Minutes of the Discussions of Cdes. L.I. Brezhnev, A.N. Kosygin, and N.V. Podgorny with UAR President Nasser, 5 July 1968

Secret Copy Nº 2

TRANSCRIPT OF NEGOTIATIONS OF CDES. L.I. BREZHNEV, A.N. KOSYGIN AND N.V. PODGORNY WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.A.R., NASSER. 

5 July, 1968

L.I. Brezhnev. At the beginning of our conversation, our esteemed friend Mr. President, our esteemed guests, we would like to once again cordially welcome you and express our satisfaction with your arrival in the Soviet Union. We are aware that we have serious business discussions ahead of us, and hope that your visit and our discussions will be useful and fruitful. We would imagine that the main topic of our talks will be conversations about Soviet-Arab friendship and what needs to be done to develop it further. We also intend to consult with you about what needs to be done to eliminate the consequences of Israeli aggression, and about how to fight against the imperialist threat. We believe that our conversations should be held in the atmosphere of complete frankness and provide a deep comprehensive approach to the issues under discussion. We cannot complain about the lack of information, since we get enough information from Cairo. You are also familiar with all our efforts and the actions that we are taking in agreement with you to [help you] solve the problems you face. Nevertheless, we cannot know all the subtleties and complexities of the situation in the Middle East to the extent that you know. If you have no objection, we would like you to present your assessment of the situation in the Middle East with the focus on those issues that you would like us to assist you with. I think that doing it in this manner will facilitate our conversations in the future. I also want to add that we have a tradition according to which we let our guests speak first.

Nasser. Mr. Brezhnev, friends, please allow me first of all to thank you for the invitation to visit the Soviet Union and to express our great joy at the meeting with the Soviet leaders in Moscow. I also take this opportunity to assure you that the Egyptian people highly value their friendship with the Soviet Union. We highly appreciate the position of the Soviet Union in supporting our struggle in the days of the most difficult trials. 

We attach great importance to our meeting with the Soviet leaders, since it gives us the opportunity to openly discuss all the issues that Cde. Brezhnev spoke about. Undoubtedly, our country is now going through difficult times; in essence, this can be called a crisis state, since part of the Arab territory is occupied by the enemy. We believe that this occupation was the result of the determination of the Arab peoples to continue, despite everything, an independent policy of struggle against imperialism. If Cde. Brezhnev does not mind, I can talk about our general assessment of the situation in the Middle East region and then move on to the main problem –the problem of eliminating the consequences of Israeli aggression.

L.I. Brezhnev. Please, Mr. President.

Nasser. We sincerely strive to unite the political, military, economic and other efforts of all Arab countries in the struggle against imperialism. However, unfortunately, there are serious differences between the Arab countries. Such countries as Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Libya, and, to a lesser extent, Morocco, as you know, are connected with the West and with the United States in the first place. Therefore, these countries avoid entering into direct confrontation with the United States by all means. As for the Syrians, they refuse to maintain any contact or cooperate with the so-called reactionary Arab states. For our part, at this time we try not to call Arab countries progressive or reactionary, considering that by their nature and essence all Arab peoples are progressive. Any attacks against reactionary governments push them to take a negative stance towards the U.A.R. in particular, and towards the solution of the problem of eliminating the consequences of Israeli aggression in general. As you know, the peoples of all Arab countries are resolutely opposed to Israel and are against imperialism. This was once again confirmed in the first days of the Israeli aggression on 5 June last year, when literally the entire Arab world was overwhelmed by a powerful demonstration of protest against Israeli aggression, moreover the reaction of the people in the reactionary countries was in some cases even stronger. For example, the most grandiose popular protests took place in Tunisia, which shows that the peoples of all Arab countries are striving for progress and Independence. 

This is the general situation in the Arab world.

Another part of this issue is the position of countries in the immediate vicinity of Israel: U.A.R. representing the western front, and Syria, Jordan and Iraq representing the eastern front. The rest of the Arab countries can be considered as the second tier. Recently, we have managed to facilitate signing of an agreement on the coordination of military actions between Syria and Iraq, with the view of involving Jordan in this, since Syria still refuses to have any sort of direct cooperation with Jordan. We managed to reach a compromise agreement in accordance with which a joint command is being created, headed by representatives of Iraq, who will maintain contacts with both the Syrians and the Jordanians. The Syrians agreed with the idea of ​​coordinating military efforts in this format and with the creation of the so-called Eastern Military Command which will include military units of Iraq, Syria and Jordan.

A.N. Kosygin. Did the Jordanians also agree to this proposal?

Nasser. The Jordanians have also given their consent, since in accordance with this proposal, Iraqi troops will be stationed in Jordan. The Jordanians are very interested in the arrival of these troops because their military is very weak and they have not yet made up for their losses incurred during the Israeli aggression. The U.S. promised to supply Jordan with planes. However, as we know, similar aircraft promised by the U.S. to Israel have already been delivered to the latter, and the Jordanians are still being fed with promises.

A.N. Kosygin. Have you publicized any information related to the creation of the joint command?

Nasser. We did not publish any information about reaching an agreement on coordinating military efforts of the Arab countries. This agreement was reached as a result of negotiations held by the Minister of Defense of the U.A.R. in Syria and Iraq, as well as as a result of subsequent negotiations by the Minister of Defense of Syria in Baghdad. We initially thought of publishing some information on this issue, bearing in mind that reaching any agreement on coordinating military efforts between Arab countries may to some degree influence or intimidate Israel. However, we took into account another factor, namely that such an agreement could provoke Israel to occupy the rest of Jordan. As you know, due to the weakness of Jordan, the Israelis can at any time cross over to the East Bank of Jordan and completely isolate Jordan from Syria. In this case, any possibility of any cooperation between Syria and Jordan will be eliminated. The command I mentioned has been in operation for about a month now, but things are still moving slowly as the Syrians continue to display reservation with respect to the idea of ​​establishing a more comprehensive cooperation with Jordan. We assumed from the start that certain difficulties would arise in this matter, and therefore we believe that the time factor will be of great importance.

A.N. Kosygin. However, as you know, Iraqi troops are already in Jordan.

Nasser. Currently, there are three separate brigades of Iraqi troops in Jordan. During the visit of the U.A.R. Minister of Defense to Iraq an agreement was reached to send an additional two divisions and a certain number of Iraqi aircraft to Jordan, meaning that they will be based on Syrian airfields, since there are currently no airfields in Jordan suitable for their placement. It is assumed that the Jordanians will build an airfield, to which these aircraft will later be relocated.

Jordan is the weakest, the most vulnerable point. They essentially have no military forces or equipment.  In the period after 5 June they have received a small number of Centurion tanks from Iraq. We also provided a small amount of equipment to Jordan. But this does not solve the problem. 

As for the defense situation in the Egyptian sector of the front, we believe that over the past year, the Egyptian forces have fully prepared for defense.  We were able to achieve progress in all areas related to increasing the combat capability of our army. Thanks to the great help that the Soviet Union provided to us which almost completely compensated for our losses in equipment, the Egyptian Armed Forces confidently got on their feet. According to our assessment, the Syrian troops are also in good shape. As I already said, the most serious situation is developing in Jordan. In a conversation with King Hussein, I advised him to maintain friendship with the United States and see what would come of it. Hussein, for his part, told me that in view of the difficult situation of Jordan, he cannot aggravate relations with the United States. As you know, he traveled to the U.S. and met with Johnson, however, his negotiations with Johnson were completely fruitless, and the Jordanians did not even receive a single carbine from the Americans, although they are considered their friends. 

The main goal that Israel is currently pursuing is to submit and break Jordan. That is why they do not stop constant armed provocations against Jordan, through which Israel seeks to force Hussein to beg for peace. However, the internal situation in Jordan differs significantly from the situation that existed before 5 June, 1967. The main factor that now determines the situation in Jordan is the beginning of organized military actions by Palestinian organizations, in particular Fatah, which hinder and will continue to hinder the establishment of any peace with Israel. Thus, we are now seeing in Jordan a significant increase in the Palestinian guerrilla movement, and the desire to form independent political organizations. Palestinian troops are an impressive force. It is known that when the Israelis try to cross the Jordan [River] in order to eliminate the bases of the Palestinian guerrillas, Palestinian troops are the first who fight them and put up successful resistance. The influence of Palestinian organizations is growing more and more in all Arab countries. The head of the Fatah organization asked me before my departure to Moscow to include him in the delegation. His name is Yasser Arafat – an engineer by profession, studied in Egypt, held a good position. However, for the sake of the liberation of the Arab lands, he left behind everything he had in Cairo and completely devoted himself to the guerrilla movement. I brought him with me. He is now in Moscow. Doing so, I proceeded on the premise that Fatah has recently become one of the strongest Palestinian organizations that enjoys significant financial and military assistance from the U.A.R. and other Arab countries, like Syria, Iraq and others. Other forces that would like to put this organization under their control show significant interest in it, too.

A.N. Kosygin. And where’s Choueiri now?

Nasser. He completely vanished from the political arena. However, the Palestinian Liberation Organization continues to exist, although it is not as popular as Fatah. Fatah is actively fighting on Israeli territory causing serious material and military damage. About a week ago an agreement was reached between Fatah and the Palestinian Liberation Organization to establish a National Council.

As far as we know, lately even the Faisal and the Chinese are looking for contacts with the Fatah organization.

A.N. Kosygin. What is the number of armed units?

Nasser. Frankly speaking, I don’t know. The leaders of the guerrilla detachments are very reserved in this regard and never talk about it. For my part, I don’t ask them this question so as not to give the impression that I interfere in their internal affairs. In any case, they are very active and, for example, two weeks ago they managed to blow up a very large ammunition depot near Tel Aviv and cause significant damage to the potash plant. Based on conservative estimates, as a result of the activities of the Palestinian guerrillas, the Israelis suffer losses in the order of 15-20 people killed every week. The guerrillas also suffer heavy losses, and maybe even greater than the Israelis. However, more and more volunteers are joining them. Fatah leaders do not seek to increase the number of their units at any cost, but select volunteers based on very strict requirements. I believe that the future belongs to this organization not only with respect to Palestine, but with respect to the entire Arab world as well. So when Arafat expressed his desire to go to Moscow, I took him with me.

A.N. Kosygin. Is the richest part of the territory of Jordan occupied by Israel?

Nasser. Israel has occupied not only the most fertile lands in the West Bank of Jordan, but is increasingly devastating the fertile lands on the East Bank of Jordan, forcing their inhabitants to leave native lands and move deep into the country.

L.I. Brezhnev. What is the nature of the area from a geographical point of view on which the Palestinian guerrillas operate? How do they manage to successfully conduct their military operations and hide from the enemy?

Abdul Munim Riad. The West Bank of the Jordan River is a mountainous area. There are especially many hills and mountains in the northern region, near Jerusalem and Nablus. 

Nasser. We believe that the guerrilla movement in the occupied part of Jordan will increase. Recently, the Israeli Defense Minister announced in the Parliament that since 5 June, as a result of guerrilla actions, the Israelis have lost about a thousand people. The guerrillas use all the known tactical methods of guerrilla warfare: they set up ambushes, lay mines, etc. At the same time, they provide us with such information about Israel, about its military capabilities, which we did not have before the start of the Israeli aggression. 

