News Brief

Mr. Hammarskjold evaded answering to a question as to whether Cairo has sent a reply to the UN Secretariat on Israel’s complaint regarding the seizure by Egypt of Israeli cargo on ships passing the Suez Canal. It is known here that no such reply has been received as yet,

The UN Secretary General was asked whether he might go to the Middle East himself to handle the issue on the spot. He replied that he is personally “in touch with Cairo” and added: “I don’t believe that personal, on-the-spot intervention is necessary. I am in touch through normal diplomatic channels. I hope this corner will be turned.”

Mr. Hammarskjold was also asked what he thought of the statement made recently by United Arab Republic President Gamal Abdel Nasser, who had disclosed that, some months ago, he had planned “decisive battle” against Israel. The UN Chief said such quotation was inaccurate, since Nasser had made it clear he would fight Israel only “if attacked” by Israel.

HAMMARSKJOLD’S VIEW CONSIDERED PRO-EGYPTIAN AND ANTI-ISRAEL

With regard to the passage of Israel’s cargo through the Suez Canal, Mr. Hammarskjold was reminded of the Security Council resolution of 1951 and other United Nations decisions which favor free passage. In the light of these documents, Mr. Hammarskjold’s referral to Egypt’s statement of 1957–which was unilateral–was considered as being pro-Egyptian and anti-Israel. The Secretary General has usually been noted for his meticulous observance of non-partisanship.

The 1951 Security Council resolution touches on the very issue raised here last month by Israel in regard to confiscation of cargoes. Those cargoes were shipped from Haifa to Ceylon, the Philippines, Japan and Hong Kong. The 1951 resolution stated categorically that it was concerned about denying freedom of passage through the Suez Canal to “nations at no time connected with the conflict in Palestine” who needed “valuable supplies for their economic reconstruction.”

In addition to the 1951 resolution, the Security Council also adopted, in 1956, six principles on operation of the Suez Canal. One declares: “There should be free and open transit through the Canal without discrimination, overt and covert–this covers both political and technical aspects.” Another of the principles holds: “The operation of the Canal should be insulated from the politics of any country.” Giving second place to those principles, and first place to the Egyptian declaration of 1957, seemed to observers here as anything but non-partisan behavior.