Office of the Historian

254. Memorandum From the Director of the Executive Secretariat (Howe) to the Under Secretary of State (Herter)1

Washington, March 29, 1957.

MEETING WITH THE SECRETARY ON SUEZ—MARCH 29

You should know the outcome of the Secretary’s meeting on Suez held this noon. Following are the results of this meeting:—

1.
The Secretary said that he would meet with the British at 11:30 a.m. tomorrow in his residence to discuss their views on the Egyptian draft memorandum. He noted that he had received their preliminary views (Tab A)2 during a meeting with Hoyer Millar.3 He told him that we thought we should respond to this apparently clear invitation to [Page 484] negotiate4 but that we felt we could not act as an agent for other interested countries, assuring him, however, that we would keep them informed of the progress of these negotiations. The Secretary said he did not plan to show the text of the draft declaration (Tab B)5 prepared by Mr. Phleger to the British on Saturday,6 but would rather discuss the matter generally, trying to obtain their views. A discussion of the wording of this declaration with them would only involve a delay which we cannot afford because of the very short time limit in this matter. The Egyptians have indicated that they plan to finalize their memorandum by April 2.
2.
Mr. Phleger is to telegraph Cairo the text of our draft declaration immediately because of its length and the mechanical problems involved in its transmission. The original thought of the meeting was that Ambassador Hare might discuss this declaration in very general terms with Fawzi but it was finally decided to ask him to delay any presentation until he had received final instructions. These instructions would be cabled Saturday afternoon after the meeting with the British and should reach Hare by Sunday morning. He is then to discuss the revised text of our draft declaration with either Fawzi or Nasser at his discretion.
3.
During this meeting several revisions of the draft declaration were recommended, the principal ones of which follow:—
a.
In either the initial paragraphs or in a preambular paragraph there is to be included a statement specifying recognition of the Six Principles and they are to be listed therein.
b.
Paragraph 6. (C) is to be revised to specify that the 25% of all gross receipts of the Canal are to be used for the capital expenditures and development of the Canal with the further provision that this portion of the receipts should be deposited in the Bank of International Settlement.
c.
Where the expression “Representation of the users” appears, the term “the users” is to be substituted so as to employ the phraseology appearing in the Security Council’s resolution embodying the Six Principles.
4.
EUR is to inform the French, Italians, Norwegians, and Dutch that the views on this matter which were requested of them yesterday evening would now be needed today since we plan to transmit our comments tomorrow because of the limitation of time.

H
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/3–2957. Confidential.↩
  2. Not printed. In the memorandum, the British Foreign Office stated its agreement with the Department of State view that the Egyptian draft constituted a unilateral approach, did not mention the six principles of October 13, and did not provide for the application of the principle of organized cooperation between the Egyptian authority and the users of the Canal. The British Foreign Office’s basic objection to the Egyptian draft was that it would substitute a unilateral instrument for a negotiated agreement; and consequently, the Egyptian Government would be free to amend the instrument at its will.↩
  3. A memorandum of the conversation of March 29 by Wilkins is in Department of State, Central Files, 974.7301/3–2957.↩
  4. On March 28, Department of State officials informed representatives of the Governments of France, Great Britain, Norway, Italy, and the Netherlands that the United States planned to submit views on the Egyptian memorandum to Egypt, because the United States believed that it could not refuse to respond to the Egyptian request for comments. (Telegram 6785 to London, March 28; ibid., 974.7301/3–2857)↩
  5. Not printed. Later on March 29, the Department of State transmitted a revised version of Phleger’s draft to the Embassy in Cairo in telegram 3238, infra. The original draft of the telegram instructed Hare to request an immediate appointment with Nasser to convey U.S. views on the Egyptian draft declaration.↩
  6. March 30.↩