A few words about the position of other Arab states, in particular Algeria. Algerians promised, in the event of a resumption of the hostilities, to put at our disposal certain contingents of the Algerian Armed Forces. Currently, the Algerian brigade is deployed on the territory of the U.A.R. However, the Algerians still do not accept the Security Council resolution of 22 November, 1967. As you know, we receive financial assistance from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Libya in the amount of about 100 million pounds, as per the resolutions of the Khartoum Conference. We tried to convene a new meeting of Arab leaders to work out a joint action, but our efforts were not successful. I think that certain pressure with this regard was put on some countries, and in particular, on Saudi Arabia, by the United States. A certain negative role was played by the position of the left forces, represented in particular by the Syrians, who refused to sit down at the negotiating table with the so-called reactionary regimes. In putting forward the idea of convening a new conference, we pursued the goal of encouraging all Arab countries to take a greater part, whether materially or militarily, in eliminating the consequences of Israeli aggression. The leaders of these countries understood this goal and therefore have treated and still treat with reservation the idea of holding a new summit meeting. On the other hand, none of the Arab countries except Algeria, possesses substantial military. 

As for Saudi Arabia, Faisal has some doubts about us, although he continues to provide us with financial assistance. Faisal's restraint can be explained by our position towards the Yemen Arab Republic (YAR) and the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (PDRY). Saudi Arabia's main goal is not to fight Israel, as one might assume, but to eliminate the current regimes of the Yemen Arab Republic and the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, whose governments we support. For this reason, relations between us and Saudi Arabia are limited to providing us with financial assistance in accordance with the decisions of the Khartoum Conference. 

As you know, the situation in Yemen, both North and South, is unstable. Monarchist troops in the YAR continue their military activity aimed at overthrowing the republican regime. President Qahtan al-Shaabi, who visited the U.A.R a few days ago, also spoke to us about the serious economic problems that the country is going through. Al-Shaabi pointed out that while their revenues do not exceed 7 million, their expenses are about 27 million. Al-Shaabi asked us to provide them with assistance if possible. We promised to provide them with a small amount of assistance, mainly in the form of certain commodities. Al-Shaabi will also reach out to the leaders of Iraq, Syria and Algeria with similar requests. The situation in the PDRY is also complicated by the fact that Saudi Arabia has taken an active hostile position against the current regime. 

This is the general situation in the Arab countries.

Allow me to move on to assessing the internal situation of the United Arab Republic. Undoubtedly, Israeli aggression and defeat in the war caused serious disruptions, as well as created an unfavorable psychological effect in the mood of the people. During the visit of Cde. Podgorny to the U.A.R., I told him that eventually we would start having bigger and bigger problems in terms of stabilizing the internal front. And now, more and more often, the same question is being asked, “When will we drive the Israeli invaders from our land?” People ask why we were defeated, why confusion and chaos arose in the country, and they demand that all mistakes be corrected. In February of this year verdicts in the case of the leaders of the Air Force were published. The sentences were very lenient, which led to demonstrations of workers at an aircraft factory in Helwan; there were clashes with the police, and there were injuries. Rumors spread among the students that some of the workers had been killed. This, in turn, served as a trigger for student protests. In the end, we managed to resolve all the issues, but we had to reconsider the composition of the government and take a number of measures aimed at the reorganization of the Arab Socialist Union. Now all our efforts are focused on strengthening the internal front. We believe that the internal situation in the country is encouraging, although the reactionary forces do not cease their activities against the regime. The activity of the reactionary organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, is particularly notable. Recently, some forces of the leftist type have also been acting against us, in particular, the pro-Chinese Communist Party. However, this Communist Party is so weak that we do not even consider it necessary to take any preventive measures against it. During the student protests, the Communist Party tried to take advantage of the situation to address the protesters, but they were not able to do it. Hostile subversive elements operating against us at that time, including those directed by Saudi Arabia and the Americans, tried to unite the student and workers' protests. However, the workers did not respond to this call and did not take to the streets during the student protests. Moreover, the total number of students studying at the universities of Cairo and Alexandria is about 150 thousand people, of which no more than 7 thousand took part in the protests. In determining our policy towards the workers, we proceed primarily on the premise of the preservation of the socio-economic gains that they have achieved. The situation in the army does not warrant concerns, however, about 3 months ago, a small group of officers from among the Muslim brothers was identified in the army. All these individuals have been arrested. In addition, as you know, a large number of generals and officers were discharged from the army. The restructuring of the army is a very complex and painful process. However, we managed to implement it. If you do not mind, I would like to say a few words about the situation in Syria.

L.I. Brezhnev. Please.

Nasser. Syrian reactionary forces are taking active steps to change the existing situation in Syria. These forces receive significant support from Saudi Arabia and partially, indirectly, from Kuwait. Naturally, Americans are very directly involved in this. West Germany is also displaying an increased interest in Syrian affairs. As for the Syrian army, it is completely under the control of the country's leadership. There is also a conscious working class in Syria. At the same time, a large bourgeois stratum actively opposes the existing regime. A few words about the situation in Iraq. Reactionary forces are making great efforts to isolate Iraq from the advanced Arab countries. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are working in this direction. We believe that despite the presence of certain disagreements in the leadership of Iraq, these forces will not be able to change the policy of this country.

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you rate the Syrian army?

Nasser. I think it's a good army. They have replenished most of the weapons lost in the war, have developed plans to further increase the combat capabilities of their armed forces, and are intensively training personnel. 

A. Riad. The area of some concern is the level of training and qualifications of the commanders of the Syrian army. As a result of personnel changes in the Syrian army, most of the officers who studied and received military training in the Soviet Union were removed from leadership positions. They have been replaced by mostly civilians, mainly teachers, who do not have sufficient military training. Thus, from a professional point of view, the level of the senior staff in the Syrian army leaves much to be desired. We believe that this is one of the weak points of the Syrian army, which naturally significantly reduces its overall level of combat readiness. 

A.N. Kosygin. Do the Syrians maintain contacts with you in the military sphere?

A. Riad. As the President said, the Minister of Defense of the U.A.R. recently visited Damascus. We share know-how and various military information.

L.I. Brezhnev. How many airfields do the Syrians have?

A. Riad. They have about 6 air bases.

Nasser. Due to the fact that we raised the issue of airfields, I would like to note that since the Israeli aggression, we have increased the number of military airfields in the U.A.R. from 9 to 27, and continue to work both on improving existing airfields and on building new ones.

A. Riad. The number of airfields that we currently have can be considered satisfactory. However, we are experiencing great difficulties in the technical equipment of airfields, in particular, we lack various technical means for the ground infrastructure of airfields.

A.N. Kosygin. What material do you use to build the runways – concrete or sand?

A. Riad. Usually the access roads to the runways are made of concrete and the runways themselves are made of asphalt.

L.I. Brezhnev. Is the asphalt strong enough for heavy aircraft?

A. Riad. Yes, it is. Even temperature doesn't affect it.

A.N. Kosygin. Do you lay asphalt over sand?

A. Riad. As a rule, after a thorough study of the structure of the soil, we lay several layers of crushed stone, tamp it down, and then lay the asphalt.

Nasser. By the way, Israel has more than fifty airfields and runways.

A. Riad. About 53-54 airfields. That is why Israel can be called the aircraft carrier of imperialism in the Middle East. 

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you provide cover for your planes?

A. Riad. At present, all our aircraft, with the exception of TU-16 aircraft, are in ground shelters. Just yesterday we tested a new underground shelter, the principle of which is to lower the aircraft underground on a special elevator. The experiment was successfully carried out and we intend to continue working in this direction.

A.N. Kosygin. This is obviously a very complex and expensive structure?

A. Riad. It will not be very expensive if we get one lift to serve 2-3 planes.

A.N. Kosygin. So, how much will one shelter cost?

A. Riad. A ground shelter for one aircraft costs about 20,000 pounds. An underground shelter with a lift designed for 2-3 aircraft will cost about 50-60 thousand pounds. The construction of underground shelters can be considered feasible from an economic standpoint, given that they completely exclude the possibility of attacking aircraft in shelter. At the same time, aircraft that are placed in ground-based concrete shelters may be subject to a bomb attack under certain circumstances.

L.I. Brezhnev. You have completed great work.

Nasser. We even built special sections on the roads that can be used as take-off and landing strips for aircraft, and specifically, there are such sections on the Cairo-Alexandria road. 

L.I. Brezhnev. During World War II we also used roads for positioning planes, and Germans often couldn't figure out where our planes were coming from. 

A.N. Kosygin. The Moscow-Minsk highway was built with the view that it may be used by aircraft. 

Nasser. Allow me to move on to the main problem that is of concern to all of us – the problem of eliminating the consequences of Israeli aggression. As you know, the U.A.R. and Jordan adopted the Security Council Resolution of November 22, 1967. Countries such as Algeria, Sudan and others have either rejected this resolution or are avoiding speaking on it in a certain way. We believe that even if we manage to convene an Arab Summit, many Arab leaders will be forced to refuse to accept the Security Council Resolution due to the attitude towards this issue that exists internally in these countries. 

We informed Jarring about our readiness to comply with the Security Council Resolution and with all the requirements it contains. However, we will never agree to give up a single inch of Arab territory. As far as Israel is concerned, it has rejected the resolution of the Security Council and demands direct negotiations and the conclusion of a peace treaty with the Arab states. You are familiar with all these issues, so there is no need to dwell on them.

More than a year has passed after the Israeli aggression, during which many efforts have been made to reach a peaceful resolution of the Middle East crisis. I was eager to come to the Soviet Union in order to discuss the current state of affairs in the settlement of the crisis, as well as the steps that we should take going forward. We also acted on the premise that our countries are bound by close relations of friendship and cooperation. We believe that these ties grew beyond regular friendship. The Soviet Union stood by our side in the most difficult for us days. We believe that our relations should continue to develop in the future. The U.A.R. pursues a policy of non-alignment. However, our relations with the United States are severed. The U.S. constantly opposes the U.A.R. But we will not reconcile and will not capitulate in the face of any pressure from the Americans. As it is, the United States are on the side of our enemies and the Soviet Union is on our side. Therefore, we need to work towards strengthening our relations and achieving mutual understanding on all issues relating to the Soviet Union and the U.A.R. I want to emphasize that the point is not that we are getting help from the Soviet Union. The point is that we are trying to ensure the sustainable development of our relations, not only during the difficult times which we are going through now, but also for the future, after the consequences of Israeli aggression are liquidated. 

The U.A.R. occupies an important geographic and strategic position, and therefore will always be subject to pressure from imperialism. We would like to state that we will never succumb to the pressure of the United States. This is the essence of the matter. I want to emphasize again that we will not agree to any settlement with the United States, even if the Americans come to Cairo.

If you don’t mind, I would like to touch upon the issue of the resolution of the the Middle East crisis, both from the civilian and the military point of views. I believe that this issue is the key issue of our negotiations. As for a peaceful settlement, as you know, so far we have adhered exclusively to the path of a peaceful political settlement and are prepared to continue moving in this direction. However, one cannot ignore that our enemies, and especially the Americans, are convinced that the longer the settlement of the Middle East crisis drags on, the better opportunities are created for undermining the regimes in the progressive Arab countries. For our part, we pay a lot of attention to the strengthening of the internal front, especially to the workers and peasants, considering that they are the force that supports us 100%. 

L.I. Brezhnev. Is your industry operating at full capacity now?

