Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Arab-Israeli Dispute, 1955, Volume XIV

385. Telegram From the Embassy in the United Kingdom to the Department of State¹

London,November 4, 1955—7 p.m.

1861. Geneva for Secretary. Since Ambassador Aldrich dealt personally with the High Aswan Dam problem with the Prime Minister, he may well wish to comment on Cairo’s 868² following his return to London on Monday. In the meantime it may be helpful to the Department if the Embassy (which has not yet seen Ambassador Byroade’s report of his conversation with Kaissuny mentioned Cairo’s ref tel) were to recall certain previous interchanges on subject.

As indicated in Embtel 1632³ British had obviously not thought through matter when Eden made his original proposal (Embtels 1602⁴ and 1603⁵).

As far as Sudanese attitude on Nile waters is concerned, Embassy reported in para 2 of Embtel 1632 that British are well aware of need for agreement on Nile waters. Foreign Office official subsequent in conversation described such agreement as “essential”.

Furthermore, Department will recall from Embtels 667 August 22⁶ and 1165 September 22⁷ that British reluctance at that time to press Sudanese to accept Egyptian offer on division of waters was based partly on belief Egyptian offer unsatisfactory and partly on feeling it preferable postpone any approach pending further developments re future of Sudan. In view developments re latter subject reported Embtel 1835 November 3,⁸ it may be British would be willing reconsider matter.

Butterworth

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 645W.74322/11–455. Secret; Priority. Received at 4 p.m. Repeated to Cairo and Geneva.

2. Byroade informed the Department in telegram 868 on November 3 that he had a discussion the previous evening with Minister of Finance Kaissouni about the financing of the Aswan High Dam. According to Byroade,

   “British have been highly deceptive on this subject. As explained in longer message [telegram 879 from Cairo, November 5, not printed;ibid., 033.7411/11–555] consortium plans to go ahead in absence of Nile waters agreement, knowing this stumbling block for World Bank. Our efforts to urge British seek waters agreement, and our offers to be of assistance in this regard, have in past been brushed aside. It seems to me their lack of cooperation on waters agreement, coupled with fact they seek our assistance in arrangements which exclude American competition, gives us basis for fairly frank talk.” (Ibid., 874.2614/11–355)

3. Not printed. (Ibid., 645W.74322/10–2255)
4. Document 347.
5. Document 348.
6. See footnote 2, Document 204.
7. Document 298.
8. The Embassy in London reported in telegram 1835 that in view of Sudanese Prime Minister Azhari’s public statement of October 29 indicating that he favored a plebiscite to determine the Sudan’s political future, the British Foreign Office had instructed Ambassador Trevelyan in Cairo to inform Nasser that the British Government concurred in Egypt’s counterproposals for a plebiscite, a Constituent Assembly, and an International Commission. (Department of State, Central Files, 745W.00/ 11–355)