Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Arab-Israeli Dispute, January 1–July 26, 1956, Volume XV

373. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, May 28, 1956¹

Washington, May 28, 1956

SUBJECT

• Fifth Meeting of Ambassadorial Committee on Coordination of Arms Shipments to the Near East

PARTICIPANTS

• France
  • M. Maurice Couve de Murville, Ambassador
  • M. Charles Lucet, Minister
  • M. Francois de Laboulaye, Counselor
• United States
  • Mr. J. E. Coulson, Minister
  • Mr. Willie Morris, First Secretary
• Italy
  • Signor Manlio Brosio, Ambassador
  • Signor Giuseppe De Rege Thesauro, Counselor
• United States
  • Mr. Robert Murphy, G
  • Mr. William M. Rountree, NEA
  • Mr. Fraser Wilkins, NE
  • Mr. John W. Jones, WE
  • Mr. Ernest Lister, BNA
  • Mr. Aubrey Lippincott, MC
  • Mr. Richard B. Finn, G
  • Mr. Lewis Hoffacker, NE

The French Ambassador, who had requested the meeting, recalled that at the March 6, 1956, meeting of the Ambassadorial Committee,² the US and UK representatives had differed with the French view that some arms should be shipped to Israel to correct at least partially the arms imbalance arising from the Czech-Egyptian arms deal. He observed that the Italian representative seemed to stand between the “Anglo-Saxons” and the French on this point. Now, it seemed to the French Ambassador, there appeared to be a narrowing of the gap between the two positions since the US was not standing in the way of other friendly powers’ arming Israel and the UK and Italy were making some deliveries to Israel. It seems therefore that since there appears to be agreement on principle to ship some arms to Israel, the next step was to determine what the pattern is to be. As set forth in French Embassy note number 247 of May 18, 1956, as amended by note number 258 of May 23, 1956,³ the French Ambassador proposed the following preliminary steps towards establishing a quadripartite pattern of shipment:

“The military experts of NEACC are asked to present on the 4th of June, at the latest, to the Committee of Ambassadors:

(a) An evaluation of the respective forces and armaments of Israel, of the Arab states, especially of those adjacent to Israel, at the earliest possible date, and taking into account all the information received on deliveries originating in countries other than those represented on Committee.

(b) An evaluation, from the technical point of view, of the volume and nature of the military matériel which will be necessary to Israel for it to be in a position of defending itself if need be against aggression, without, however, giving it means capable of encouraging it to launch a preventive war.

(c) An inventory of available information regarding requests for armament made by Israel to the four powers, members of the Committee, and whenever possible, on the basis of available information, to other friendly countries.”

As a result of reasons put forth by Mr. Murphy, the Italian Ambassador, and Mr. Coulson, it was agreed that the military experts of NEACC would be asked to present by June 15, 1956, to the Committee of Ambassadors the land forces data called for in paragraph (a). Naval and air force data would be presented as soon as possible.

Mr. Coulson, on instructions, voiced strong opposition to paragraph (b) since his government has feared for some time that any quadripartite plan aimed at establishing a pattern of arms shipments to Israel would become known outside the Committee and would cause grave repercussions in the Arab world. For this reason, he could not accept any form of paragraph (b), which seemed designed to provide the first step toward just such a four power plan. The British Government prefers an “ad hoc trickle.” The French Ambassador rebutted that his Government hoped that on the basis of the study called for under paragraph (b), the Committee might consider what arms Israel might require and take steps to supply them in a “more systematic” manner than was possible through NEACC. Mr. Murphy pointed out that even if we had the requested data today, the Department would not be in a position to say whether certain arms should be supplied to Israel. Mr. Rountree commented on the almost impossible task of keeping the Arabs from taking strong exception to any arms shipments to Israel and underlined the inevitable argument that Israel’s defense should not be based solely on arms but on other means as well. The French Ambassador said that even if one government could not participate in subsequent shipments, its opinions on the subject would be taken into consideration. The discussion on paragraph (b) ended with a recognition that it was not acceptable to the Committee as a whole and would therefore be omitted.

At the Italian Ambassador’s suggestion, it was agreed to request the military sub-committee of NEACC to make an inventory of arms requests not only for Israel but for the Arab states, especially the bordering states. Paragraph (c) was amended accordingly. Mr. Murphy pointed out that it may not be possible for some members of the Committee to submit an inventory of all Israel requests. The U.S., for example, submits to NEACC only those orders which are approved within the US Government. Mr. Coulson indicated that his government did likewise. The French Ambassador had hoped that all arms requests, whether approved or not, would be laid before the Committee for consideration. Mr. Murphy said that this suggestion might be discussed at a later date.

At the Italian Ambassador’s suggestion, the initial sentence of the French proposal was amended to relate it directly to Article 8 of the Committee’s Terms of Reference.⁴

At the suggestion of the French Ambassador, “friendly” was omitted in paragraph (c).

The French Ambassador, who leaves tomorrow for a week’s consultation in Paris, said he looked forward to the next meeting of the Committee shortly after his return.

The amended instruction to the military sub-committee reads as follows:

“In accordance with Article 8 of the Committee’s Terms of Reference, the military experts of NEACC are asked to present to the Committee of Ambassadors as soon as possible:

(a) An evaluation of the relative military strengths of Israel and of the Arab states, especially the bordering states, taking into account all the information received on deliveries originating in countries other than those represented on the Committee. Land forces data should be presented by June 15, 1956.⁵ Naval and air force data should be presented as soon as possible thereafter.⁶

(b) An inventory of available information regarding requests for armament made by those states mentioned in paragraph (a) to the four powers, members of the Committee, and whenever possible, on the basis of available information, to other countries.”

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 784A.56/5–2856. Secret. Drafted by Hoffacker.
2. See Document 184.
3. See footnote 3, Document 369.
4. Article 8 of the Terms of Reference of the Ambassadorial Committee on Coordination of Arms Shipments to the Near East, approved at the fourth meeting of the Committee on March 6, called for an immediate and careful study “to establish a comparison between the relative military strengths of Israel and the Arab states, and especially the bordering states.” (Memorandum of conversation by Hoffacker, March 6; Department of State, Central Files, 784A.56/3–656)
5. At the June 12 meeting of the NEACC, the members agreed to approve NEACC D–9/4 entitled “Ground Weapons Strengths of Israel and the Arab States.” (Minutes of the NEACC meeting, June 12; Ibid., G/PM/MC Files: Lot 66 D 428, NEACC Minutes M–42 to M–72) NEACC D–9/4 is Ibid., NEACC Central Files. NEACC Documents, D–l to D–.
6. At the July 3 NEACC meeting, the members agreed that the military experts should meet to prepare reports on the air and naval strengths of the Arab states and Israel. (Ibid., NEACC Minutes M–42 to M–72)