684A.85/8–354: Telegram
No. 848
The Chargé in Israel (Russell) to the Department of State
125. Moshe Keren, former Counselor Israeli Embassy Washington, presently chief editorial writer Haaretz, yesterday in reply my question as to danger of Israel outbreak said he does not believe serious danger of deliberate aggression by Israel. Believes as result present policy impasse between Israeli Government and Western Powers, sense of insecurity, frustration, and ill-will toward major powers, and particularly US likely to increase and foresees continuation present uneasy border relations between Israel and neighbors but, in absence of “a Qibya in reverse”, does not believe Israeli Government will resort to outburst”.
Keren said Ben Gurion has stated, and Keren believes, he will not return as Prime Minster as long as present party system continues with its innumerable squabbles and ability minority parties to hold up government action, and Keren believes no likelihood of party system change in near future. While Keren bitterly disappointed at Sharett’s unwillingness to change “present obstructive and sterile policy toward US” he believes Sharett has broad political support within government and is generally successful in resolving inter-party differences. Keren does not believe Lavon has sufficient backing to take over government.
Israel will undoubtedly continue its policy of reacting in strength to Arab border infringements. There is danger this may lead to Arab counter-reaction which would serve as excuse for Israel attack. IDF and supporting “activist” group have capability of promoting this kind of development and in this way could outmaneuver more moderate Sharett faction. Also, Francis Offner, Israeli Christian Science Monitor correspondent, believes there is element of danger in facet in Israeli character which may lead them, in face of a deteriorating international position, to gamble everything on a dramatic, desperate move to assert dominance even though it may be demonstrably against their best interest.
[Page 1598]Embassy comment: Despite negative response to tripartite border proposals (Embtel 107)1 and to Chargé’s suggestions (Embtel 108),2 Embassy will, if Department approves, emphasize in discussions with Israel Government officials and friends of Israel:
- (a)
- That present Israel Government policy is contraproductive of Israel’s avowed long-term objectives;
- (b)
- That there is an alternative cooperative relationship which could assure Israel’s security and strengthen its role in free world;
- (c)
- That Israel Government has regularly in past year or two tripped up US in its efforts to deal with area problems and lessen area tensions, notably on Jerusalem problem (by sudden move of Foreign Ministry), obtaining Jordanian cooperation in dealing with border problem (by Qibya), strengthening UN (by withdrawing from Israel–Jordan MAC), developing Jordan Valley plan (by flouting UN on Banat Yaacov), and strengthening area security through obtaining Arab cooperation (by policy of converting isolated border firings into major engagements). During next few months, following Suez agreement and as US program of aid to Egypt is getting underway, also following assumption of responsibilities by new Chief of Staff of UNTSO, we will have best opportunity of obtaining Egypt’s cooperation in giving leadership to improvement of relations with Israel. We hope that Israel will consider most carefully whether its response to tripartite proposals, attitude re Banat Yaacov, position re area security, absence from Israel–Jordan MAC, statements of its leaders, its border policies, and other actions are most conducive to the success of our effort, and what courses of action will remain available if this effort fails.3
- Document 846.↩
- Supra.↩
- On Aug. 9, the Department authorized the Embassy to develop the points contained in its telegram 125 in conversation with Israeli officials. (Telegram 77 to Tel Aviv, Aug. 9, 8:19 p.m.; 784A.5/8–954)↩