Egypt Stalls with Answer on Israel’s Complaint on Cargo Seizure

The United Arab Republic is “in no hurry” to answer Israel’s Security Council complaint against confiscation of cargoes passing through the Suez Canal in non-Israeli bottoms. That was the assertion made to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency here today by Arab sources, including Egyptian.

Various “reasons” are given by Arab delegates here for the Cairo Government’s disposition to stall in regard to an answer to the Israel complaint, which was filed here a week ago in a letter to the President of the Security Council from Abba Eban, chairman of the Israel delegation.

One of the “reasons” is that Dr. Omar Loutfi, head of the UAR delegation, is now absent from the UN headquarters having gone to the Pacific on a mission concerning Samoa. Another “explanation” for Cairo’s “no hurry” posture is that Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold is still away. He is not scheduled to return from his month’s tour of many capitals, including Moscow, until next Sunday.

Arab sources shrugged off reports from London, alleging that the UAR delegation at the UN has been instructed to answer the Israel complaint by claiming Egypt’s so-called “right of belligerence” under a contention that Egypt and Israel are still in a “state of war.” These sources, insisting that the “state of war” does indeed exist, hold nevertheless that there is no reason for hurrying with an answer to Israel’s grievance.

The Arab sources did indicate, however, that when and if an answer is made by the Caino government, it may point to a desire by UAR President Gamal Abdel Nasser to pass on Israel’s claim for the right to freedom of navigation through the Suez Canal to the International Court of Justice at The Hague.

Ambassador Eban stated openly here last week that Israel sees no reason for taking the matter of cargo confiscations in the Suez to the world court. Israel, he pointed out, had already received a “verdict from a higher court,” meaning the Security Council, which ruled in 1951 that Egypt must allow the passage of shipping through the Suez Canal “wherever bound.”