Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXI, Near East Region; Arabian Peninsula

88. Telegram From the Department of State to the Consulate in Aden¹

Washington, March 15, 1967, 12:14 p.m.

155272. Aden 1168.²

1. Dept appreciates detailed analysis reftel. There is no question USG providing security commitment to new South Arabian state. As reftel indicates, protection South Arabia is matter for SAFG with such military and financial help as British may choose to provide. USG role must perforce be secondary, though we planning do what we can encourage forces moderation and stability.

2. Re paras 6 and 17 of reftel, Secretary’s letter to Javits included no “warning” to UAR nor was it basis NYT item which prompted Farid’s elation (London 7228).³ Guidance re latter article was contained State Circular 149571,⁴ while info re letter to Javits included in State 141188,⁵ both of which repeated Aden.⁶

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967-69, POL 19 ADEN. Secret; Noforn. Drafted and approved by Brewer; cleared by Judd, Bergus, Wolle, and by Davies in substance. Repeated to London, Cairo, Sanaa, USUN, Amman, Athens, Baghdad, Beirut, Damascus, Jidda, Kuwait, Moscow, Dhahran, CINCMEAFSA, and Tel Aviv.
2. In telegram 1168 from Aden, March 14, Jones reported that as the evacuation deadline approached, pressure was building for U.S. involvement in the defense of an independent South Arabian state. He argued that U.S. national interest dictated the avoidance of any security commitment or even the semblance thereof. (Ibid.)
3. Telegram 7228 from London, March 8, reported that Farid was elated that The New York Times had interpreted the Secretary’s letter to Senator Javits as a “warning” to the UAR. (Ibid.)
4. Circular telegram 149571, March 6, discussed the March 4 New York Times story that reported the U.S. Government had “issued what appeared to be a warning to UAR and other outside powers not to attempt armed intervention in troubled South Arabian Federation” and that the State Department had made a “brief public statement” linking President Kennedy’s May 8, 1963, press conference remarks opposing the use or threat of force in the Near East to the current situation in South Arabia. The telegram noted that the Department spokesman declined to speculate whether his remarks should be interpreted as an extension of Kennedy’s statement to South Arabia. If queried, posts were to state that the Department had merely restated the general principle of U.S. Government opposition to use or threat of force in the area and there was no reason to characterize this response as a “warning” to any party or in any sense a new policy statement. (Ibid.)
5. Telegram 141188 to London, February 21, stated that Rusk’s letter to Javits did not contain a warning to the UAR regarding Aden. (Ibid.)
6. Printed from an unsigned copy. In telegram 1207 from Aden, March 23, Jones reported that he had told Farid The New York Times had misconstrued remarks by a Department official and guidance from Washington made it clear that the U.S. Government had issued no warnings and that its Near East policy was unchanged. (Ibid.)