Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XIX, Arab-Israeli Crisis and War, 1967

380. Telegram From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State¹

New York, July 21, 1967, 0124Z.

305. USUN 290.² Mid-East Crisis.

Dobrynin (USSR) telephoned me this noon to say he wanted to check with me about the wording of the formulas I had discussed with Gromyko yesterday. We met at UN shortly after lunch.

Dobrynin showed me two texts. One “called for” Israeli withdrawal in one para and said renunciation of claims and acts inconsistent with existence of independent national states was “expected” in other. Second version used similar formulas on substance but used terminology “is expected” in both paras. Both versions used words “without delay” in each para.

After looking over text I told Dobrynin I had not used expression “calls upon” in conversation yesterday and further noted that he had used it only in para one and that this created imbalance between the two. He said his purpose was to clarify with me exactly where our position stood.

I then went over with him conversation of yesterday based on his notes (which were accurate) and my own. As a result the two versions attached at end of this tel were completed as accurately reflecting yesterday’s intention. (Final drafting reflected two subsequent telecons as well.) Dobrynin confirmed by telephone that Gromyko agreed these texts, and not ones Dobrynin had explored with me earlier, represented what we had talked about. Version I is the text in which Dobrynin appeared to have greatest interest.

Dobrynin also told me Gromyko had been in touch with Fawzi (UAR) about these new formulas and that Fawzi thought he might need more time to consult his govt. Dobrynin therefore wondered if we would consent to two or three days more time. I told him we were suspicious that constant requests for delay were simply a bargaining tactic. Also that we had heard of possible efforts to bring Jerusalem into SC and wondered whether this request for a further delay was not simply effort to complicate issue with that of Jerusalem again. Dobrynin said USSR knew of no intention to have early SC meeting on Jerusalem, which he reconfirmed after talking to Gromyko. I told him we nevertheless had indication some Arabs were thinking of this. I told Dobrynin it was our view that session must be completed tomorrow afternoon as agreed or at latest on Saturday morning. Dobrynin said he would inform Gromyko of this reaction.

In separate conversation Riad (UAR) told Sisco and Pedersen UAR del had sent to Cairo today two variant formulas given them by USSR, indicating one of them used “is expected” phrases in both paras and that second para was based on “independent national state” concept. Riad implied Fawzi thought text had some merit but Cairo would take decision. He also foresaw difficulty with Algerians and Syrians. We are uncertain exactly what texts he referring to, as conversation preceded agreement between Dobrynin and me as to what proper texts were.

In separate conversation Sov Couns Shevchenko told a Belgian Sovs could see no reason not to accept res calling for withdrawal of Israeli forces and recognition Israeli right to exist, both “without delay”. When queried whether Sovs would be prepared to break with Arabs in agreeing such res, Shevchenko reportedly made fuzzy reply, main point of which seemed to be they would not necessarily be breaking with all Arabs.

Nevertheless our assessment is proposals will be unacceptable to Arabs, that Sovs will not be willing to break with Arabs, and that we are most likely to end GA shortly with procedural res along lines being discussed by Finland, Sweden and Austria.

Fol are the two texts:

Version I

The GA,

Having examined the grave situation in the ME,

Considering that the crisis in the ME merits the attention of all member states and indeed requires the full participation of all members to achieve a just and lasting peace,

1. Declares that peace and final solutions to this problem can be achieved within the framework of the Charter of the UN;

2. Affirms the principle under the UN Charter of:

A. Without delay withdrawal by the parties to the conflict of their forces from territories occupied by them in keeping with the inadmissibility of the conquest of territory by war;

B. Without delay acknowledgment by all member states of the UN in the area that each enjoys the right to maintain an independent national state of its own and to live in peace and security, and renunciation of all claims and acts inconsistent therewith;

3. Requests the SC to continue examining the situation in the ME with a sense of urgency, working directly with the parties and utilizing a UN presence in order to achieve an appropriate and just solution of all aspects of the problem, in particular bringing to an end the long-deferred one of the refugees and guaranteeing freedom of transit through international waterways.

Version II

The GA,

Having examined the grave situation in the ME,

Considering that the crisis in the ME merits the attention of all member states and indeed requires the full participation of all members to achieve a just and lasting peace,

1. Declares that peace and final solutions to this problem can be achieved within the framework of the Charter of the UN;

2. Affirms the principle that conquest of territory by war is inadmissible under the UN Charter, and consequently that the withdrawal by the parties to the conflict to the positions they occupied before June 5, 1967 is expected;

3. Affirms likewise the principle that acknowledgment by all member states in the area that each of them enjoys the right to maintain an independent national state of its own and to live in peace and security and renunciation of all claims and acts inconsistent therewith are expected;

4. Requests the SC to continue examining the situation in the ME with a sense of urgency, working directly with the parties and utilizing a UN presence in order to achieve an appropriate and just solution of all aspects of the problem, in particular bringing to an end the long-deferred one of the refugees and guaranteeing freedom of transit through international waterways.

Goldberg

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, POL 27 ARAB–ISR/UN. Secret; Immediate; Exdis. Repeated Immediate to the White House and Moscow. Received on July 20 at 10:25 p.m. Passed to the White House at 11:10 p.m. Rostow sent a copy to the President on July 21 at 9:35 a.m. (Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Middle East Crisis)
2. Document 377.