Discussion with Israeli President Shazar on Vietnam and
Peace
(August 2, 1966)
This memo, reporting on a conversation between President
Johnson and the Israeli President about Vietnam, U.S. support for Israel
and peace between Israel and her neighbors. The U.S. reported that it
did not want to be a major arms dealer and Israel responded that it
wanted to live in peace and not have to rely on U.S. arms. Johnson expressed
concern over American Jewry's criticism of the war in Vietnam and President Shazar responded that he
was President of Israel and not of world Jewry, but would try to minimize
Jewish criticism of Vietnam. The Government of Israel also expressed
disappointment at UN criticism of Israel and expressed hope that the
U.S. would stand by Israel.
Memorandum of Conversation/1/
Washington, August 2, 1966.
SUBJECT
Call on President Johnson by President Shazar
PARTICIPANTS
President Lyndon B. Johnson
His Excellency Zalman Shazar, President of Israel
His Excellency Avraham Harman, Ambassador of Israel
Mr. Ephraim Evron, Minister, Embassy of Israel
NEA--Assistant Secretary Raymond A. Hare
The Honorable Walworth Barbour, Ambassador to Israel
Mr. Walt W. Rostow, Special Assistant to the President
S/CPR--The Honorable James W. Symington (for portions)
Mr. William Moyers (for portions)
NEA/IAI--Harrison M. Symmes
After a brief private conversation with President Shazar, President
Johnson asked the other Israelis and Americans present to join him and
President Shazar. President Shazar discussed some of the impressions
he had gained in his visits to Uruguay, Brazil and Chile. He mentioned
particularly educational problems faced by some of these countries and
commented on some of the leaders he had met.
President Shazar recalled he had first met President Johnson at the
funeral of President Kennedy. He had been one of the first Chiefs of
State received by President Johnson after the funeral. They had had
a memorable conversation in which President Johnson assured him there
would be no diminution in U.S. support of Israel as a result of President
Kennedy's death, but, indeed, U.S. support might be even greater. He
had reiterated to President Shazar assurance previously made by President
Kennedy. After his return to Israel President Shazar said he had repeated
to persons all over Israel what President Johnson had said to him. He
continued to tell people about the President's assurances to Israel.
President Shazar thanked President Johnson for the sale of U.S. military
equipment to Israel. President Johnson responded that this had been
a difficult decision because we do not wish to become an arms merchant
anywhere in the world. Nevertheless, we had made the sales because we
had been persuaded by Israel that the arms were necessary. President
Shazar commented that Israel in turn does not like to have to buy arms.
Israel would like nothing better than to live at peace with its neighbors,
but Israel has been given no alternative. The Fatah raids on Israel
have resulted in the murder of innocent Israelis. Israel has no alternative
but to defend itself. To establish its own Fatah is no alternative.
It must have military force to deter its enemies.
President Shazar at one point apparently misunderstood President Johnson
and thought he was referring to the current U.N. Security Council consideration
of Syrian and Israel complaints. It appeared he thought President Johnson
had referred to "Israeli aggression." He said that Israel
had not always been happy about U.N. consideration of problems involving
Israel. U.S. representatives in the U.N. did not always take a clear-cut
line with regard to problems involving Israel and the Arabs. Unless
the U.S.G. takes a clear-cut line with the Arabs and shows by its votes
that it is opposed to aggression the Arabs will not get the message.
U.S. action is particularly important in persuading the younger generation
in Israel: a "skeptical generation" among a "believing
people."
The two Presidents had an extended discussion of the principles involved
in the U.S. stand against aggression in Vietnam and its implications
for U.S. assurances it will seek to deter and prevent aggression against
other small states. President Johnson said that the U.S.G. did not want
troops or money from Israel. We were asking for no material support
from Israel in Vietnam. What we wanted was sympathetic understanding
of the principles involved and what we are trying to do. The United
States has commitments to other small states. It was important to ask
this question: if, because of critics of our Vietnam policy, we did
not fulfill our commitments to the 16 million people in Vietnam, how
we could be expected to fulfill our commitments to 2 million Israelis?
Yet some friends of Israel in the United States had publicly criticized
U.S. policy in Vietnam and had called upon the President to disengage
the United States from its commitment.
President Johnson stressed that these critics seemed to believe that
one could pick and choose how he would oppose aggression against small
states. A principle was involved. Either we opposed aggression against
small states and honored our commitments, or we did not. We could not
fail to honor our commitments in one place and then try to hold to them
in another place. Our failure to carry through in Vietnam would be bound
to affect our ability to carry through in our commitment to other small
states such as Israel.
President Shazar and the other Israeli officials present indicated
that they understood this principle and its implications. President
Shazar noted that among the first things he had mentioned on reaching
American soil was Israel's appreciation for the policy of the United
States toward the security of small states from aggression. This applied
to the situation in Vietnam and what the United States was doing there.
Other Israeli officials recently had spoken along similar lines. The
President interjected that he had received from the Israel Embassy a
statement recently made by Foreign Minister Eban along these lines.
President Shazar commented that he was happy he could say he had made
his statement before the President had raised the matter. This indicated
Israel's understanding of the principle.
President Johnson emphasized that he had reiterated to President Shazar
our assurances regarding Israel's security. In doing so, he also wanted
to make clear how our commitment in Vietnam and public criticism of
that commitment was involved. During an extended discussion President
Shazar said that he was President only of Israel, not of world Jewry,
and that he had no control over what Jews elsewhere in the world might
say. He and the other Israeli officials present indicated, however,
that they understood President Johnson was referring to the criticism
of U.S. Vietnam policy that had been made recently by Jewish groups
in the United States, particularly Rabbi Weinstein, and that it would
be important for the Government of Israel to make known its views on
this matter. President Shazar gave every impression of comprehension
of the problem.
President Shazar showed President Johnson the statement he proposed
to read to the press upon his departure from the White House (attached)./2/
President Johnson indicated his approval of the statement. He also told
Mr. Moyers that in speaking to the press about the call of President
Shazar he might comment along the following lines: President Shazar
had told the President about his recent visit to Latin America and his
impressions of problems and leaders in the countries he visited. The
two Presidents had then reviewed world problems and the desire of the
United States and Israel to try to promote peace. President Shazar had
stressed Israel's desire to live at peace with her neighbors. The two
Presidents had discussed the intention of the United States to help
small nations to defend themselves against aggression. There had been
some mention of the joint U.S.-Israel desalting project and U.S. economic
assistance to Israel.
/1/Source: National Archives and Records
Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964-66, POL 7 ISR. Secret; Exdis.
Drafted by Symmes on August 5. According to the President's Daily Dairy,
the meeting took place at 12:46 p.m. in the President's office at the
White House. (Johnson Library) President Shazar's visit was informal.
Briefing material for the visit is ibid., National Security File, Country
File, Israel, Shazar Visit Briefing Book.
/2/Not attached.
Sources: Foreign
Relations of the United States, 1964-1968, V. 20, Arab-Israeli Dispute
1967-1968. DC: GPO,
2001. |