First Response

British officialdom welcomed the new U.S. plan and even the anti-Americanism of the Tories thawed slightly. Here and there the Tory press, which had long wanted the U.S. to move "jointly" with Britain in the Middle East, was tempted to crow that the new U.S. position merely paralleled the British line--which contended that Britain had launched its attack against Egypt just to stop the Russians. "As things are now shaping," snapped Beaverbrook's Sunday Express, "we may have [Eisenhower] ordering us back into Egypt . . . I hope the thought of it isn't spoiling his golf game this week on the Augusta golf course where America's Government now seems to be permanently established." Liberal, Laborite and independent newspapers kept up their strong support of the U.S.; the influential Observer, a bitter critic of Britain's Suez venture, printed a dispatch from its Washington correspondent: "Suddenly, American intentions in the Middle East have taken on a creative, independent and positive air."

Arab officialdom was more cautious. There was no vacuum, they maintained, that the Arab peoples could not fill. The Egyptians reaffirmed that they are cold war neutrals, that the only outside force they want in the Middle East is the U.N. In Washington, Syria's ambassador to the U.S., Farid Zeineddine, warned that no new U.S. moves into the Middle East could apply without "prior and explicit agreement" with the Arabs--which is a key provision of the U.S. plan.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.