Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XX, Arab-Israeli Dispute, 1967–1968

102. Telegram From the White House to the U.S. Interests Section of the Spanish Embassy in the United Arab Republic ¹

Washington, March 5, 1968, 6:50 p.m.

389. Ref: Cairo’s 1413;² SecState 106083.³ Subject: US-UAR Relations.

1. We are informed that Attwood article will appear in March 19 issue of Look which to be on newsstands March 5. We inclined to regard this as taking care of “big lie” as far as resumption of relations concerned. Accordingly, we suggest you tell your contact informally we willing release joint statement any time GUAR wishes after March 5 provided you have satisfactory undertaking on compensation (para. 6 Deptel 106083). You authorized work out date of resumption subject final check with Department. We hope you can do this tactically so that GUAR informed we regard Nasser statement to Attwood adequate but so that initiative on setting date still up to them and we not cast as running after them.

2. For your background, in conversation with Deptoff February 23 Ghorbal asked when US-UAR relations could be resumed. Deptoff replied we willing to discuss resumption at any time. Ghorbal then inquired whether upon appearance Attwood article “we can tell Mohammed Riad and Don Bergus to go ahead.” He also showed Deptoff text proposed joint statement worked out by you and Mohammed (para. 10c Cairo tel 1413) and asked whether it has been approved. Deptoff said suggested timing appeared all right and he would check on status proposed joint statement. Deptoff subsequently informed Ghorbal we thought proposed statement acceptable. You may confirm to Mohammed.

3. Ghorbal raised question about level representation once relations resumed. We told him that while we plan to resume at ambassadorial level, we do not now envisage immediate exchange of ambassadors but plan to keep our representation at charge level initially.

4. Needless to say, forward movement on Jarring mission will facilitate problem resumption relations. February 27 comments by al-Zayyat on Eban’s statement that Israel willing enter into some sort negotiations with Arabs do not indicate much progress. We got more negative version of Riad-Jarring February 20 talks from Soviets here than that reported Cairo’s 1714.⁴ Summary Soviet version being forwarded septel. Additionally, Ghorbal’s summary similarly more somber. Department continues rely on position stated in para 3 Cairo’s 1713.⁵

1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, United Arab Republic, Vol. VI, Memos, 8/67–7/68. Secret; Nodis.
2. See footnote 4, Document 55.
3. Document 62.
4. In telegram 1714 from Cairo, February 22, Bergus provided a summary of a report on Jarring’s February 20 visit to Cairo, as given to him by Mohamed Riad. Jarring transmitted the Israeli position as he had received it from Eban but concluded that he did not feel the Israeli statement constituted acceptance of Resolution 242. According to Riad, Jarring was in a pessimistic mood and said he might ask to be relieved of his post. Riad indicated that the UAR was prepared to implement the resolution, but did not see the necessity of negotiations in Cyprus. The UAR would continue to negotiate with Israel through Jarring. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, POL 27 ARAB-ISR)
5. Paragraph 3 of telegram 1713 from Cairo, February 22, reported Mohamed Riad’s assurance that the UAR position was that it was prepared to discuss and negotiate everything through Jarring. (Ibid.)