On the eve of the opening here of the 22-nation conference on the Suez Canal issue, it was noted today that of all the countries participating in the parley, only France has thus far clearly and publicly indicated that she definitely includes Israel when she insists that the canal should be free for the passage of ships of all nations.
British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd, in a broadcast to the nation yesterday on Suez, failed to mention Israel at all. This made him the third important Commonwealth leader to disregard Israel in this connection. The other two, who also spoke to the nation within the last week, are Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden and Australian Prime Minister Robert G. Menzies.
The overriding fear of the Israelis is that some agreement may be reached in which the Western Powers would accept continuance of Egypt’s anti-Israel blockade. British and American spokesmen reply with meaningless verbalisms when they are asked whether they visualize Israel’s freedom of use of the canal being covered by any international agreement. However, Britain has informed Israel that London has Jerusalem’s interests in mind.
In a television interview, Labor Party leader Hugh Gaitskell called for specific guarantees of freedom of the canal for Israel. At one point, he opposed the use of force by Britain in connection with the Suez Canal situation, insisting that the only conditions under which force would be justified would be in defense of Israel if Egypt attacked.
As the Year Turns, Support the Journalism You Trust. JTA covers the stories shaping Jewish life around the world — with the depth this moment calls for. As you reflect on the year ahead, consider a gift that keeps independent Jewish journalism strong.
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.