Nasser. All the plants and factories of the country are working. However, some of them are not working at full capacity because of the shortage of foreign currency for the purchase of raw materials. In the initial period following the aggression, we suspended work at some factories due to the lack of raw materials. However, even in these cases, the workers were not fired and continued to receive wages.

L.I. Brezhnev. So you didn’t have any problems with unemployment due to the closure of a number of factories after the aggression?

Nasser. No, we didn't.

L.I. Brezhnev. What raw materials do you currently buy abroad?

Nasser. We buy copper ore and those semi-finished products that are necessary for the normal operation of our assembly plants. Some time ago, our Minister of Economics visited Moscow and raised the issue of purchasing those types of raw materials which we need most of all. Soviet organizations rendered us great assistance in this matter.

L.I. Brezhnev. How are the food supplies for the population?

Nasser. Very good. This year we have had a very good harvest of wheat and legumes, which significantly exceeds the harvest of last year. Nevertheless, we are forced to import 2 million tons of wheat annually. This is our main food problem. Our enemies believed that we would have exhausted all of our food imports as early as December of last year. However, the Soviet Union helped us overcome the difficulties that arose and, as you know, agreed to increase the supply of wheat to the U.A.R. to 500,000 tons. Nevertheless, the current supply of grain will only last us a few months.

A.N. Kosygin. How do you rate the rice harvest?

Nasser. We haven't harvested the rice yet, so it is hard to say how good the crop will be. However, according to the preliminary estimates, we expect the rice harvest to be slightly less than last year.

L.I. Brezhnev. Were you able to add new lands to agricultural circulation in connection with the construction of the Aswan High Dam?

Nasser. As for Aswan, we have two main problems with it – too much water and too much electricity.

A.N. Kosygin. This is not that bad at all.

L.I. Brezhnev. Especially if you plan for the future.

Nasser. In connection with this, we would like to ask the Soviet Union to send us a group of experts who would prepare recommendations on the use of surplus electricity produced by the Aswan Dam. According to our calculations, current energy [production] is twice of what we need. We shut down [the production at] some thermal power plants in order to utilize the electricity coming from Aswan.

L.I. Brezhnev. This is the right decision because you are saving fuel oil and coal.

A.N. Kosygin. European countries have a great need for electricity. It would be good if you could sell Aswan electricity to Europe. However, unfortunately, the U.A.R. is too far away [from Europe].

In any case, we will send you a panel of experts to study this issue.

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you assess the situation in the military? How is the mood of the personnel?

Nasser. Much better. We conduct intensive training of all military personnel. Of course, we need certain types of military equipment, mainly artillery tractors, motor vehicles and tracked carriers, that is, equipment which will allow us to turn our army into a maneuverable one. As for the morale in the military, officers and soldiers ask only one question, “When will the Israeli invaders be expelled from the occupied territories?” I recently visited military units and battlefield positions. The servicemen with whom I spoke, openly state that if we do not fight, then maybe we will have to stay in our fatigues for another 50 years. At the same time, we continue to work on upgrading the military leadership. 

A. Riad. Only 3 days ago, about 60 people from among the senior officers were retired from active duty. 

Nasser. Sometimes we even have situations when armored brigades are headed, for example, by officers with the rank no higher than a lieutenant colonel. 

Recently, together with Cde. Lashchenko, who is present here, I attended maneuvers during which ground offensive was practiced with the support and participation of armored brigades and other military branches. I believe that the training that our Armed Forces received in the period since June 5 is equivalent to 5 years of training under normal conditions. It is natural that the entire military looks up to and pins its hopes on the Soviet Union. Officers and soldiers are well aware that after June 5, in essence, everything was lost, and only with the help of the Soviet Union we managed to rebuild our military. 

A. Riad. Of course, one cannot compare this with the situation that existed in the military before June 5. The number of troops increased by about one and a half times. The only problem is the lack of firepower and maneuverability of the military. We currently have 8 infantry divisions, 4 independent brigades, 2 armored divisions, and 2 separate armored brigades. Prior to 5 June, we had 6 infantry divisions, 1 armored division and 1 separate armored brigade.

We also did a lot of work to change the very nature of the army personnel. We made a special decision to recruit into the army not peasants, as was the case in the past, but people who have already received certain training. Therefore, over the past year, about 100,000 graduates of secondary, general and vocational schools, as well as universities, joined the military. We pay special attention to the recruitment into the technical branches of the military. In this manner we have turned the former army of the peasants into a modern army that meets the requirements of today. In addition, we have made a special decision to conduct training of military personnel at all levels, including commanders and soldiers. We are at the point now when the entire personnel undergoes training twice a year.

A.N. Kosygin. Are there any Egyptian officers or soldiers held captive by the Israelis? 

Nasser. No.

A.N. Kosygin. What are your total personnel losses?

A. Riad. The problem is that the Israelis did not carry out any registration of the dead or the places of burial of Egyptian officers and soldiers after June 5th. We believe that we have lost about 15,000 soldiers and about 1,500 officers, including those missing in action. Roughly speaking, our losses can be estimated at 20,000 people. This is a big number. Before the start of the withdrawal and retreat of the Egyptian troops, we lost only 500 people. Only 1.5 divisions participated in direct combat with Israeli units. The rest of our units did not take part in combat. Then the order was given to withdraw to the Suez Canal within one night. It was impossible to carry out this order. In reality, all the divisions that were on the Sinai Peninsula could withdraw within 4-5 nights.

In 1956, we implemented a similar operation within 2 nights in accordance with a carefully worked out plan, having lost in the process no more than 30 tanks. In this war, on the other hand, the joint military command ordered the retreat without coordinating with the General Staff, and without developing a definite and consistent plan for the withdrawal of the troops.

L.I. Brezhnev. In essence, this order created a panic in the ranks of the military.

Nasser. At first everything was fine. Then a large number of equipment and troops amassed in narrow places of the roads leading to the canal. Using this to their advantage, the Israelis directed their main attack at the places of accumulation of Egyptian troops and disabled a large number of equipment, thereby creating a traffic jam on the main routs of withdrawal of Egyptian troops. If the military command had planned a retreat over 4-5 nights, then in this case we would have had a completely different situation.

Our army has a very high morale, be it a simple soldier or an officer. I can judge this on the basis of my personal experience, the experience of the 1948 war in which I personally took part. I witnessed how the soldiers in my unit, who were simple peasants in the past, were dying on the battlefield but were not retreating. I am saying this so that you do not judge the moral character of the Egyptian soldier by the results of the June war of last year.

Furthermore, we did not have well-trained and qualified command staff. Commanders at all levels were appointed not based on their combat qualities, but on the basis of their loyalty to the highest leadership of the military. Now the situation has completely changed.

L.I. Brezhnev. Thus, your frontlines are currently a trench war. The Israeli troops are on one side of the canal, and the Egyptian troops are on the other side. I would like to know, so that I can have a general idea, what are the Israeli troops busy doing on the east bank of the Suez Canal?

Nasser. They are, just like us, in the trenches, creating a second echelon.

A. Riad. There are 7-8 Israeli brigades on the Sinai Peninsula stretched from Arish to the Suez Canal, of which 2 are armored [brigades]. The Israelis do not consider it necessary to build up their forces in this section of the front, figuring that, if the need arises, using their dominance in the air they will be able to mobilize the divisions located on Israeli territory and quickly deploy them to the canal area. At present, the Israelis are doing a lot of work to fortify the east bank of the canal. In particular, they are constructing a defensive wall up to 8 m. high in order to create insurmountable obstacles for Egyptian troops in case we attempt an assault crossing of the canal. 

L.I. Brezhnev. Are these structures erected along the entire canal?

A. Riad. In the southern part of the canal, this wall stretches for up to 60 km. Then the canal passes through salt lakes, where there is no such wall. As for the northern part of the canal, for about 30 km. from Port Said to El-Qantara, there is a stretch of hard to negotiate swampy terrain, where there are also no defensive structures. In the area where the swamp ends and for 25-30 km. beyond it, the Israelis built a defensive wall, but not as high as in the southern part of the canal. The Israelis consider it impractical to fortify their defensive structures in this part of the canal, since the chances of forward troop movements in this area are limited. There is only one road there, surrounded by loose sands. 

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you assess the prospects for settling the Middle East crisis?

Nasser. We will continue to follow the path of a peaceful settlement. Of course war is not easy. Israel has significant military power at its disposal. According to our calculations, they have about 32-34 brigades, including 8 armored ones.

L.I. Brezhnev. What is the size of one brigade?

A. Riad. About 5,000 people.

A.N. Kosygin. So this means that the total size of the Israeli army is 170,000 people.

A. Riad. According to the information we have, Israel can mobilize up to 16% of the population during the war. The issue is not so much the size of the Israeli army, but the fact that it fully relies on foreign aid and does not experience any difficulties from the economic point of view. Let’s take for example the Mirage aircraft, one of which costs £1.5 million. Purchasing these airplanes is not a problem for Israel. The Israeli military has approximately 3,500 half-track transporters. They practically do not have infantry units that do not have significant transportation means at their disposal. As we have already said, there are about 53-54 operating airfields in Israel which are completely ready for combat operations. It is hard to imagine that a state with a population of 2.5 million people can have such a number of airfields. That is why we believe that Israel is a [sort of an] aircraft carrier, a staging ground for imperialism in the Middle East. 

Nasser. Israel was created by the imperialist forces for one single purpose - to exert pressure on the Arab states, to curb those governments that stop taking orders from the imperialists.

A.N. Kosygin. Does Israel buy artillery shells or manufacture them locally? 

A. Riad. With the exception of mines and small arms ammunitions, Israel purchases shells from other countries. There are military factories in Israel at which some of the equipment gets assembled under agreements with some Western countries.

Nasser. Getting back to the issue of resolving the Middle East crisis, I want to state once again that we will continue to follow the path of a peaceful resolution, but the basis for it will be that we will not surrender a single inch of Arab territory. As you know, the concept of a peaceful settlement is accepted only by two Arab countries – the U.A.R. and Jordan. We cannot agree to direct negotiations with Israel, as this would mean our surrender. The Israelis are occupiers, and in any negotiations they will dictate their terms. There are no leaders in the Arab world who would agree to conduct direct negotiations and conclude a peace treaty with Israel. This is not mentioned in the Security Council Resolution of 22 November, 1967, either. We have discussed all these issues in our conversations with the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General, Jarring. 

However, we believe that along with the implementation of measures for a peaceful settlement, it is necessary to prepare the armed forces in every possible way for the possibility of resuming hostilities. What happens if we do not reach a settlement by peaceful means? I believe that in this case Israel will remain [here] and continue to occupy our lands. A year has passed since the Israeli aggression. We are prepared to wait another year and strengthen our home front. But what will happen after that? During World War II, the Soviet Union was in a similar situation. But you made every effort to free your lands. We can move on to the methods of guerrilla warfare in the Sinai Peninsula. However, the natural conditions on the Sinai are such that this will only be possible if there is a powerful air cover.

I believe that the main goal of our negotiations is to reach an agreement on the steps that we must take in terms of achieving a solution to the Middle East crisis in the future. Let me ask again what will happen if we fail to achieve a peaceful settlement of the problem? Israel is determined to ultimately swallow the territories which it occupied after 5 June, 1967. To liberate these territories is not only our right, but is also our duty. With this respect, a negative role is played by the United States of America who seeks our surrender. In February of this year, they demanded again that we restore our relations. We rejected this proposal because it would mean restoring the US position in the Middle East, and because this step would be followed by the restoration of US relations with Iraq, Sudan, Algeria and other Arab countries.

