890D.01/12–2045: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chargé in Lebanon (Mattison)
413. Following observations on Franco-Brit accords concerning evacuation of troops from Levant and similarity of aims in Middle East are for your info:
- (1)
- While statement in agreement that troops are to be withdrawn is welcomed Dept considers it disappointing that notwithstanding such statement and in spite of the protracted discussions and negotiations on this subject the agreement actually provides for retaining forces in Levant until UNO has arranged for organization collective security in that area.
- (2)
- It is possible to interpret agreement as recognition by Brit and French Govts of a special position of each of these Govts in countries in the Near East. Dept feels that concept of preferred position in independent countries of Near East is outmoded and that to perpetuate such concept would bring discredit upon Great Powers.
- (3)
- It is felt that if Great Powers should resort to private agreements to cooperate with each other in UNO for purpose of retaining whatever special interests are mutually recognized by them, UNO would come to be regarded as instrument of extension or perpetuation of imperialism.
- (4)
- Although Dept considers accord unsatisfactory in these respects, Brit Govt points out that, while aware our preference for immediate evacuation, French Govt holds very strong views on this point and it was no small achievement to have persuaded French to agree to evacuation by stages of whole of Levant beginning at very early date. Furthermore, Brit point [out], complete evacuation of Syria will take place independently of UNO discussion of Levant problem. Brit also note that the US and other interested Govts are free to take steps for hastening discussion of Levant problem in UNO and for bringing about evacuation of Lebanon at an early date. Brit agree this will be very desirable.
- (5)
- Brit insist that it would not be appropriate to compare withdrawal problem in Levant with that in Iran since the date of withdrawal from Iran is prescribed by treaty.
You may make it clear, in response to inquiries (reference Damascus’ 95 Dec 1887) that statements to effect that this Govt has given its approval to the agreement have no basis in fact. You may point out that we were not parties to the negotiations which led to their conclusion but are naturally hopeful that the agreements will in practice work out to the mutual satisfaction of all concerned.88
Sent Beirut for Damascus; repeated London, Paris, Moscow.
- Not printed.↩
- In a memorandum of December 21, 1945, to Acting Secretary Acheson and Assistant Secretary Dunn, the Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs reviewed the Franco-British accords and stated: “We are of the opinion that the agreement, far from solving the problem of the Levant, will give rise to fresh complications and to considerable acrimony and that eventually the whole thorny problem will be deposited in the lap of UNO.” (890D.01/12–345).↩