Ibid., 396.1–KA/1–2059)

4. In telegram 2256, January 19, the Department informed the Embassy in Ankara that it approved language for a new article II in the bilateral agreements providing for cooperation with other involved governments in preparing defensive plans to resist aggression, but that this was as far as the Department was prepared to go in accommodating the desires of Iran, Turkey, and Karachi as expressed in their proposed article IV. (Ibid., 396.1–KA/1–1359)

   Article IV, as proposed by Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan, provided for cooperation with the other signatories of the London declaration of July 28, to “prepare all necessary defensive plans for the purpose of putting into effect the provisions of the present agreement.” (Telegrams 1740 from Ankara, 1415 from Karachi, and 1089 from Tehran, all December 12; ibid., 782.5/12–1358, 790D.5/12–1258, and 788.5/12–1258, respectively)

5. As stated in telegram 2331 to Ankara, January 23, not printed. (Ibid., 780.5/1–2159)
6. See Document 54.
7. In telegram 2044, January 16, Warren expressed additional concern about the prospects for the Economic Committee meeting and recommended that the United States announce at the meeting that it approved in principal financial support for a Turkish-Iranian railroad. (Department of State, Central Files, 396.1–KA/1–1659)
8. As stated in a letter from Murphy to Irwin, January 16. (Ibid. 780.5/1–1759)