Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The Near and Middle East, Volume IX, Part 2

780.022/4–1454: Telegram

No. 1557
The Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in Saudi Arabia¹

secret

Washington, April 14, 1954—4:06 p.m.

288. Following developments concerning Buraimi took place April 13:

(1) Department reviewed developments with British Embassy representative pointing out Aramco opposition relinquishment any concession territory in disputed area Trucial Coast and apparent Saudi misinterpretation of meaning paragraph c British proposal. Mention made of letters written by Aramco to British oil companies and contents summarized. Department deplored possible conflict between US and UK companies for Saudi oil and suggested in circumstances British consider withdrawing paragraph c or modifying it substantially in order there should be no misunderstanding concerning its meaning. It was also stated that in Department opinion suspension oil operations in disputed territory pending conclusion arbitration would be helpful. Failure take this step might well prompt SAG request Aramco also engage in operations in disputed areas.

British representative expressed understanding Department position and renewed assurances re lack of British intention in any way prejudice Aramco rights in disputed areas. He expressed belief Saudis understood perfectly well meaning British proposals. He agreed with Department that demarcation boundaries should not be based upon oil considerations and conceded extent of operations in disputed area probably not so great as to make suspension difficult. However he considered continuation oil operations of vital importance to British position in area and expressed view Saudis understood and generally accepted this proposition. He stated continuation oil operations essential to maintenance status quo, which HMG considers should not be disturbed during pre-arbitration period, and that any cessation would cause loss of prestige and consequent disaffection of tribes. In connection with these oil operations Embassy representative wondered if purpose Aramco letters to British companies was to protect themselves against possibility having compensate British companies for equipment and installations in areas over which Aramco may obtain concession after arbitration. Department indicated no such consideration had come to its attention.

Embassy representative forwarding Department views to Foreign Office. He stated Saudi reply to British proposals considered unsatisfactory but preparation fresh instructions for Pelham had been interrupted by news that King Saud while recently in Kuwait suggested in formal manner to Political Agent before Ruler that arbitration Buraimi dispute be abandoned and direct negotiations resumed. Foreign Office had instructed Burrows discuss question with King in Bahrein and state Foreign Office willing consider matter but would expect receive from King general proposals for settlement dispute which could form basis negotiations.

(2) Aramco representative handed Murphy letter to Secretary dated April 12 setting forth Aramco position and requesting United States support in order achieve discontinuance all oil activities in disputed area and establishment boundaries without delay. This letter accompanied by a memorandum of Aramco position for British Foreign Office (which Aramco requested Department transmit) together with copies letters to King Saud and to AIOC and PDTC Letter to King outlined Aramco position and denied Aramco collaboration in preparation British proposals and stated it advised by responsible officials US Government had no part in their preparation. (Department understands copies these documents being provided Embassies Jidda and London.)

Murphy stated Department would transmit memorandum to Foreign Office. He informed Aramco representative in general way Department’s conversation with British and reiterated our desire assist Aramco in any feasible manner.

Action requested: Embassy Jidda should inform Foreign Office Department has had discussion with British Embassy during which Department outlined Aramco position and SAG views as revealed to us and indicated our misgivings concerning paragraph c in light recent developments. Department suggested British re-examine paragraph c and consider modifications and clarifications which would meet existing situation. Department believes Ambassador should discuss recent approach King Saud to British only if Saudis raise it. For time being British desire we withhold this information from Aramco. However Embassy asking Foreign Office if it objects our mentioning matter to Aramco should it become pertinent in discussions.

Smith

1. Drafted by Fritzlan and cleared by BNA and NEA. Repeated to London and Dhahran.