Office of the Historian
  1. Home
  2. Historical Documents
  3. Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, The Near East and Africa, Volume VIII
  4. Document 996

811.7490G/10–2045: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman) to the Secretary of State

London, October 20, 1945—noon.
[Received October 21—11:25 a.m.]

11003. Having in mind the Secretary’s letters of August 22 to Bevin and Cadogan30 on direct radio telegraph circuits with Iraq and Saudi Arabia we arranged to see Under Secretary Ronald31 and Gallop, head of General Section of Foreign Office, on October 17 and in talking with them emphasized the various points brought out in memorandum which accompanied the Secretary’s letters. At conclusion of discussion it was agreed that statements made by Ronald which included suggestions for meeting our needs would be put in writing. This has been done in a communication dated October 18. A summary with pertinent excerpts follows:

1.
Iraq:
British understanding is that American Legation Baghdad approached Iraqi Government late last year re direct circuit and that Iraqi Government replied establishment of wireless communications with stations outside Iraq was last item on list proposed improvements in telecommunications and that Iraqi Government not interested in offer at present. When American Legation in Baghdad indicated to British Embassy there that Iraqi attitude was due to advice from Embassy British Chargé32 gave assurance British had not intervened in any way and Foreign Office regrets that we still appear to retain impression to contrary. Letter states specifically on this point: “at no time have the Iraqi Government asked our advice on this question nor have we at any time volunteered an opinion to them on the matter.” (In oral discussion of matter Ronald made it clear that this statement also carried with it absolute assurance that no attempt to dissuade Iraquis would be made in future.) Also pointed out that “the case of Iraq differs from that of Saudi Arabia in that Cable and Wireless [Page 1027] Limited or their subsidiaries enjoy no exclusive rights in the former countries.”33
2.
Saudi Arabia:
(a)
During last year we had advanced various reasons for asking Britain to take initiative in informing Saudi Arabian Government in favor of modification of Eastern Telegraph agreement to enable erection wireless telegraph station at Dhahran to be owned by Saudi Government and operated by American company in order to establish direct radio circuit with US. One of these arguments was slowness, expense and inadequacy of present facilities. Britain felt that if service deficient proper remedy was to improve it rather than modify agreement to company’s detriment and certain proposals put forward for meeting our requirements. “We had naturally deferred putting these into effect until we heard that they met your requirements. You had however maintained that nothing would satisfy you short of having your own direct circuit.”
(b)
“While in general [we agreed with your dislike of]34 monopolies, we were opposed in principle to the multiplication of direct circuits except where traffic could be shown to justify them on the ground that they would involve the wasteful and uneconomical use of equipment and also of frequencies in an already overcrowded frequency spectrum. There was a clear divergence of views between us as to the quantity of traffic which Saudi Arabia could be expected to offer in the next 5 or 10 years and all our investigations reaffirmed our belief that it was unlikely that there would within a measurable time be room for two systems.”
(c)
Re statement in our memo that “the Saudi Arabian Government has given notice of its desire to modify an existing exclusive contract which it had entered into with a private British company.” Letter of Foreign Office states “if this had been the case there would have been nothing to discuss for it is within the right of the Saudi Arabian Government having given due notice at the correct time to modify the agreement. They do not require our consent. All that the Saudi Arabian Government have in fact done was by the material date of the 1st December 1944 to reserve the right to modify the concession if and when they should desire to do so. The Saudi Arabian [Page 1028] Government have at no time informed us that they wish to modify the concession in any particular sense. They have however expressed the hope that the British and US Governments should reach an agreed view on the question at issue which would spare them the difficulty and embarrassment of choosing between our two conflicting viewpoints.”
(d)
After foregoing review letter concludes as follows: “In brief therefore we feel that our attitude in this matter has throughout been entirely reasonable. This question has, however, given rise to a volume of correspondence and apparently engendered feelings which appear to us quite out of proportion to its intrinsic importance, and we should not wish it to remain unsettled and thus risk being magnified out of its true perspective. We are therefore prepared, while maintaining our views of principle, to instruct our Minister at Jidda to inform the Saudi Arabian Government that he understands that your Government are anxious that the Saudi Arabian Government should modify their agreement with the Eastern Telegraph Company in such a way as to permit of the erection and operation by an American company of a wireless telegraph station to be the property of the Saudi Arabian Government for the exclusive purpose of operating a direct wireless circuit between Saudi Arabia and US, and that if the Saudi Arabian Government wish to avail themselves of his offer our Government would not wish the agreement with the Eastern Telegraph Company to stand in their way. In this connection I should mention that De Wolf35 informed MacLean, of our Embassy Washington, on 11 January that the State Department were quite prepared to see the American installed transmitter in Saudi Arabia confined to the Saudi Arabia–US circuit leaving the Eastern Telegraph Company in possession of all other traffic. As soon as we hear from you that the State Department are sending appropriate instructions to your Minister at Jidda we will also instruct our Minister to concert with yours in order that he may make the appropriate communication to the Saudi Arabian Government.” By way of comment I may say that, although Ronald did not admit of any weakness in British position in this matter throughout our long discussion, he appeared on other hand to be genuinely concerned by unfortunate consequences which might result from continued misunderstanding and to be intent on finding a ground for definite agreement even though this might necessitate basic concession on British side. In circumstances it is suggested that, in order to take advantage of this new and apparently conciliatory attitude of officials now handling this matter in Foreign Office, the Embassy be advised whether explanations and assurances given by Ronald meet our requirements.

Full text of Foreign Office letter by airgram.

Sent Department as 11003; repeated Baghdad as 19 and Jidda as 9.

Gallman
  1. Letter to Sir Alexander Cadogan not printed; see footnote 22, p. 1023.↩
  2. Nigel B. Ronald, Superintending Under Secretary, General Department, British Foreign Office.↩
  3. Geoffrey H. Thompson.↩
  4. The Department in telegram 295, October 2, 1945, had directed that further representations be made to the Iraqi Government concerning a direct radiotelegraph circuit between the United States and Iraq (811.7490G/10–245). In despatch 953, November 3, 1945, Baghdad notified the Department of receipt of a note dated October 31 from the Iraqi Foreign Office which stated that the Iraqi Government had “decided upon the erection of a short wave radio transmitting station suitable for direct communication with the United States” (811.7490G/11–345). The Department in telegram 357, December 4, 1945, thereupon requested that American companies be permitted to submit bids for the necessary equipment on an impartial basis (811.7490G/11–345). Baghdad notified the Department in telegram 483, December 10, 1945, that the Iraqi Government would not solicit bids as steps had already been taken to order the equipment in the United Kingdom (811.7490G/12–1045).↩
  5. Bracketed insertion based on full text of Foreign Office letter transmitted to the Department in airgram A–1145, October 20, 1945, not printed.↩
  6. Francis Colt de Wolf, Chief of the Telecommunications Division.↩