L.I. Brezhnev. Do you maintain any contacts with Israel?

Nasser. We made indirect contact with the Israelis on two occasions. President Tito had a meeting with Goldman, who stated that Israel was striving for peace, that there were serious differences inside the Israeli government regarding the future policy of the country. Moreover, Goldman pointed out that despite the presence in Israel of an influential wing of hardliners, the majority wants peace.

The second contact took place through the Deputy Foreign Minister of Romania who came to Cairo to discuss with us the issue of reaching an agreement with Israel. The Romanian also stated that they had conversations with Goldman and repeated everything that Tito had told us earlier. In my conversation with the Romanian, I told him that this contradicted the official statement of the Israeli government, noting nevertheless that we were striving for a peaceful settlement and would welcome any step that the Romanians deem necessary in order to achieve a solution to the Middle East problem, provided that complete secrecy is maintained. Our conversations with Tito and with the Romanian coincided with the campaign against Goldman which was launched in Israel, and as you know, he had to step down as the Chairman of the World Zionist Congress. Goldman was accused of interfering in the internal affairs of Israel and such.

These are the indirect contacts that took place with Israeli representatives

L.I. Brezhnev. We would like to have a better understanding of all aspects of the settlement of the Middle East crisis, and in this regard let me ask you a few questions: how does Israel imagine the implementation of the Security Council resolution? What is Israel trying to achieve – signing of a peace treaty with Arab countries or legalizing their occupation of Arab territories? What did Jarring tell you regarding this?

Nasser. I think Foreign Minister Riad will be able to give you the information we have.

A. Riad. My last meeting with Jarring took place in Stockholm on 25 June this year. After that, Jarring went to Moscow, met with Cdes. A.N. Kosygin and A.A. Gromyko. To my question about Israel's position, Jarring responded that the Israelis reject the implementation of the Resolution of the Security Council, and even the Jarring’s formula, to which they once agreed. This famous Jarring’s formula includes three provisions:

1) Adoption by the parties of the resolution of the Security Council of 22 November;

2) Cooperation with Jarring;

3) Meeting with representatives of the parties in New York.

Jarring acknowledged that Israel's position has become noticeably tougher. I also asked Jarring how Israel interprets the border clause contained in the Resolution of the Security Council. Jarring replied that the Israeli government had so far refused to tell him their understanding of the provision on secure and recognized borders. He said that he intended to meet Israeli Foreign Minister Eban in Holland and would try to ask him one last time how the Israeli government interprets the issue of borders. Jarring also pointed out that there are serious disagreements in the Israeli government on how to resolve the Middle East crisis. He talked about his attempts to formulate a plan for the phased implementation of the Resolution of the Security Council and asked me some questions about it. But all of this, as Jarring said, will depend on whether Israel agrees in principle to the implementation of the Resolution of the Security Council.

Nasser. I once told Cde. Ambassador Vinogradov that Israel had achieved its military task, but had not achieved its main political goal. In this case, why would Israel leave Arab territories? If I were in the Israeli leaders’ place, I would by no means leave the occupied lands. What would prompt Israel to leave the occupied territories when it has not achieved its main goal – to undermine the progressive regimes in the Arab countries and to bring to power weak governments loyal to the West and Israel, which would open their countries to the economic expansion of Israel?

Israel knows that we are not ready for the resumption of military action. Therefore, Israel has no reason to rush with the withdrawal of its troops. At the same time, Arab countries are seething. They are demanding from me to immediately liberate the occupied lands. The same is happening in Syria. Therefore, the Israelis are waiting until some sort of split happens on the internal front of the Arab countries. They are prepared to wait two, three or more years. From the economic standpoint, this is not going to be a problem for them. There is a point of view in Israel the supporters of which believe that there is no need for the Israelis to give up the western bank of the Jordan River, since these territories are part of Palestine. They believe that these lands should be annexed to Israel or that an independent Palestinian state should be created that would not have an army. These goals are also reflected in the plan recently put forward by the Israeli Labor Minister Allon. It provides for the creation of a strip of Israeli settlements up to 15 km deep.

When I met with our friend Cde. Mazurov, I told him that Israel would not leave the occupied territories. Mazurov asked me why I was so pessimistic. I told him that we base our assessment, in the first place, on the fact that Israel has not achieved its main political goal and that, secondly, the Arab countries are not ready for a military action.

A.N. Kosygin. It would be interesting to hear what is the absolute limit of what you are prepared to do for a peaceful solution to this problem? What concessions would you be willing to make, and what would be acceptable to you? I am asking these questions so that we can better understand all the possibilities for a peaceful solution to this problem.

Nasser. We are ready to agree and accept all the provisions contained in the Security Council Resolution of 22 November, 1967.

A.N. Kosygin. Some issues in the Security Council Resolution are not very clearly defined. We would like to achieve absolute clarity on this.

Nasser. For example, we have accepted the provision for secure and guaranteed borders.

A.N. Kosygin. In essence, this means the restoration of the old borders, a return to the status quo that existed before 5 June, 1967.

Nasser. Yes it is. We will not give up a single inch of our land.

A.N. Kosygin. Is a peace treaty with Israel unacceptable to you?

Nasser. No, it is not acceptable. However, we have stated that we are ready to submit to the Security Council through the UN Secretary General our commitment to comply with certain provisions, with the understanding that Israel, for its part, will also declare its readiness to comply with certain provisions.

A.N. Kosygin. Is it possible to find a more acceptable name for these mutual obligations which you are going to submit to the Security Council so that they can be correctly understood by world public opinion?

Nasser. What we meant was that we will convey our commitment to the Security Council without entering into negotiations with Israel. Israel, for its part, will do the same.

A.N. Kosygin. What specific provisions can be set out in this obligation?

Nasser. – The right of every country to exist;

• ending the state of war upon the completion of withdrawal of Israeli troops;

• an agreement on secure borders;

• freedom of navigation in the Gulf of Aqaba;

• freedom of navigation in the Suez Canal on the condition of addressing the issue of Palestinian refugees in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations;

• free movement of Israeli goods through the Suez Canal after the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the occupied territories.

A.N. Kosygin. You mean the transport of Israeli goods on Israeli ships under the Israeli flag?

Nasser. We can phrase this as follows: transport of Israeli goods through the Suez Canal after the withdrawal of troops and free passage of Israeli ships on the condition that the issue of Palestinian refugees is resolved. 

A.N. Kosygin. So, you are sort of subdividing this issue into two stages: first, if the troops are withdrawn, then foreign flag ships carrying Israeli goods will be allowed to pass; second, if the problem of Palestinian refugees is solved, then Israeli ships will be allowed to pass through the Suez Canal. 

Maybe you can briefly outline what the solution of the Palestinian refugee issue means to you.

Nasser. There is a respective decision of the United Nations Organization on Palestinian refugees, which provides for their return to their native land and compensation of damages. 

A.N. Kosygin. Are they supposed to return to Israel and reside on the territory of the State of Israel? 

Nasser. Yes.

L.I. Brezhnev. How many Palestinians have been expelled from their lands?

Nasser. After 1948, there were about a million Palestinian refugees. Now their number approaches one and a half million.

L.I. Brezhnev. After the expulsion of the Palestinians from their lands, did Jews settled in these lands?

Nasser. Yes.

L.I. Brezhnev. Both in the cities and in the villages?

Nasser. Yes. The Jews occupied the cities and the villages, seized all of the property belonging to the Palestinians, leaving them essentially with nothing.

L.I. Brezhnev. So that means that there are practically no Palestinians in Israel?

Nasser. There are about 250,000 Palestinians left in Israel. However, they are treated as second-class citizens and essentially reside in the territories that are set up as reservations. 

A.N. Kosygin. Is there a possibility that Israel might agree to fully compensate damages inflicted on the Palestinians, but will not allow them to return to their homes?

Nasser. One way or another, the solution to the Palestinian refugees issue must provide them with a choice: [either accept] compensation of damages or return to their homeland. 

A.N. Kosygin. Let’s say if the damage caused to the Palestinians will be determined to be 500 million dollars and if Israel agrees to pay these 500 million dollars on the condition that the Palestinians will be resettled elsewhere on unoccupied lands, will this option be acceptable?

Nasser. No, this does not solve the issue.

A.N. Kosygin. So is this unacceptable?

Nasser. I am sure that many Palestinians would prefer to receive compensation and not return to the land under the rule of the State of Israel. But if we only talk about compensation, then this will not solve the problem. There still are Palestinians who will demand the return to their ancestral lands. The only acceptable solution would be the one encompassing [a choice between] the compensation and the [option to] return to their lands.

A.N. Kosygin. I would like to ask you not to perceive our questions as if we are planning to look for a solution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees. It is important for us to better understand the overall picture of the problem in general and with respect to individual issues.

The Palestinian problem is a very complex problem that has not been solved for more than 20 years. If we assume that the Zionists, both among Israelis and in other countries, would agree to pay the necessary amount for the resettlement of the Palestinians who, as you say, live in terrible conditions, then would this be only a partial solution to the problem in your opinion?

Nasser. In this case I am expressing only my personal point of view. Palestinians have their own organizations and they will never agree for me to speak on their behalf. That is why I asked Jarring to address the issue of Palestinian refugees directly with the Palestinians. However, I believe that if an agreement is reached which will provide for the option to choose between the compensation and return, then this will solve the problem.

A.N. Kosygin. You say that this is a purely Palestinian issue. But at the same time you are suggesting that solving this issue should be one of the conditions for allowing the passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal. Hence this is your problem too. Accordingly, you are bundling these issues into one package. Therefore, we cannot consider this a purely Palestinian issue.

Nasser. Of course, if this issue only involved the Palestinians, then we would not have needed to increase our military power, maintain a strong army, and Israel would not have occupied our territories. This issue existed even before the June 1967 aggression but remained unresolved. One could say that the Palestinian issue has arisen since the establishment of the State of Israel.

L.I. Brezhnev. We strive to develop a unified opinion on all issues. Let's imagine ourselves in Israel’s place. What does the solution of the Palestinian problem along the lines that you have described, mean [for them]? This would mean that part of the Palestinians, say half of them, would want to return to their homes. If the current Israeli government agrees to this, it will inevitably be overthrown. Therefore, they will never go for it. With such a position on the issue, it can be concluded that your proposals will be unacceptable.

Nasser. 2 years ago, United Nations Special Representative Johnson raised an issue of implementation of the UN Resolutions concerning Palestinian refugees. In particular, he put forward a proposal to repatriate to Israel a symbolic number of refugees, such as 20,000 people [for example]. However, his mission yielded no results.

L.I. Brezhnev. Israel did not accept even this symbolic figure? 

Nasser. Neither side agreed to this proposal. 

L.I. Brezhnev. In practice, does this mean that there is no way to solve the problem of Palestinian refugees? 

N.V. Podgorny. It’s not just that. Even if Israel agreed to the return of some of the Palestinian refugees, the issue as a whole would still not be resolved. The issue lies in ensuring the political rights of the Palestinians. As you know, Palestinian organizations are talking about the formation of an independent Palestinian state.

A.N. Kosygin. In this case, the Palestinians will inevitably raise the issue of the Gaza region, meaning the issue of creating a Palestinian state on the territories that [currently] belong to both the U.A.R. and Jordan.

