Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "498693791",
    "label": "August 4-10, 1970",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/498693791"
}

{
    "id": "498693791",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/498693791",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "August 4-10, 1970",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/498693791",
    "collections": [
        "National Security Files (Nixon Administration)",
        "Henry A. Kissinger Telephone Conversation Transcripts (Telcons)"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-nsf/579113/Batch0002/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-nsf/579113/Batch0002/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-nsf/579113/Batch0002/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 91,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/498693791",
    "naId": 498693791,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 6,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-nsf/579113/Batch0002/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05/37-natsec-kissinger_telcons-579113-06-05-006.jpg",
    "mediaId": "152e3629c5a32168",
    "ocrText": "TELCON\nSisco/Kissinger\n2:50 pm\n/ 4/70\nS: First, we have gotten which I have had LDX'd to you the official response.\nIt's highly quilified even though we are playing it as an acceptance. I don't know\nif the other side will accept our decision. The Israelis have made it public. I\nsuppose she had to. It says \"I have the honor to\nyou that the position of\nmy Government is as follows: ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? the Government of Israel has\ndecided to reply affirmatively. It would have been better to say accept. \"? ? ?\n?\nto Amb. Jarring. 11 And they interpret our plan. It would habe been all right if\nthey read it like the Egyptians. It means they are ready to talk, to designate a\nrepresentative to discussions to he held under Jarring's auspices according to\nwhat he recommends. His position in favor of a cease-fire is what the Govern-\nment resolution said the other day. The cease-fire on Mxx Jordan front has never\nbeen null and they buy it where Egypt is concerned. Their proposal on the\nJordan side is more positive than ours. If you are for full cease-fire then surely\nthey are for a 90-day one. It goes on to say it has to be a binding peace agreement.\nIt's all fine if it were a separate letter. In the end they say Israel will not\nhave\nprior\nconditions.\nThey go on xhakx to say that Egypt must regret (?)\nall\nbelligerency. One positive thing, they state the principle of withdrawal.\nK: From the territories?\nS: No \"the\". From the conflict. The problem is -- when we saw Jarring yesterday\nhe said he wanted each party to say that they agree to the statement he is putting\nout. The Israeli reply doesn't subscribe. The statement is the American\nsee\nproposal. Tekoah is seeing Jarring. I told Yost to tell Tekoah to XXX that he\nconveys to Jarring the affirmative reply agreement to Jarring issueing the\nstatement in the U. S. proposal. They say they are for the UN putting out the\nstatement. The Egyptian statement is much more categoric.\nK: Much more clever.\nS: We may be at a major hurdle. When the other side reads it they may say\nthey haven't accepted it. If they are smart they will play it in positiver terms.\nK: Is that what Rogers wants to talk to the President about?\nS: I doubt it because he hasn't read it. I talked to Packard today abour arms.\nWe are okay on 95% on NSSM 46 (?). Secondly, the Israelis have come in\nwith a priority package of 4 items. The Pentagon is going on various studies.\nThe Pentagon is cooperating. He said the Israeli thing you have isn't a perfect\npackage. They are not interested in perfection. They want something now because\nEgypt is helping it's position before the cease-fire. So he said they would work\npositively and give us an answer. If there's a problem I will let you know. The\nfundamental difference may be that my estimate of the Pentagon view is that they\nare not keen on supplying the Israelis with suppresive weapons.\nThat\nThings\nthat"
}