My dear Pearson,
I am taking advantage of the presence in Paris (on his way
home) of the Israeli Minister in Washington, Mr Reuven Shiloah, to ask him to
transmit to you this letter.
I understand that in connection with the NATO meeting
matters of the Middle East are likely to come up for consideration. Mr Shiloah
is particularly well informed on the affairs of our area and I hope that
despite what is bound to be a very crowded schedule you may nevertheless find
it possible to see him. At the same time my purpose in sending you this
personal word is to express to you in more direct fashion something of the
anxieties which continue to press upon us as a result of recent developments,
and of which you will have heard in greater detail from [Israel’s Ambassador in
Ottawa, Michael] Comay.
The Czech-Egyptian arms deal was concluded last September.
The gravity of the threat to the peace of the Middle East and to Israel’s very
existence implicit in this massive addition to the military strength of Egypt
has increased with every month that passes. Neither the Hammarskjöld mission
nor the recent Russian declaration have in any degree served to mitigate the
danger. We have cooperated and will continue to cooperate to the full with the
Secretary General. But any temporary relaxation of tension on the borders as a
result of local technical arrangements (and already there have been gross
breaches by the Egyptians of their renewed cease-fire undertaking) cannot and
does not affect the basic fact that Colonel Nasser is day by day, week by week,
and month by month training his army, his air force and his navy in the use of
his new equipment, is coordinating and organising under Egyptian command the
neighbouring Arab states for a united hostile front against Israel, and is
developing among his people a war psychology the only meaning and purpose of
which is an assault on Israel at some time to be decided by himself.
Our plea for arms of a quality and in quantity sufficient
to meet this threat was first addressed to the Government of the United States
in October last. That request was based inter alia on the conviction that we
and the Western Powers have a common vital interest in the maintenance of peace
in our area and, secondly, that peace can be assured only by putting Israel in
such a posture of defence that any assault upon it can be effectively countered,
and would at the least be extremely hazardous to the aggressor.
More than six months passed without any positive response
on the part of the United States. At one stage we were urged to rely on that
part of the 1950 Tripartite Declaration under which the United States, the UK
and France undertook to prevent and resist aggression in our area. To-day it is
clear that that undertaking is hedged in with such reservations that it would
be a slender reed indeed on which to stake the lives of the people of Israel
and the future of our State. Subsequent advice to place our faith at the moment
of crisis in action to be taken by the United Nations, could hardly be taken
seriously by our people which has not forgotten that only by a hair breath and
as a result of its own supreme exertions did it avoid annihilation at a time
when the United Nations stood passively by [in 1948] in failure to support its
own [partition] resolution of a few months before [i.e., November 29, 1947]. We
are also acutely aware of the paralysis of action implicit to-day in the ever
present threat of a Russian veto in the Security Council.
A few weeks ago we were informed by the Government of the
United States that while they considered our fears warranted and our request
for defensive arms, and in particular fighter planes, fully justified they
would prefer us to try to obtain them from countries other than the United
States.
I do not need to tell you what these months of delay have
meant to us in terms of the risks run and anguish felt. For the moment,
however, there was no alternative but to turn elsewhere and we applied to the
French and to yourselves. The French have made available to us a dozen Mysteres
which are important and deeply appreciated, but which fall far short of our
minimal needs as against the many scores of Mig fighters and Ilyushin bombers
received by Egypt from its Communist suppliers. So far as Canada is concerned
we are still hoping for early and affirmative action in response to our request
for twenty-four F 86's.
In the meantime the sands are running out. Nasser’s
megalomaniac objectives of Arab Empire in which the elimination of Israel is a
central and essential element remain unchanged. The withholding of arms from
Israel far from serving to moderate Nasser’s forward drive has acted as a
stimulus and an encouragement to him to proceed with his far-reaching designs
in the belief that he can do so with relative impunity. Is the Western world
really so blind as to find again a thousand reasons for refusing to do what it
knows to be right in the vain hope of gaining some fresh easement at the hands
of the potential aggressor? We cannot believe it. In this hour we appeal
again to the democracies of the West. And in particular I turn to you, whose
friendship for Israel has not faltered and who played so imaginative and
constructive a part in the decisive days of November 1947, with a personal plea
to use your influence in enabling Israel to meet this dire threat and thereby
to assure the peace of the Middle East and possibly much more.
With
kind regards,
SOURCE: Draft (FA/947) which Reuven Shiloah was to have transmitted to
Canada’s Secretary of State for External Affairs, Lester B. Pearson. A
handwritten Hebrew note at the top of the letter indicates it was “not sent.” ISA FM 130.02/2448/6-i.