Nasser. Jews tried to create a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians did not agree with this and demand the restoration of the status quo that existed prior to 1948.

L.I. Brezhnev. How many Palestinians are there in total?

A. Riad. About 2 million.

A.N. Kosygin. Almost the same as in Israel.

Nasser. A large number of Jews from other countries come to Israel every year - about 60,000 people. Israelis are trying to bring the population of their state to 5 million people.

A.N. Kosygin. Going back to the conditions which should be reflected in the obligations of the U.A.R. and Israel to the Security Council, what other issues, besides those that we have already discussed, could be included in them?

Nasser. I don't think there are any other issues.

A.N. Kosygin. Thus they will include provisions on the right of every state in the Middle East region to an independent existence, which will mainly solve the problem of the existence of an Israeli state, of ending the state of war after the completion of the withdrawal of Israeli troops, of secure borders, and of the navigation in the Gulf of Aqaba and the Suez Canal. These are key issues. As for the issue of freedom of navigation in the Suez Canal, as far as we understand, its solution is linked to the solution of the problem of Palestinian refugees. If we drop this issue and do not touch on the problem of Palestinian refugees, then we will actually come to the status quo that existed until June 1967.

Nasser. We did not allow Israeli cargo through the Suez Canal.

A.N. Kosygin. How many ships does the Israeli merchant fleet have?

Nasser. I think that the total tonnage of the Israeli merchant fleet does not exceed 300,000 tons.

A.N. Kosygin. We touched upon the key issues concerning the peaceful settlement of the Middle East crisis: the right of states to an independent existence, the cessation of a state of war, navigation in the Gulf of Aqaba, the Suez Canal, and so on.

L.I. Brezhnev. It is possible that Israel may demand and put forward a number of other conditions, and specifically the creation of a demilitarized zone.

N.V. Podgorny. The creation of such a zone is possible if both parties agree to it.

Nasser. On our part, we told Jarring that we are ready to agree to the creation of a demilitarized zone, provided that the Israelis also agree to this.

A.N. Kosygin. You know that we had conversations with Jarring in Moscow, during which all these issues were brought up. The only new thing that he said was that he is expecting that he will be done with his third report to the Security Council in the nearest future, and due to this he is moving his headquarters to New York. We asked Jarring off the record whether he, as a representative of the UN and as a person entrusted with such an important undertaking, could find any justification for Israel's actions in this situation. Jarring answered “no”. I say this to characterize Jarring as a person. Jarring said that he is making every effort to resolve the Middle East crisis, but cannot identify opportunities that would help make his mission a success. 

We have touched upon the main aspects of the political settlement of the Middle East crisis. But don't you think it's possible that all those conditions that we talked about were formalized in the form of an agreement with Israel, and not just in the form of transferring documents with obligations from both sides to the Security Council? What prevents you from concluding such an agreement, provided, of course, that the Israelis agree to withdraw to the positions they occupied before 5 June, 1967.

Nasser. In this case, our people will overthrow us. This will end us in our country, and you and your friendship with the entire Arab world. Every Arab speaking about the Palestinian problem falls into real hysteria. Recently, at one of the grass-root rallies in the Port of Said, an ACC representative suggested that we allow Israeli ships to pass through the Suez Canal. This representative of the ACC, despite the fact that he was from the general secretariat, got beaten up. The rally turned into a hysterical demonstration that got out of control.

L.I. Brezhnev. Allow me to summarize the provisions that you agree to as the basis for the settlement of the Middle East crisis: 

1. recognition of the right of each state to an independent existence;

2. ending of the state of war;

3. withdrawal of troops to positions they occupied before 5 June, 1967;

4. agreement on the establishment of secure and recognized borders;

5. freedom of navigation in the Gulf of Aqaba;

6. free passage of Israeli cargo through the Suez Canal under a foreign flag;

7. freedom of navigation through the Suez Canal on the condition that the issue of Palestinian refugees is resolved.

What if the Israelis agree to the first six points and say that they will be satisfied with this solution to the problem, provided that it does not involve the issue of Palestinian refugees?

Nasser. But the demand for a solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees was included in the Security Council resolution.

L.I. Brezhnev. Israelis may say that since the Palestinian problem existed before the conflict, let's resolve all the issues that have arisen as a result of the conflict. What will be our position in this case?

Nasser. I agree with you. But then the issue of Palestinian refugees will remain unresolved.

A.N. Kosygin. But this does not mean that we will not continue to work on solving it.

Nasser. I agree with this. However, I would like to clarify that when we talk about the withdrawal of Israeli troops, we do not mean just Egypt.

L.I. Brezhnev. It is absolutely clear that what is meant is the withdrawal of troops from all the occupied territories.

Nasser. For us, for the Egyptian people, the western bank of the Jordan River may be [even] more important than the Sinai Peninsula, therefore, under the withdrawal of Israeli troops we mean the liberation of all occupied territories.

L.I. Brezhnev. Can you put forward the proposal I was talking about?

Nasser. It will be difficult for us to explain it to the people of Egypt. Undoubtedly, this will cause significant damage to my personal standing in the Arab countries. However, I believe that it will pay back in the future.

A.N. Kosygin. It is absolutely not necessary for you to put forward this proposal. You could initially put forward the whole plan for the settlement of the Middle East crisis, including the solution of the Palestinian issue. However, in the process of its discussion and finalizing, [you could] remove it, postpone it to a later time.

L.I. Brezhnev. Dear Mr. President, if you don't mind, we will end our conversation now in order to continue it tonight.

Nasser. I would like to thank you, Cde. Brezhnev, and our friends for the frank exchange of views that we had today, and express our hope that we will be able to continue our conversation about the possibilities for resolving the Middle East issues.

From the Soviet side, the following people took part in the negotiations: Secretary of the CPSU CC, B.N. Ponomarev; Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, A.A. Gromyko; Minister of Defense of the USSR, A.A. Grechko; General of the Army, P.A. Lashchenko; Ambassador of the USSR to the U.A.R. S.A. Vinogradov; Head of the Middle East Section of the MFA of the USSR, A.D. Shchiborin.

From the Egyptian side: Chairman of the U.A.R. National Assembly, Anwar Sadat; U.A.R. Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mahmoud Riad; Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, Abdel Moneim Riad; Ambassador of the U.A.R. to the USSR, Murad Ghaleb.

The conversation was translated by V.V. Posuvalyuk

The conversation was recorded by V.V. Gudev

[Handwritten: “outgoing No. 448/obv, 08/07/1968”]

3.rr.vk.ki

Mb-3164/gs

5/7/1968

Secret Copy Nº 2

TRANSCRIPT 

OF NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN CDES. L.I. BREZHNEV, A.N. KOSYGIN, N.V. PODGORNY AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.A.R., G.A. NASSER.

5 July, 1968

(Continuation of the negotiations in the evening)

L.I. Brezhnev. Well, maybe we should admit that we haven't talked much yet. So let's talk some more.

Nasser. As for us, we are prepared to stay up till morning.

L.I. Brezhnev. And so are we.

N.V. Podgorny. Not necessary. Tomorrow will be another day, and we can talk then.

L.I. Brezhnev. How are your pilots now? Actively training?

Nasser. Yes, pilot training is going well. We can say that there is some progress compared to the past. As for the pilots, General Lashchenko said that we already have 300 first-class pilots. I am now receiving information with respect to this from two sources – from Lashchenko and from our command.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, do young people in your country have an interest in aviation, in modern technology? For example, in our country the profession of a pilot is very popular, and young people are drawn to aviation.

Nasser. Yes, the interest is there. Young people want to go into aviation, but the medical evaluation screens out a significant number of them, because the health of our young people in medical terms is not very good. It is due to nutrition, living conditions, the presence of certain illnesses, such as brucellosis, which many young people suffer from. For this reason, only a small number of young people successfully pass the medical screening. But even those who pass this screening [in our country] often fail here.

L.I. Brezhnev. Yes, the Vietnamese have our MiG-21s, but they are physically a bit weak and therefore cannot fly the plane. And they are a bit too short. But we have a larger population than Vietnam, and our people are bigger in size.

Nasser. Egypt now has [population] over 30 million.

A.N. Kosygin. Arabs are certainly taller people.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, are your pilots given privileges compared to other branches of the military?

Abdel Moneim Riad. The salary of our pilots is 60-70% more than that of the personnel in other branches. In addition, one year of service in aviation is counted as one and a half. At Cde. Lashchenko's suggestion, we organized free meals valued at 15 pounds per pilot per month. Any pilot who dies during boot camp or training flights is considered killed in action, and his family is provided for accordingly.

L.I. Brezhnev. Our pilots are all officers, and they are provided for as officers, that is, with uniforms, meals, additional rations, which include high-calorie foods, chocolate, fruits, and so on.

A.A. Grechko. Our rations are quite expensive. Their cost is 56 rubles per pilot per month, and they are issued completely free of charge.

Nasser. For one person?

A.A. Grechko. Yes, for one.                                           

L.I. Brezhnev. We have an indefinite term of service for the Air Force. This is [the pilots’] profession, and [they] retire from the service only for health reasons or because of age. Even at an advanced age, they stay in the Air Force as instructors or work as air traffic controllers at airfields, that is, they make aviation into a life-long career, and we value this personnel.

Nasser. We have approximately the same situation.

L.I. Brezhnev. After the expiration of the term of service a small number of military pilots transfers to civil aviation, but only a small number. I do not know the exact figures, but for each aircraft we have more than one pilot, and there is a reserve.

Nasser. We don't have a reserve.

L.I. Brezhnev. You’ve got to train the reserve. The army is always needed because it protects the independence and sovereignty of the country.

Nasser. I think that in 1942 the situation was different for you. They are making such statements now not because they love war, but because they have suffered a defeat and want to get revenge. It’s natural.

L.I. Brezhnev. Well, let’s get back to the so-called "friends". What’s with the Americans? How do they feel about the U.A.R.? There were rumors that someone came to visit you. What are their intentions? What can you see with this respect?

Nasser. Bundy came with a visit. I received him and our conversation lasted an hour and a half. It was a day or two before our arrival in the USSR. He spoke with me in an unofficial capacity. During our conversation, he actively inquired whether there were opportunities to resolve our disputes with Israel. I told him the same thing as I told Jarring, that is, I laid out our position to him. I told him, among other things, that we support the Security Council’s Resolution. He replied that it was unlikely that Israel would agree to the implementation of this Resolution. I am afraid that he doesn't know our region very well, its specifics, and its ancient culture. It is an old region, with an ancient civilization. Prophets Moses and Mohammed were born here, etc.

L.I. Brezhnev. Was Moses really born in Egypt?

Nasser. Yes, he was born in Egypt and then, together with the Jews, migrated to Palestine. The history of our region is full of various legends. It is a rich history.

A.N. Kosygin. I think that Bundy is well aware of the situation in the Middle East. After all, he once coordinated intelligence activities under the President of the United States.

