Effect of Anglo-egyptian Pact on Israel Discussed in Commons

The question of how Israel’s interests will be affected by the Anglo-Egyptian agreement for the evacuation of the Suez Canal area by British troops was raised in both Houses of the British Parliament to day after Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden formally announced conclusion of a pact for British surrender of the Canal zone.

In the course of his statement in Commons, Mr. Eden reaffirmed the intention of the British Government “to abide by the terms of the tripartite declaration of May 2, 1950 relating to peace and stability between the Arab states and Israel. “

During the debate which followed, Herbert Morrison, Labor leader, asked whether Mr. Eden’s statement meant that provision had been made for the free transit through the Canal of Israel-bound shipping and whether the Foreign Secretary was satisfied that Israel’s interests were adequately safeguarded.

Mr. Eden replied that Israel-Egyptian relations were kept in mind by the government, but, he reminded Mr. Morrison, the situation had arisen as a result of the Arab-Israel war. “If it is the wish of the whole of this House to try to reduce tension between the Arab states and Israel I ask the House to judge if we shall better be able to use that influence if we have an agreement with Egypt or not, ” Mr. Eden continued.

Emanuel Shinwell, another Labor leader, asked whether the final agreement on the Suez evacuation would provide that Egypt would be supplied with arms and whether Mr. Eden would take note of the fact that the tripartite declaration stressed that no arms should be supplied to any of the Arab states without a firm assurance that they would not be used for aggression against another Middle East state. The Secretary replied that the Anglo-Egyptian pact said nothing about supplying Egypt with arms.

When Conservative MP Paul Williams asked whether the Egyptian Government had given any indication that it would re-establish freedom of the Canal, Mr. Eden again stated that the Israel-Egyptian situation had its roots in the war of 1948.

At this point Sidney Silverman, Laborite, reminded the Secretary that the war against Israel had been an act of unprovoked aggression and asked whether any discussion had taken place about the continuation of the Egyptian blockade of the Canal. Mr. Eden replied that “this is a subject which has been completely discussed on a number of occasions between us and the Egyptian Government. “

LORD READING EXPLAINS SITUATION IN HOUSE OF LORDS

In the House of Lords a similar debate took place with Laborite Lord Henderson asking Lord Reading, the government spokesman, whether the Suez Canal would be opened to Israeli traffic and whether the government had taken or would take steps to secure agreement from France and the United States–the other two parties to the three-power declaration-for an early public reaffirmation of the tripartite agreement.

Lord Reading replied that the Anglo-Egyptian agreement contemplates measures to contribute to the peace and security of the Middle East. “We all know that there are dangerous tensions in the Middle East largely because of the absence of peace between the Arab countries and Israel. Peaceful co-existence is as necessary there as in other parts of the world and while the process of procuring this may take time, I believe the opening of the Canal to Israeli shipping and the reaffirmation of the tripartite agreement will contribute to this.”