University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Foreign Relations of the United States

Page View

United States Department of State / Foreign relations of the United States, 1951. The Near East and Africa

The Near and Middle East: multilateral relations,   pp. 1-342 PDF (132.2 MB)

Page 72

  so low that the Iraqi Government has never received more than $10
  million per annum for its tremendous oil resources, which could pro-
  duce quantities comparable to the present Iranian and Saudi Arabian
  output. The country resents the fact that it has oil and is getting little
  for it.
  B. Recommendations
    1. In view of the Conference findings that certain oil companies, in
 particular British companies, have in the past threatened stability in
 the Middle East through reactionary and out-moded policies with
 respect to the countries concerned, vigorous representations should
 be made to the Foreign Office to the end that henceforth British com-
 panies be brought to conform to the existing joint United States-
 United Kingdom policies designed to promote stability in the Middle
                         IN THE MIDDLE EAST
 A. Conclwsions
   1. Admiral Carney outlined a series of military intelligence require-
 ments which are not being adequately met at the present time, namely:
   (a) Reporting on ship cargoes entering and leaving Iron Curtain
   (b) More complete and prompt coverage of all merchant shipping
 in the Middle East, which is essential to the initiation of effective ship-
 ping control measures;
   (c) More voluminous and accurate target and logistical-data;
   (d) Maps and air photograph coverage;
   (f) Extension   and  modernization   of dossiers on    important
   (g) Speeding up of intelligence reporting and dissemination.
   2. Proper coordination of intelligence operations in Washington
and the field is essential to avoid overlapping or conflict of directives
and operations. The Conferences assumed that the Central Intelli-
gence Agency under its present leadership will nowbe able to provide
coordination in Washington, and noted that individual Chiefs of
Mission clearly have the responsibility for field coordination. While
effective field coordination depends largely on personal relationships,
most delegates to the Conference seem to favor a general supervision
(a) to keep informed on important intelligence activities, (b) to
resolve problems, and (c) to prevent difficulties which could militate
against United States interests.

Go up to Top of Page