Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Arab-Israeli Dispute; United Arab Republic; North Africa, Volume XIII

99. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, November 10, 1959¹

Washington, November 10, 1959

SUBJECT

• Arab-Israel Question and Palestine Refugee Problem (Three of three)

PARTICIPANTS

• For the United States:
  • The Secretary
  • NEA—Parker T. Hart
  • IO—Woodruff Wallner
  • NE—William D. Brewer
• For the United Arab Republic:
  • H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Fawzi, UAR Foreign Minister
  • H.E. Dr. Mostafa Kamel, UAR Ambassador

Dr. Fawzi said the UAR desired world peace and no unpleasant surprises in the Near East, whether with respect to Israel or otherwise. The Secretary noted that we had understood the UAR had recently been concerned about the possibility of some Israeli action. We had endeavored to check this as far as possible and could find no evidence that the Israelis were planning to initiate anything. Dr. Fawzi replied that, whether it was with respect to the Jordan River or any other problem, nothing should be allowed to disturb the maintenance of area peace which was useful and vital to the development of the states concerned. The Secretary assured Dr. Fawzi that no one could desire settlement of the manifold Arab-Israel difficulties more than the US.

Dr. Fawzi remarked that the moment did not seem propitious to seek a definitive solution of the Palestine issue. There were two present imperatives: (1) the situation should be kept quiet; and (2) provision should be made for the continued care of the Palestine refugees. The Secretary observed that Congress was increasingly reluctant to approve funds for assistance to the refugees without some indication that progress would be made towards a solution of this problem. The Department would find it difficult this year in seeking additional funds from Congress unless there could be some glimmer of a possible solution. Dr. Fawzi responded that other Parliaments had had the same problem. He had suggested to other representatives that they might suggest to their Parliaments that, pending a final solution of the Palestine problem, the refugees either had to be supported or the situation around Israel’s borders would explode. The Secretary recalled that the US had already appropriated more than a quarter of a billion dollars for the refugees, including $63 million for training and resettlement. UNRWA had made an effort to do more than merely feed the refugees, but so far very little had happened.

Dr. Fawzi expressed the hope that the US delegation would not put difficulties in the way of renewing the UNRWA mandate for a definite period of time. The Secretary observed that the US delegation could not commit the Congress. It was probable that UNRWA in some form would be continued, but Congress might at some point vote no further funds if it were indicated that assistance would continue to be required indefinitely. The Secretary therefore hoped there would be suggestions during the debate regarding a way out of this dilemma. Dr. Fawzi observed that all nations had appropriations problems, but it was sometimes possible to reach agreements in principle for future years subject of course to the availability of funds. The Secretary reiterated that we would like to see some light at the end of the road.

Dr. Fawzi cautioned that any attempt to discuss general aspects of the Palestine question would give rise to more difficulties in the UN. He also felt that any exploration of a possible alternative body to UNRWA would be unhelpful. The Secretary replied that the US had no interest in any proposal whereby the same organization would merely be called by a different name.

Mr. Wallner wondered whether it might be possible to find some intermediate ground between the status quo and a final solution to the Palestine question. Perhaps there might be a move in the direction of integration of the refugees. Some development of this nature would be helpful in connection with the problem the Secretary had outlined. Dr. Fawzi commented that the question had to be looked at from the Arab, as well as the US, point of view. For example, any reference to the word “integration” by the UN would result in attacks throughout the Arab area, with allegations made that the rights of the refugees had been surrendered. Dr. Fawzi felt that the more modest the proposals put forward, the more realistic would they be. Expressing agreement, the Secretary noted that Congress might nevertheless show a degree of impatience which the Department could not control. Dr. Fawzi observed that the Arabs also had very profoundly entrenched differences but that, in New York, they had been seeking to work out a compromise on the extension of UNRWA, believing five years a better solution than either one year or an indefinite extension. Perhaps the UNGA might decide to take note of the Secretary General’s report, and his suggestion that UNRWA be extended, and approve such an extension for a five-year period. Of course, any delegation could independently express the hope that a solution might be found to the Palestine question but any effort to scatter and settle the refugees would create trouble. The Secretary emphasized that the US continued to support the principle of repatriation or compensation for the refugees. Dr. Fawzi observed that the Israelis had recently said publicly that they were ready to negotiate. The Arab reply was that the Israelis should first show their good will by recognizing existing UN resolutions and Arab rights. Once these rights were recognized it would be possible to seek a solution for the Palestine problem. Meanwhile, we should seek to continue cooperation on specific problems.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 884.411/11–1059. Secret. Drafted by Brewer on November 13 and approved by S on November 16. Fawzi was in the United States for the U.N. General Assembly session.