172. Memorandum of a Conversation Between the British Chargé (Coulson) and the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs (Rountree), Department of State, Washington, September 5, 19561
SUBJECT
- (1) New Approach to Suez Canal Problem; (2) Visit Between the Kings of Iraq and Saudi Arabia
1) Mr. Coulson called on Mr. Rountree at the former’s request to obtain more information on the Secretary’s new suggestion for an approach to the Suez Canal problem. Mr. Rountree gave the British Chargé the substance of the message the Secretary sent to Mr. Henderson yesterday2 on this matter, explaining that the Secretary, when he discussed the subject with Mr. Coulson yesterday, had only given the general lines of his idea since he did not wish to create the impression that all the details had been worked out. It would, of course, be necessary to give the most careful scrutiny to these details should the general idea be found to have merit.
After Mr. Rountree had finished summarizing the telegram under reference, Mr. Coulson commented that one very important point had been cleared up for him—the question of whether the new approach would be carried out by the signatories of the 1888 Convention or by the majority users of the Canal. He thought that the idea of a proclamation by the users would be very helpful. Mr. Rountree said that if you could get the relatively few nations who control 95% of the shipping going through the Canal to agree to a new international arrangement for passage through Suez, a very heavy onus would fall upon those powers representing the minority users who might choose not to go along with the new system.
Mr. Coulson then raised the question of whether force would be required to set up the new arrangement. Mr. Rountree replied that essentially the new idea was a fall-back position of the type which people sometimes have to have but hope they will not be required to use. If, however, you formulate a fall-back position you have to be ready to carry it out if necessary. The Secretary’s idea was that what was proposed was within the rights of the users of the Canal under the 1888 Treaty, and opposition to it would place Egypt in the position of going against the Treaty.
[Page 375]The British Chargé then said that one of the difficulties would be that it would be hard to carry out the new approach in time, in view of the likelihood that the Five-Nation Committee would probably soon end its work in Cairo. In this connection Mr. Rountree commented that Nasser’s response to the initial presentation by Mr. Menzies had not been good.
Mr. Coulson said that the Foreign Office had acknowledged the receipt of his message sent after talking with the Secretary yesterday. It had commented that the proposal was very interesting and that it was seeking the reaction of the various Government entities concerned with this problem. Further comment would shortly be sent.
[Here follows discussion of unrelated subjects.]
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/9–556. Top Secret. Drafted by Stuart W. Rockwell, Deputy Director of the Office of Near Eastern Affairs, on September 6 and Rountree on September 8.↩
- Reference is to telegram 640, Document 170.↩