117. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Lebanon1
2554. Embtel 2265.2FYI While physical possibility exists for Arab diversion of some of Jordan headwaters, opinion of Johnston mission engineer is that diversion structures would be only partially successful and exceedingly costly estimating cost Hasbani tunnel, canal and diverting works at approximately $10 million. Even in unlikely event that Arabs able complete proposed diversionary structures, amount of water Lebanese and Syrians could divert would not greatly exceed amount of water Israel obligated to deliver to Kingdom of Jordan under Johnston proposals. Furthermore, if Arabs undertook such diversionary efforts Israelis might well feel freed to initiate prompt and effective action to make up for anticipated upstream losses. Such Israeli action would be to lasting detriment of Jordan, Boteiha Farms in Syria and other downstream users. These technical facts undoubtedly understood by Arab engineers who participated in Johnston negotiations. End FYI.
Under circumstances, Department believes best course is for USG officials in discussions with Arab leaders give impression of mild but resigned regret. We believe over-eagerness on our part should be avoided if Arab leaders are to be induced to become less emotional and more realistic re Jordan waters question. In any case USG not interested becoming involved in Jordan waters issue unless there clear indications that parties directly concerned honestly wish third party assistance.
With foregoing considerations in mind, Department skeptical re providing Oueini with informal memorandum containing substance Deptel 2474. We see likelihood his using this piece of paper as fuel for fire which he seeking to ignite. Unless you have strong views to contrary you may inform him Department has not agreed you provide written memo since to do so would serve no constructive purpose and would give impression US seeking involve itself in area problem which can only be resolved by parties concerned.
[Page 258]If Oueini again mentions matter of US assistance for Hasbani diversion, you might simply remark that Washington has indicated this would not contribute to welfare of the area. If you think it would serve a useful purpose and if suitable opportunity arises, you may mention casually to Chehab or other Cabinet ministers that in our eyes project does not make sense from point of view of the area.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 684A.85322/1–1660. Confidential. Drafted by Meyer; cleared in draft with L/NEA, Ludlow, Cargo, and Jones; and signed for Herter by Thacher. Repeated to Amman, Baghdad, Cairo, Tel Aviv, London, Paris, Damascus, and USUN.↩
- Telegram 2265, January 16, reported that McClintock had made the démarche authorized in telegram 2474 (supra), but Oueini was unmoved. The Foreign Minister talked at length about a diversion of the Hasbani River and stated that Lebanon would request U.S. aid for such a project. At the end of the conversation, Oueini asked McClintock for a “piece of paper” embodying the text of telegram 2474. (Department of State, Central Files, 684A.85322/1–1660)↩