United Nations circles speculated today on the significance to be attached to remarks made yesterday at a Moscow cocktail party by one of the Soviet Union’s top-ranking figures on the right of Israel shipping to use the Suez Canal. Opinion was divided whether First Deputy Premier Anastas Mikoyan’s remarks were an indication of a Soviet policy change or were, as one correspondent said, “off-the-cuff remarks to make conversation.”
Mr. Mikoyan, in conversation with reporters at a legation cocktail party, expressed the view that all states should have equal rights to use the canal. Asked if he meant Israel as well, he replied, “Yes.” he was then quoted as having said that “for a long time they have not been able to use it and nothing has been done about it.” He added, however, that closing the canal to Israel was not too serious for that country because most of its trade was through the Mediterranean.
Only 36 hours earlier, Izvestia, the Soviet Government organ, had carried a savage attack on Israel, accusing it of seeking to launch aggressive war against the Arab States in collaboration with the Western Powers. The editorial warned Israel that it was “playing with fire” by conducting reprisal raids against Jordan.
DULLES THINKS SOVIET FAVORS ISRAEL’S USE OF CANAL
Secretary of State Dulles indicated his belief today that the Russians interpreted the Security Council action on the Suez Canal last week to mean that Israel ships should have the right of passage. He was asked at his press conference whether the Western Powers had sought and received any assurances from Egypt that the principle of free passage without any discrimination would be respected concerning Israel shipping through the Canal.
Mr. Dulles replied that “we received no such explicit assurances from Egypt. It was generally understood that the principle did cover all shipping, including that of Israel. I see that it is reported in the papers this morning that Mr. Mikoyan, at least on behalf of the Soviet Union, has expressed that was his understanding of the resolution, as it was of ours. But we did not seek and receive any explicit assurances of Egypt in that respect. But we do believe that it in effect constituted a reaffirmation by the Security Council of the 1951 decision.”
Jordan carried its anti-Israel attack here into the Suez Canal situation today by presenting a memorandum to the Security Council declaring that Israel has no status here in regard to the international waterway since the 1951 Security Council resolution dealing with freedom of passage through the canal was passed “within the context of the Palestine question.” Within that context, Jordan contended, Israel herself has defied Council resolutions and therefore has no other claims.
Yemen and Saudi Arabia also filed memoranda with the Council today regarding the Suez situation. All three of the Arab briefs supported Egypt’s position on the Suez Canal situation.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
