Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Arab-Israeli Dispute; United Arab Republic; North Africa, Volume XIII

57. Letter From the Israeli Ambassador (Eban) to the Under Secretary of State (Herter)¹

Washington, December 12, 1958

Dear Secretary Herter: A conversation held yesterday by the Counsellor of this Embassy in the United Nations Division of the Department of State² has given rise to our apprehension that we have not yet achieved full understanding with the United States on the urgent need for action by the Security Council on Israel’s current complaint against Syria.

United Nations representatives and observers in their official reports have attested the following facts:

(1) Syrian forces opened the firing which led to the engagement of December 3 (Para. 3 of General von Horn’s Report).³

(2) Whereas Israel’s response came subsequently and was limited in scope (Para. 5 of the above-mentioned Report), Syrian forces developed the engagement into a bombardment of seven villages along a front of seventeen kilometers and a depth of five kilometers. They fired some 800 shells into seven Israel villages. The absence of a massive casualty list is fortunate and, indeed, almost miraculous.

I repeat that all the above facts are confirmed by United Nations Reports.

The essence of our complaint relates to the artillery bombardment. On no frontier in the world would the despatch of 800 shells from the territory of one State into the territory of another do anything but a grave and sensational event, no matter what the attending circumstances might have been. In this case, the chief attending circumstance is the confirmed fact of Syrian responsibility both for starting the incident, and for enlarging it so alarmingly in intensity and range.

Despite the enormous gravity of the artillery bombardment, my Government decided to limit its action to an appeal to the Security Council. We recall the addresses of President Eisenhower in February 1957 and of Secretary Dulles in November 1956⁴ and subsequently in which the United States expressed its intention to support greater vigilance and resolution by the United Nations in curbing violations of the peace before they developed into major crises. I also recall the Secretary’s recent emphasis on the reliance which Israel, and other small countries, can place in the United States.

In these circumstances the effect in Israel and in the Arab world can well be imagined if an artillery bombardment of such scope and range were to be brought to the United Nations without encountering an emphatic American statement that such warlike acts must be renounced. The bombardment in question went far beyond the dimensions of a frontier skirmish. Any reserve by the United States would seriously undermine the policy of my Government in placing its reliance on the United Nations and its leading members. If the absence of a direct response by Israel were now followed by evidence of lack of concern by the United States, the likelihood of a renewed bombardment would be substantially increased; and in these circumstances the results would not fail to be very grave.

We have found amongst other members of the Security Council, as well as in our talks with the Secretary General, an awareness of the need to speak out clearly against the December 3 bombardment, as having been unjustified in any circumstances. I am very perplexed at not having yet heard any such expression of intention on behalf of the United States.

The prospect of preventing large-scale military assaults by international deterrence, rather than by direct self-defense, is definitely at issue here. The help of the United States is acutely needed if such assaults are to be deterred; and if the restraint and peaceful recourse adopted by my Government after the bombardment of last Wednesday are to be vindicated, as I hope they will.

The Security Council is due to meet on Monday or Tuesday of next week.⁵ But I frankly fear that much harm will be done unless unconditional United States opposition to the bombardment of civilian settlements by artillery is expressed at an early stage. It is for this reason that I am addressing you in concern and anticipation today.

I enclose an analysis of recent United Nations reports, the inspection reports on the position in Israel villages and relevant photographs.⁶

Yours very sincerely,⁷

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 684A.86B/12–1258. No classification marking. Attached to a memorandum of a conversation between Meroz and Rockwell, December 12. Meroz remarked at the time he gave the letter to Rockwell that it had been written before Baxter’s démarche in Tel Aviv; see supra. Eban also sent a copy of the letter to Lodge with an appeal for a definitive statement by the United States against artillery bombardments of peaceful villages. (Telegram 454 from USUN, December 13; Department of State, Central Files, 330/12–1358)
2. See footnote 4, supra.
3. See footnote 6, supra.
4. For text of President Eisenhower’s address to the Nation, February 20, 1957, see Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957, pp. 147–156. For Dulles’ address to the U.N. General Assembly, November 1, 1956, see Department of State Bulletin, November 12, 1956, pp. 751–755.
5. See infra.
6. Not found.
7. Printed from an unsigned copy.