741.56374/3–2054: Telegram
No. 1303
The Ambassador in Egypt (Caffery) to the
Department of State1
niact
1137. Reference Department telegram 1115,2 following are my comments London’s 3991:
Overall, Eden’s proposal seems offer hopeful possibilities. In particular, concept total withdrawal British military personnel and use civilian contract labor in certain installations suggests possible way out of present impasse over “uniforms”. On other hand, Egyptians are likely take exception to number of arguments and propositions put forth by Eden, particularly if British offer is put up as completely “new deal”. In such case, Egyptians will probably claim United Kingdom really just serving up “warmed-over hash” with a lot of new demands thrown in. Large measure of agreement already reached might be completely undone.
Egyptian reaction might be quite different, however, if United Kingdom made new proposal within framework previous bilateral discussions. It would then be proposed as series of inter-related amendments to previous positions on specific points, such as “duration” (ten years), “availability” (formula including attack on Turkey), “period for withdrawal” (two years) and “base maintenance” (civilian contractors, instead of military technicians).
As regards details Eden’s proposal in present form, I anticipate Egyptians may raise objections along following lines:
- 1.
- Complete evacuation is Egypt’s “national right”. In compromising to extent of accepting British “technicians”, Egyptians have always insisted these could not have status in Egypt of British military (hence dispute over “uniforms”). Therefore, shift to genuine civilian “technicians” will not, from Egyptian viewpoint, entail such important victory in principle as to warrant great additional concessions by Egypt on other points. Government of Egypt will also be acutely aware that within two years in which British propose evacuate, 1936 Treaty will run out.
- 2.
- In line with foregoing, I anticipate Egyptians: (a) will reject any suggestion of 20 year agreement, although they might consider 10 year, and (b) will resent and reject any attempt inject commitment regarding Sudan Governor General’s commission into Suez base question and insist on dealing with Sudan question in separate [Page 2241] context. This does not preclude “gentlemen’s agreement” to keep “hands off”.
- 3.
- Government of Egypt will probably decline involve itself in any extensive or long-term contract commitments with foreign firms. British have in past insisted on principle of British technical control of War Department stores and equipment. With abandonment this principle and removal “considerable quantities of equipment” by British, Egyptians may be expected adopt attitude that need for foreign maintenance must be demonstrated in any particular instance. Since Egyptians already operate both military and civilian international air fields, doubt they would be impressed by Eden’s example (paragraph C, London’s 3991) of type of “key installations” to be maintained by foreign civil contractors. I also doubt Government of Egypt will readily agree to foreign government inspection of installations.
In summary, I find Eden’s initiative in seeking agreement at this time highly encouraging. I believe his proposal constitutes constructive approach toward attempting resolve present impasse. I think psychologically now is time to move in order to turn presently deteriorating situation into new channels equally desired by Egypt on one hand, and by United States and United Kingdom on other. It is evident that the obverse of Egyptian concern at prospect of Iraqi adherence to Turkish-Pakistan pact is desire not to “miss the boat. themselves.
I believe, therefore, that Eden’s proposal, with modifications, could lead to Egypt-Western cooperation in Middle East defense arrangements. I do not, however, think United States should again attempt to get directly involved in negotiations prior to agreement in principle between United Kingdom and Egypt. I should certainly recommend that United States be prepared accept Egyptian invitation to use base on any reasonable terms (these presumably would entail United States and United Kingdom aid to Egypt-Pakistan). I urge, however, exercise of greatest caution concerning United States involvement in proposed arrangements for civilian contract base maintenance. It appears to me that this idea has not been fully thought out and in its presently-proposed form may be quite unacceptable to Government of Egypt (see paragraph three above).
- Repeated priority to London as telegram 375.↩
- The Department in telegram 1115 to Cairo, Mar. 19, not printed, requested that the Embassy comment as soon as possible on telegram 3991 from London, Document 1298. (641.74/3–1754)↩