I am attaching hereto a memorandum which discusses in some detail various
factors involved in the problem and sets forth the considerations which
cause the Department to feel that it would be in our national interests
to support the application of Trans-Jordan for membership in the United
Nations.
I would appreciate it if you would let me know whether you approve the
course of action which the Department suggests. The matter may come up
for discussion before the Security Council Committee on Membership
within the next few days.
[Enclosure]
Memorandum for the President
Subject: Position of United States with Respect to
Admission of Trans-Jordan to United Nations.
The Kingdom of Trans-Jordan which was recognized by the British
Government as an independent country on March 22 of this year, has
[Page 415] applied for membership
in the United Nations and the question has arisen as to whether or
not the delegate of the United States to the Security Council should
be instructed to vote for its admission. The decision which the
United States Government takes with regard to this matter is certain
to have considerable repercussions, both of a domestic and an
international character.
Most of the Zionists and the supporters in the United States of
extreme Zionism are opposed to the recognition of Trans-Jordan as an
independent country and, therefore, to the admission of Trans-Jordan
into the United Nations. On the other hand, Great Britain and the
Arab world are extremely anxious that the application of
Trans-Jordan for admittance shall not be rejected.
[Here follows discussion in some detail of the mandate for Palestine
awarded to Great Britain by the Council of the League of Nations on
July 24, 1922.9a]
It seems to the Department that in the absence of precedents, and in
view of the possibility of various interpretations being placed upon
the language used in the Mandate, in the American-British
Convention,10 and in other
pertinent documents, the Zionists can produce plausible arguments in
favor of their position. The Department is of the opinion, however,
that the position of the British from the legal point of view is the
more sound. The Department also feels that in making its decision,
the Government of the United States should consider the factual and
international political aspects of the problem, not solely those of
a legalistic nature.
Among these considerations are the following:
- 1)
- Trans-Jordan has been a separate and autonomous part of
the Palestine Mandate since 1922, and those provisions of
the Mandate which related to the Jewish national home have
never been applied to territory East of the Jordan.11 The development of Trans-Jordan as an
Arab state under a separate Arab government has resulted in
the evolution of that territory in a direction quite
different from that taken by Palestine proper. Even the most
extreme Zionists have in [Page 416] the past apparently recognized the
special and semi-independent position of Trans-Jordan within
the Palestine Mandate, and they have not taken exception to
Article 25 of the Mandate which sanctioned the exclusion of
Trans-Jordan from the provisions relating to the Jewish
national home. Furthermore, the population of Trans-Jordan
is almost wholly Arab, and, so far as is known, contains no
Jewish residents.
- 2)
- Great Britain has gone so far in setting up and
recognizing an independent Kingdom of Trans-Jordan that it
is not now possible for it to change its policy in this
respect. Great Britain, therefore, apparently has no choice
other than to support the application of Trans-Jordan for
admission into the United Nations. If the United States
should oppose the admission of Trans-Jordan, a rift would
take place between Great Britain and the United States in
the Middle East with a resultant weakening of the position
of the Western Powers and a decline of Western influence in
that area. Such a development would be extremely unfortunate
in the present world situation.
- 3)
- The government of the United States may find it expedient
to vote reluctantly for the admission into the United
Nations of Albania and Outer Mongolia, countries which have
no greater degree of independence than Trans-Jordan. The
Philippines and India are already members of the United
Nations. It would be difficult to explain to the Arab world
why the United States in such circumstances should oppose
the admission of Trans-Jordan, which is a member in good
standing of the Arab League. In this connection, it might be
pointed out that the British Embassy has furnished the
Department with a paraphrase of instructions issued to Sir
Alexander Cadogan on this subject. This paraphrase reads in
part as follows:
[Here follows text quoted in fifth paragraph of telegram 3373, July
11, 4 p.m., to Paris, page 411.]
In view of the above considerations and of the over-riding political
necessity of maintaining the peace and stability of the Middle East,
it is recommended that the delegate of the United States be
instructed to vote for the admission of Trans-Jordan to the United
Nations.