Nasser. Yes, when I met him, I could see that he was an intelligent person. Bundy spoke of the need and desirability of restoring relations with America. But I told him directly that the only way we will agree to restore the relations, is if America declares that Israeli troops need to be withdrawn from [sic.] the lines they occupied before the 3 June aggression. But Bundy brought nothing new [to the table]. He asked a lot of questions and that was it. McNamara will visit the U.A.R. soon. He is coming to the U.A.R. as the Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. I also met with George Michael. He also spoke about the need to restore relations between the U.A.R. and the USA. I met with Andersen, whom I knew from before, and he also spoke about the need to restore relations between the U.A.R. and the United States. Of course, the United States understands that if they succeed in restoring the relations with Egypt, they will be able to restore them with all the countries of this region. Without establishing relations with Egypt, they will not be able to achieve this with respect to other countries. Since January they have been trying to resolve the issue of restoring relations, but we are not going for it. We will not be able to explain such a step to our people. Position of the United States in the UN, position of Rostow, as well as statements of other officials are an exact copy of the position of Israel, the position of open support for aggression, and therefore, naturally, we cannot agree to restore our relations.

L.I. Brezhnev. In a word, they toss their agents at you.

Nasser. Yes, but these are not official representatives of the United States, and during their conversations and meetings with me, they even claim that they are protecting Arab interests. Such statements were made by Andersen and McCloy, but of course I am aware of the [real] nature of their position. Bundy asked permission to come, we allowed. An informal visit is one thing, but the restoration of relations between the U.A.R. and the United States is quite another. The official reason for Bundy's visit was to study the activities of the Ford Foundation in the U.A.R. McNamara is coming under the pretext of studying the activities of the representative office of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development in the U.A.R. I can provide a general background of our relations with America. At one point McCloy came to us from Johnson and asked us not to conduct or engage in atomic and rocket research. In addition, McCloy put forward an inspection requirement. Of course, we resolutely refused and rejected such proposals, since such demands violate the sovereignty of our country. I stated this in one of my public speeches. Next time McCloy came and stated that the United States objected to the U.A.R. equipping its army with modern weapons, to increasing its power. During this visit, he also insisted on conducting an inspection. Then later I received a message through Talbot of much of the same content. When I refused to agree to these demands, Talbot read out the remainder of the message. The message stated that, in case their demands are not accepted, the United States would arm Israel even more and would not allow the so-called balance of power in this region to be disturbed.

L.I. Brezhnev. Talking about the peaceful settlement, about 5-6 points of this settlement, it is interesting to know in what format you discussed them with Jarring. Was it the same as what you discussed with us?

Nasser. Yes. At the very first meeting with Jarring, I told him that we were ready to fully state our position, and this was confirmed at further meetings. Our Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke with Jarring at length and in detail about our position.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, did you present all of the points of your position?

Nasser. Yes, except for the one concerning the free passage of goods and the passage of Israeli ships under their flag through the canal. We tied the resolution of this issue to Israel's readiness to comply with the UN resolution on Palestinian refugees. It should be noted that during the meeting McCloy raised the issue of the presence of the Soviet fleet in the Mediterranean. He said that the US was very concerned and worried about this issue.

A.N. Kosygin. As for the fleet, this concern is mutual.

Mahmoud Riad. During the mediation efforts, Jarring inquired about the possibility of sending UN troops, if Israel began to withdraw troops, in order to open the channel. We told Jarring that it was possible to withdraw the troops 30-40 km, as we discussed with Gromyko during the first visit. I told Jarring that we have no objection to the presence of UN troops during the Israeli withdrawal. These troops can return to the positions they occupied before 5 June so that they can be transferred to the Gaza Strip afterwards.

Nasser. I have not touched upon some issues, so I will state them now. The second issue which I would like to touch upon is the following: one American company has been in contact with the President of Somalia. This American company proposes to complete a project important to it. They are saying that if we agree to this project, then Israel will immediately leave the territories occupied after 5 June, and Egypt will not lose a single soldier during this operation. The essence of the project is that this company wants to dig a new channel to the east of Port Said. The width of such a channel could be 2,000 feet, so that ships could move in two directions. In addition to this, they want to secure a 10-mile-wide no man's land around the canal. Under a concession agreement for a period of 99 years, they would like to build in this zone various facilities necessary for the operation of such a canal. The company is prepared to finance the implementation of this project in the amount of $2 billion. If we consent, they are prepared to remit 50% of the profits to the government of Egypt. I emphasize, [50%] of profits, and not of the revenues. We have rejected this project, because it effectively means that another sovereign state will be established on our territory.

A.N. Kosygin. Yes, this was published in the newspapers.

L.I. Brezhnev. And is the Canal very clogged up? How long will it take to restore it?

Nasser. The cleanup of the Canal may take four months. In addition, another three months would be needed for dredging work, as there are sand deposits and therefore it will be necessary to do work to make it deeper.

L.I. Brezhnev. This means that should the settlement be reached, it will take another seven months to restore the Canal. In your speech, you said that you can wait another year, but it will be very difficult after that. How should we understand this? Can you explain it to us as a friend to a friend?

Nasser. The Israeli occupation leaves a certain impression on the general mood. Our people want the Jews to leave our territories immediately. It has now been 13 months since our lands were occupied. Another year will pass. It is difficult, but we can and will have to hold on. Then the third year will come, and Israeli troops will still be occupying our territories. Our people will then understand that we effectively surrendered to the Israeli aggressors, capitulated to them. Of course, we have people who suggest to negotiate with the Americans, believing that this is the only way out in the current situation. There [even] were such people in the government. They suggested that we accept assistance and loans from the United States, arguing that our country could not and would not survive in this situation. They believe that the situation from the economic, political and military points of view will only worsen, and therefore they say that the only way to solve this problem is to negotiate with the Americans. Others think that such a decision would mean a complete surrender, loss of independence, and in this case we would become nothing more than slaves. There were sharp disagreements on this issue. Zakaria Mohieddin resigned. I believe that our country will survive politically and economically, and will be able to restore military power. But such a situation can only continue for a maximum of two years, and naturally [everything] has its limits. I am saying that at the current moment we cannot advance, but in a year we will be able to fight. People understand this. I am saying this not in public statements, but during meetings with cadre personnel and at all sorts of meetings with the apparatus workers inside the country. They understand the situation when I explain it to them, but if I tell them that I don't know when we will drive Israel out, then I will be in extremely difficult situation. The opinion that it is necessary to come to an agreement with the Americans on this issue is more common among the intelligentsia than among the workers and peasants. It's been a year now, even more. We will still be able to endure this for another year, or a year and a half, and after that we will find ourselves in a very difficult situation.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, do you have people in Israel who know and could inform you about the true mood of the Israelis and about how they are going to act in the future?

Nasser. Unfortunately, we do not have such people.

L.I. Brezhnev. We should draw certain political conclusions from the fact that they stopped in front of the Suez Canal and did not advance any further.

Nasser. They are now regretting that they stopped there. The Israelis say that if they knew that things would turn out like this, they would have crossed the Canal. Dayan talked about it. We have received this information from journalists who visit Israel and, when they are in Cairo, inform us. Dayan now regrets that the Canal was not occupied on both sides.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, the Israeli ships never went through the canal?

Nasser. No, never. Since the formation of Israel, even Farouk did not allow their ships to pass.

L.I. Brezhnev. We have already said that it is necessary to look for ways of a peaceful resolution. [We] laid out 5-6 provisions for settlement talks. How should these issues be dealt with further from your point of view?

Nasser. I think that this should be done with the help of Jarring and the United Nations, and of course within the framework of the Security Council’s Resolution.

L.I. Brezhnev. If we think out aloud, moving away [from these issues], what other questions do you have in connection with this situation? We talked about conditions, forms, but there are other aspects, direct and indirect, related to the solution of the current situation.

Nasser. We have mentioned everything in connection with the peace settlement. Western powers tried to pressure us into direct negotiations with Israel and concluding a peace treaty with it. But this not possible.

L.I. Brezhnev. Do you consider the possibility that Israel may resume aggressive actions at this stage and advance even deeper?

Nasser. I think that this is possible with respect to Jordan. But it seems to me that in this case, the strategic position of Israel will become even worse. Its forces will be too scattered and stretched too thin.

L.I. Brezhnev. I figure their position in the Sinai Desert is not the easiest. Surely they have difficulties with moving supplies in the desert.

Nasser. Yes, but there are certain [transport] communications there: there is a railroad, there is also a motorway. In addition, Israel has a lot of helicopters, so they can solve the supply problem.

L.I. Brezhnev. Approximately how many kilometers is it from Tel Aviv to the Canal?

Abdel Moneim Riad. Approximately 350-400 km.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, do you have a large concentration of forces in the Aqaba region?

Nasser. The main forces are concentrated in Sharm el-Sheikh.

Abdel Moneim Riad. But only Israeli forces are there. We have surrendered Sinai.

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you assess the balance of power in the Mediterranean? What are your thoughts on it?

Nasser. Our Navy is stronger than Israel's in the Mediterranean.

A.N. Kosygin. Tell me, are our submarines in working order now?

Abdel Moneim Riad. Most of the submarines have been repaired. Now we have 8 of our submarines against 2 Israeli ones.

A.N. Kosygin. How is the situation with the command staff and crews? Have these issues been resolved?

Abdel Moneim Riad. Currently the ships are manned satisfactorily.

N.V. Podgorny. Tell me, your fleet is not laid up, right? It does go out to sea, correct?

Abdel Moneim Riad. For us, the main problem is air cover. Irrespective of where the advance [of the forces] is taking place, be it on land or at sea, our air cover is weak. We cannot undertake anything without resolving this issue. Our air force is weaker than Israel's.

Nasser. For the time being, we are trying not to engage in active combat, unless, of course, the Israelis begin aggressive actions.

N.V. Podgorny. I did not mean it in the sense that the fleet should be looking to actively engage. I just wanted to ask how things were with the exercises and training of the navy personnel.

Abdel Moneim Riad. Better now. In fact last month, we conducted joint maneuvers with the Soviet warships.

Nasser. Of course, as far as the fleet is concerned, we strive to have it more at sea than in port. Previously, the Navy went to sea only for maneuvers, and the rest of the time they were in port. It has become a habit. Now we are increasing the number and duration of maneuvers. I think that's what you meant by asking the question.

N.V. Podgorny. Quite right, that's exactly it.

Nasser. There are still rules and habits in the military that we are trying to eliminate. Discipline is currently being established in the military. Whoever resists the establishment of firm discipline gets removed from the army.

L.I. Brezhnev. Let's get back to the Security Council resolution. I think that it has good, useful points for us. But there is something that needs to be talked about and that should be discussed. Let's proceed from the fact that we voted for this resolution. You agree with it, the USSR agrees with it, therefore we shall implement it. The resolution has a strong provision – the first one, which talks of the withdrawal of Israeli military from the territories occupied as a result of aggression. This gives us the opportunity to demand the return of Israeli troops to the old positions they held before the 5^th of June. This provision is clear and there cannot be different interpretations here. The next provision speaks of the cessation of all claims or the state of war and of respecting and recognizing the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of each state in this region, and their right to live in peace without being subjected to threats and the use of force. This is also a good provision. Arab states must be sovereign, independent, live in peace and security and not be subjected to threats.

N.V. Podgorny. But this provision also applies to Israel.

L.I. Brezhnev. Yes, of course. Further it is talking about "recognized borders". This is written in the resolution, and there may be disagreements with respect to this. What does it mean? Who defines borders? You, they, me or the UN? This is questionable stuff.

Nasser. We asked Jarring to ask Israel about this. But Israel refused to tell Jarring anything definite. They don't want to answer this question at all.

L.I. Brezhnev. There may be danger for us in this.

Nasser. Yes, of course. 

L.I. Brezhnev. I think that we should work out a common position on this point.

