Office of the Historian

196. Telegram 146420 From the Department of State to the Embassy in London1

Washington, June 21, 1975, 0036Z.

146420. Subject: British Request Delay in U.S. Military Shipments to Guatemala.

During June 16 working luncheon with Assistant Secretary Rogers, DCM Moreton and First Secretary Walker of British Embassy reviewed state-of-play of talks with Guatemala on Belize issue, asserted that USG provision of patrol boats and C–47 aircraft to Guatemala could have harmful impact on talks, and asked whether USG could hold up on delivery such matériel until direction of talks becomes clearer. Rogers re [Page 555] plied that we had already decided to reconsider question of C–47s for Guatemala on basis of Guatemalan purchase of ten Arava aircraft and would keep HMG advised. However, we were in final stages of approving FY 75 FMS credits to cover patrol boat purchases and would find it difficult to justify reversing that process. Since delivery of five patrol boats would be spread over two years and since GOG planned use some in Atlantic and some in Pacific, we thought impact with respect to Belize would be minimal. Memcon being pouched.

Kissinger

  1. Summary: During a June 16 discussion on the Belize issue, Assistant Secretary Rogers informed Walker that the Department would reconsider the sale of C–47 aircraft to Guatemala, given the latter’s decision to purchase Israeli Arava aircraft.

    Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D750217–0187. Confidential. Repeated to Belize City and Guatemala City. In telegram 138417 to Guatemala City, June 13, the Department expressed its concern that the Guatemalan Government had attempted to mislead U.S. officials in its acquisition of Israeli aircraft, noting that the deal, combined with the proposed purchase of C–47s from the United States, would increase Guatemala’s ability to invade Belize. (Ibid., D750206–0904) In telegram 3217 from Guatemala City, June 20, the Embassy suggested that British sensitivities over Guatemala’s military capabilities and intentions might be exaggerated. (Ibid., D750218–0672) The memorandum of conversation mentioned in the last sentence of the text was not found.

    ↩