Research master thesis | Middle Eastern Studies (research) (MA)
open access
2023-01-29T00:00:00Z
During the summer of 1958 Iran, Israel and Turkey concluded a secret agreement to share intelligence data and information gathering techniques. This agreement, the Periphery Pact (‘Pact’), was...Show moreDuring the summer of 1958 Iran, Israel and Turkey concluded a secret agreement to share intelligence data and information gathering techniques. This agreement, the Periphery Pact (‘Pact’), was initiated by Israel who was anxious to establish relationships with countries on the periphery of the ring of hostile Arab countries that encircled it. The Pact signatories, engaged in a diplomatic marketing initiative to sell the Pact to their Cold War sponsor, the United States in the belief that US support for the Pact was beneficial. Existing research tells us little about how the United States reacted to this sales pitch or what US policy was towards the Pact. My research of the US diplomatic archives indicate that the US response to the Periphery Pact arrangements was decidedly lukewarm. This appears inconsistent with US regional policy which was to stimulate the creation of regional defense arrangements by its regional allies to counter Soviet threats to the region. I argue that the response of the United States to the Pact may not be a complete surprise if analyzed in the light of the US response to the Baghdad Pact, a contemporaneous defense arrangement in the region. I also investigate how the US intelligence services reacted to the Pact. This aspect of the US policy towards the Pact is under-researched. This is surprising given Israel’s track record in clandestine diplomacy and its use of its regional intelligence gathering capabilities as an argument when marketing the Periphery Pact to US officials. My research indicates that the CIA displayed more interest in and provided resources to the intelligence sharing mechanism of the Periphery Pact. It may well be that the United States used clandestine diplomacy in parallel, rather than as a substitute, for normal diplomatic channels.Show less