Nasser. We believe that the first paragraph of the resolution, which rejects the seizure of foreign territories, explains the essence of the second paragraph.

L.I. Brezhnev. So do we. But the resolution goes on to talk about ensuring freedom of navigation on international waterways. There are two shipping routes in the area – the Aqaba Strait and the Suez Canal. This means that the entire international community will interpret this resolution in the sense that since we agreed with it, the canal will now be open to everyone, including Israel. There are no reservations here, [it states that the canal will be open] for all countries in the region. Therefore, our enemy, Israel, has an international document that we have voted for in the UN, on the basis of which he can say: we can sail freely on international waterways.  But as we discussed [previously], there is an element in the first part that contradicts the decision of the Security Council. We are facing a fight, and please do not consider the manner in which I am saying this as if this is our position. We are now discussing and considering the issue from different points of view. You should have no doubts about our support. What we did means more than any correspondence. But we need to use the momentum to pressure the United States. You know how they negotiate. They mention god, talk about peace and then at the end they say: let's do what we agreed to. And this contradicts the fact that Israel will be allowed to transport goods only under a foreign flag.

Nasser. But the resolution also mentions the need to reach a just solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees.

L.I. Brezhnev. Yes, but when the resolution talks about navigation, it says "ensuring freedom of navigation", but in paragraph about the refugees it says "achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem." There is a certain difference here, and it allows the enemy to interpret it something like this: in order to achieve this settlement we should negotiate. But these negotiations could continue for a year, even two. And this may interfere with a political settlement. The main issue is the withdrawal of troops, the recognition of independence, including that of Israel, freedom of navigation, i.e. ensuring this freedom. This is what our opponents may say. I am speaking for them now. They may say that by solving this issue we will eliminate the existing conflict: there will be no war, the sovereignty of the U.A.R., Syria and Jordan will be ensured, peace will be guaranteed in the region, and [in the meantime] the enemy will win a concession and will travel freely along the canal. As for the refugee problem, they may say that it has existed for 20 years. The UN is dealing with it – so let them regulate it. This paragraph could be interpreted as if [the parties] undertake to go to the UN and talk directly about this issue. [I mean] the last paragraph of the resolution. Ensuring the territorial integrity and political independence of each state in the region through measures which include the establishment of a demilitarized zone. But you can do without it. Guarantees of the international community, the UN and so on. This can be achieved in the course of a political struggle. Of course, this issue should be resolved only on a mutual basis. If, for example, one of the parties insists on the creation of demilitarized zones, then this should be done on the basis of reciprocity. E.g. 10 km one way and 10 km the other way. This should be the rule. Thus, based on what you have stated, one may notice two deviations from the decision that you and we have made. Israeli ships can only carry goods and only under a false flag. It is not freedom of navigation, they might say, and it is contrary to the UN resolution.

Nasser. These issues can be solved in 2 stages. During the first stage all issues, with the exception of the Suez Canal problem and the problem of Palestinian refugees, will be resolved. /Addressing Kosygin/ You have visited Port Said and you know that the canal runs right through the middle of the city. And now the precedent is being created whereas Israeli ships would sail through the canal under their flag. And this would be happening without the resolution of the Palestinian refugee issue.  I have no doubt that all Arab states will consider this a betrayal of Arab interests. This is what prompted me to say that we are tying the issue of [allowing] the Israeli ships’ to pass [through the canal] to the solution of the Palestinian refugee issue. This issue is the most painful issue for the Arab world. Without solving this problem, we cannot take such a step.

L.I. Brezhnev. We fully understand this problem. I would tell you one thing – personally, our desires may go much further. But one must reckon with the fact that the Israelis may say, "Mr. Nasser does not allow us to navigate through the canal. This violates the [provisions] of the Resolution, therefore there can be no peace."

Nasser. For our part, we will consent to the implementation of the Resolution, that is, to the paragraph of the Resolution concerning the freedom of navigation, as long as the problem of the Palestinian refugees is solved at the same time. As for the Palestinian refugees, draft proposals for addressing this issue are regularly put forward at the UN. Resolutions have been adopted repeatedly, but Israel does not want to implement them.

L.I. Brezhnev. Our opponents may say that the implementation of this Resolution resolves the issues of relations between the U.A.R., Jordan, Syria and Israel, while the Palestinian issue was already there 20 years prior to the aggression, and it should be solved separately from this issue. We should assume that this will be the sticking point for them, and they will stall for time, thereby delaying the settlement.

Nasser. This issue has existed since 1917, and in 1948 it escalated. Of course the Palestinian problem is not a new problem. Why did we go to war with Israel in 1948? Well, that was because Israel seized the lands of the Arabs and drove them out of their homes. This is well known to the entire international community. If I accept such a solution, Jordan may also agree to it, but Syria will reject such a solution, Algeria will reject it, and Iraq, [and then] all of the Arab states will turn their backs on us.

A.N. Kosygin. I think the point is not to tie the Palestinian problem into one package with other problems. As soon as they are tied together, it will all be over.

Nasser. We must not ignore the public opinion in all Arab states. After I accept [the terms of the settlement], Hussein will also be able to accept such a settlement, but without me, he will not be able to accept it. But I will repeat that all of the countries – Algeria, Syria and Iraq, will turn away from us. I will be facing an extremely difficult problem, one might say the most difficult. This will be the biggest shock for the vanguard forces of the Arab East, and Egypt will be blamed for this situation, since Algeria and Syria will reject it. The Arab world is at the boiling point. If people say that I have moved away from the Palestinian problem, that I have betrayed the Palestinian people, then all the progressive and vanguard forces of the Arab states will turn away from me. Even Faisal will declare, and he is already declaring, that this would be a betrayal. Such a decision would be the biggest downfall of all progressive forces.

A.N. Kosygin. Tell me, is it possible to discuss this issue behind the scenes with Syria and Iraq and other Arab countries?

Nasser. We must not forget that in spite of aggression, the struggle between reactionary and progressive forces continues. The reactionary forces in the Middle East oppose the policy of the U.A.R., and their most important goal is to put an end to the progressive regime in the U.A.R. You know this very well. Reactionary forces are trying to strike us, they are trying to revive the ideas of creating various reactionary pacts, such as the Islamic pact and so on. We in the U.A.R. are building socialism, we are following the path of carrying out progressive transformations within the country. I think there is a secret agreement between Saudi Arabia and America on how to fight against us. And in this regard, the Palestinian problem can be used very effectively [against us]. All these issues affect our position in the U.A.R. It can be said that the Palestinian problem is a sacred problem for all Arabs. If all people, regardless of their views and ideological convictions, learn that we are distancing ourselves from the Palestinian problem, betraying the interests of the Palestinian people, then they will all turn away from us.

A.N. Kosygin. Yes, this could be construed as betrayal. 

Nasser. Yes, take Bourguiba’s position for example. At one point, he announced the need to resolve the Palestinian issue in stages based on an agreement with Israel. The result of this was that the Arab world branded him a renegade and a traitor. The Palestinian problem is not a problem of one state, it is the most acute problem affecting all states. Even King Farouk could not allow Israeli ships to pass through the Suez Canal or make any contact with Israel. A revolution took place in our country, we embarked on the path of progressive economic and social transformations, and suddenly, ignoring the Palestinian problem, without solving the problem of refugees, we take such a step, capitulate to the enemy, and allow the passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal under the Israeli flag. Let us recall the recent events associated with the assassination of R. Kennedy. As you know, he made a speech in which he openly called for arming Israel, strengthening its military economic power, giving it full support and, if necessary, defending it. This angered not only the Palestinians but all Arabs. One Palestinian killed him. In the diary that was found this Palestinian made an entry about his decision to assassinate Kennedy before 5^th of June. In 1948 the killer was a little over 2 years old. He has lived with his family in the United States for 12 years, and yet remained a Palestinian committed to the idea of fighting for a just solution to the Palestinian problem. By delaying the solution of the Palestinian problem, the Americans were hoping that the younger generation of refugees would assimilate, forget about the demands and thoughts of the older generation, but as you can see, this did not happen. Our situation is very specific. In a Palestinian family, every mother and father constantly talk about the Palestinian problem, about the lands from which they were expelled, and about the homes they lost. If, for example, we take all the students who study in Moscow, then these will be people with different opinions and worldviews. Among them will be both forward-looking people, socialism-oriented, with progressive views, and people with reactionary views. All of them are Arabs, but they can only come to a common position and they can only agree on one issue, and this issue is the issue of the Palestinian refugees. Of course, it is already 20 years old. But despite this, it is something all Arabs desire. On this issue everyone’s opinions meet. I can give you another example. So in 1952, King Abdullah of Jordan, the grandfather of the current King Hussein, said that he was able and ready to have a conversation with Israel. He was killed the following week.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, are you sure that the Palestinian killed Kennedy for this reason? We thought that the Americans were blaming this murder on the Arabs in order to provoke anti-Arab sentiments among the American people.

Nasser. No, this is accurate information. He has lived in the States for 12 years, was born in Jerusalem, now he is 22 years old, a jockey by profession, a Christian by religion, but a Palestinian.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, could it be possible that the American intelligence agencies used him for political reasons? American intelligence could have taken such a step to show the whole world that it was not the Americans who killed Kennedy, but the Arabs, and use this to create a certain mood among the international community.

Nasser. I still believe that the reason for the assassination was R. Kennedy's position on the Israeli issue, and that it was triggered by Kennedy's statement about the need to arm and assist Israel.

A.N. Kosygin. But it’s not a good idea to take responsibility for this, and you don't have to. You may turn the American people against you. You know how certain circles can spin this.

Nasser. Yes, sure.

L.I. Brezhnev. Let's continue to analyze the situation.

Nasser. In 1954, I negotiated with the British regarding a military base. During the negotiations we made a concession to keep the base for 7 years. At the end of this period the British were under obligation to withdraw. We also agreed that all service personnel at the base would be civilian. I signed this agreement. Prior to that, the British had already been in our country for 75 years. But a week after the signing of this agreement, while I was making a speech, 8 shots were fired at me. Luckily the bullets missed. Most people considered such a concession a betrayal of national interests, a betrayal of the country. I have spoken publicly at length trying to explain [the terms of] this agreement. That is precisely why we link the solution of the issue of the passage of Israeli ships with the solution of the problem of Palestinian refugees. In our opinion, the Security Council Resolution should be implemented in two stages.

L.I. Brezhnev. What do you think and what is your opinion on whether it is beneficial to raise the issue of the resolution in the Security Council in the course of its implementation? Confirm that the troops are being withdrawn, that the end of the state of war is recognized, that the sovereignty of each state is respected, that freedom of navigation is recognized, and then introduce a clearer language on the issue of Palestinian refugees in terms of setting a time limit within which the Palestinian issue needs to be considered and resolved. At least for a year or so. Would this format work for you?

Nasser. I think that Western countries will not agree with this. The Americans, in the first place, will raise all sorts of objections and create insurmountable difficulties. The British have already told me that they will not allow a single word of the Security Council Resolution to be changed. They believe that this is a balanced resolution, and any change would upset that balance.

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you think they will react if you agree to let the cargo [ships] pass?

Nasser. During Farouk’s [rule], before the revolution, cargo [ships] were allowed to pass. In essence, this went on until 1956, but after the aggression, we banned the passage of Israeli cargo.

A.N. Kosygin. I think it would be difficult to determine whether Israeli cargo has been stopped from being transported through the canal. There is a lot of cargo and it is extremely difficult to check it.

Nasser. We carry out inspections of [all] ships passing through the canal. 

L.I. Brezhnev. Can you tell me for what reasons and on what points Syria disagrees with this resolution?

Nasser. In my conversations with the Syrian leaders, they have told me that if I accept the Security Council Resolution in this form, it would cause me certain political damage in the Arab world. [However], I went ahead and committed to adopting this Resolution for the sake of achieving a political, a peaceful solution to the conflict.

Mahmoud Riad. In the opinion of the Syrian leaders, the adopted Resolution will eliminate the Palestinian problem, because this resolution de-facto recognizes Israel and it contains a clause on the recognition of its borders, etc.

Nasser. I know that the internal situation in Syria is certainly different from the situation in the U.A.R. The most hysterical attitude towards the Palestinian problem is observed among the Syrians, and it is very difficult for the ruling party to talk to the people about the Palestinian problem while departing from the full and unconditional support for the rights of the Palestinian people. More than any other country, Syria is committed to the cause of Arab unity, to [solving] the Palestinian problem and to Arab nationalism.

L.I. Brezhnev. And what about Iraq?

Nasser. Iraq practically takes the same positions and sticks to the same opinion.

A.N. Kosygin. You said that joint negotiations with Israel are out of the question, but negotiations can be conducted through Jarring. If you conduct your negotiations through Jarring, is it possible to organize them so that they are held in the same place? For example, Arabs could be in one house, Jarring in the middle, and Israelis in another house. For example, India and Pakistan could not bring themselves to getting together and discussing disputed issues. Pakistani President Ayub Khan and Indian Prime Minister Shastri could not speak to each other. I stayed in one house, Shastri in another, and Ayub Khan in the third house. I sat down with one of them for 6 hours, and then for 6 hours with the other. This way the negotiations could be more productive. We could organize this in Yalta, Odessa, or some other place and, with the help of Jarring, implement this. This is the first question.

Nasser. Of course, you should not count on the fact that our people are simpletons. Everyone will immediately understand that these are in fact direct negotiations with Israel. As for the UN and negotiations there, that is another matter. Everyone is represented in this organization, including Israel and us. In addition, India and Pakistan had diplomatic relations.

A.N. Kosygin. At the time, the ambassadors of India and Pakistan returned to their [respective] home countries. So this won’t work. Tell me, can you sign a common document, not a peace treaty, but a declaration on the cessation of the state of war? For example, we do not have a peace treaty with Japan. We have been at war for a long time. But we have signed a joint declaration to end the state of war. In this declaration we and the Japanese each stated our point of view. And although we do not have a peace treaty, the state of war has been terminated. How do you like this idea? Can this work, given that this is a declaration, not a peace treaty?

Nasser. Any joint action or signing of any document with Israel is impossible. We have a special situation here.

A.N. Kosygin. Well, with the Japanese we, too, do not have a peace treaty, but we signed such a declaration.

Nasser. How much time had passed before you signed such a declaration?

A.N. Kosygin. Eight years.

Nasser. We are ready to end the state of war in accordance with the Security Council Resolution. But if I bring the Israelis to Yalta or Odessa, all Arabs will hate you because you brought the Arabs and the Israelis together. The situation here is different from what was happening between India and Pakistan.

A.N. Kosygin. We understand this, and it does not mean that this is our position. Now we are thinking this issue over and discussing it from all sides. Jews are said to be the smartest people. We must think about how to outmaneuver the Jews.

Mahmoud Riad. I recently made a series of visits to the Scandinavian countries. During these visits, I have repeatedly confirmed our desire to achieve peace, to solve the problem by peaceful means. I had a lot of discussions at the government level, met with government officials, made a number of statements on the television and radio. It should be noted that the people who worked with us on radio and television, journalists and reporters, were pro-Jewish. They all asked about direct negotiations between the Arabs and the Israelis. To inform the public of the Scandinavian countries, I reminded them that we had two negotiations with Israel with the help of the United Nations. We even signed an agreement in Rhodes. However, Israel terminated this agreement when it wanted to seize the neutral zone. It trampled both this agreement and the United Nations. For a long time both at the UN and with the help of this organization, we were negotiating the solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees. But after Israel was admitted to the UN, it declared that it rejects the agreed protocol on the issue of Palestinian refugees. In my speeches, I also gave the second argument. Israel refuses to comply with all resolutions adopted by the United Nations on the Palestinian issue. In one of my speeches on television, I said that we were ready to negotiate with Dayan, but can you imagine if Dayan agreed to these negotiations? They would look something like this: I would ask Dayan when Israel plans to liberate captured Jerusalem. In response, Dayan would only laugh. I could ask him when they will withdraw the troops from Sinai. He, too, would laugh at this question. I could ask him when Israel will liberate the Gaza Strip. I would even ask him when he will agree to implement certain decisions on the issue of Palestinian refugees. Dayan, in response, would only laugh and say that for 20 years Israel has held this position and dragged out the solution of all these issues, and that he has no intention of solving them now after 20 years. I would then ask him, what can we then discuss in these negotiations? I am sure that Dayan would then give me a document that would memorialize the annexation of Arab territories and our defeat, and would mention absolutely nothing about the Palestinian refugees. The third argument that I have repeatedly cited, are the statements of the Israeli leaders themselves, highlighting their plans and intentions, including Israel's talk about creating a great Israel, about increasing the Jewish population through immigration to 5-6 million people. There were no such negotiations, but if they did take place, they would have gone exactly    like [I described above].

L.I. Brezhnev. At least after such a discussion a peaceful settlement can be replaced by a military one.

A.N. Kosygin. Well, we have already solved the problem by peaceful political means. We can now do it the military way!

Nasser. We are convinced that if we are not strong enough and if we do not have sufficient military power, then Israel will not, under any circumstances, agree to a political settlement. If we are not able to prevent aggression, if we do not have enough strength to do so, then Israel has no reason to leave the Arab territories captured by it as a result of the aggression.

L.I. Brezhnev. Jews are positioned on the other bank [of the canal]. Can ships go through the canal?

Nasser. The Israelis refused and do not give us the opportunity to clear the canal.

L.I. Brezhnev. What exactly are they doing? After all, the canal passes through your territory?

Nasser. The question of clearing the ships out [of the canal] was raised before us by a number of countries. We agreed with the request of the Great Britain, supported by the Secretary General of the United Nations, to clear the canal and remove 14 vessels stuck there as a result of the aggression. We even agreed on the dates when these works would begin. But as soon as our tugboats were deployed into the canal to perform the necessary work, Israeli troops immediately opened fire on these boats. They stated that they objected to work on this side of the canal.

L.I. Brezhnev. Was that a public statement? I don't remember seeing it.

Nasser. Yes, the Israelis have said it publicly. After that, we had more contacts with England, and they asked us if we were ready to resume work on clearing out the ships. We replied that our position had not changed. The British said that they would get in contact with the representatives of various states in the UN on this issue. But this was never discussed any further.

Speaking of our situation, we would like to note the tremendous assistance that you provided to us in the military, economic and other fields. I have a memo on these issues with me here, but I think we will not discuss other issues today. Let us work on the issues of settlement, that is, the issues of peace or war.

L.I. Brezhnev. We have already discussed the issues of the peace. We are now left with the questions of the war.

Nasser. As to the matters of the war, you know what Israel has at its disposal. Therefore, we leave it to you to make the appropriate estimates and calculations related to this, and to determine Egypt’s degree of preparedness and the moment when Egypt will be ready. I want to tell you frankly that we will not start the fight without coordinating with you. We will not restart the war without your consent to it. There must be a full agreement between us with respect to all of the details related to this issue. Personally, I believe that what is captured by force can only be returned by force. Of course, I prefer the peaceful way of solving our problems, since war has numerous dark sides. But if we do not reach a peaceful settlement, and Israel, in turn, continues its aggressive course and continues to declare that the ceasefire line suits it, and that Israel is not going to liberate the occupied territories, then we therefore have only one path left – the path of war. In order to solve the problem in this way, it is necessary to prepare, reorganize the armed forces, train personnel, and resolve all the issues necessary for this. It takes confidence to win. The military of the Soviet Union will be able to assess the needs of Egypt in military power in order to win this fight. Based on these assessments, we will create and build our armed forces. Soviet specialists, together with Egyptian specialists, will determine the strategic line in this way. Frankly speaking, we can now start a guerrilla war against Israel in the Sinai desert. We have people for this, we have personnel trained for these purposes. In addition, we can start a war in a year or a year and a half. But, if we go for it, we must know to what extent we can act and what will happen to us. Before my visit here, I told our ambassador that I did not come here to say that I needed 50 tanks or a certain number of canons. On 8 June, after the aggression, we had practically no army. When Cde. Podgorny was in the U.A.R., I told him about it. Now we have a force capable of conducting defensive operations. It is necessary to transform a defensive force into an offensive one. I think that this is achievable with the help of the USSR. Speaking with you openly, I believe that you will treat this issue of ours as your issue, too. If we are defeated in this battle, then imperialism will triumph in the Middle East. We have defeated the Baghdad Pact and the Islamic Pact – these tools of imperialism. In the course of the historical development, socialist states were born in our region, and they proclaimed a course for socialist conquests. This gave bright hopes to every Arab.We proclaimed the same slogans as you. We must have a real army. We must have modern technology, the same as Israel has, and obviously, somewhat superior than Israel’s. How much and what – I leave this for the Soviet military to decide. This is my opinion.

L.I. Brezhnev. How do you evaluate the work of Soviet advisers? Is this a useful thing?

Nasser. Yes, it is useful. Of course there was propaganda against the advisers, attempts to discredit this idea. But these attempts were thwarted. The overwhelming majority of the personnel of the U.A.R. armed forces understands the usefulness and necessity of Soviet advisers. During my trips around the country, in meetings with the military, I have repeatedly emphasized that it was I personally who asked for the Soviet advisers.

L.I. Brezhnev. Tell me, do you have plans for the construction of airfields in the region?

Nasser. Yes

L.I. Brezhnev. And what are Syria and Iraq doing in this regard?

Abdel Moneim Riad. I do not know exactly the plans of the Syrians. As to the Iraqis, they want to build an airfield on the territory of Jordan, and in addition to this, build an airfield in Iraq on the site where the oil pipeline passes.

Nasser. The Iraqis made a deal with France to supply a certain number of aircraft, but then this deal fell through. To confront Israel, we need aviation, no worse than what Israel has, especially with regard to the range, because at present the range of Israeli aviation is much greater than ours. We also need equipment that would make our army more maneuverable. But again, I want to say that I don't want to talk about the details. I leave it to the Soviet military. Our task is to liberate the occupied territories, and if we have to do it in a battle, we must be ready for it. If we fail in this battle, everything will come to an end, everything will fail.

L.I. Brezhnev. [Losing] for the second time will be unacceptable.

Nasser. Yes, what happened on 5 June was a disaster.

L.I. Brezhnev. If you don't want to bring up other issues now, maybe we should finish. It seems that we will have to prepare the answers for all of your questions.

The conversation was translated by V.V. Posuvalyuk

The conversation was recorded by A.I. Kuzmin

3-mk, gz/AK

mk.3166/gs

06-07-1968

[Handwritten: Outgoing No. 449/obv, 08-07-1968]