501.BB Palestine/10–2547: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom
us urgent
niact
4578. For the Ambassador. It is of greatest importance that you discuss immediately with Mr. Bevin certain aspects of the Palestine problem now before the UN. For background reference see: (1) unanimous recommendations I and II of UNSCOP providing for termination of Palestine Mandate and independence in Palestine; (2) majority recommendations A and B 1 (a) of UNSCOP providing for transitional period; (3) UK statement of Sept. 26;1 (4) US statement of Oct. 11;2 (5) UK statement of Oct. 163 (all in UN Ad Hoc Committee on Palestine).
It appears that some difference has developed between the US and the UK with regard to responsibility for the administration of Palestine during the process of transition to independence. We have been [Page 1208] assuming that, in asking the GA for recommendations concerning the future government of Palestine, the UK has been seeking recommendations on the basis of which it would make disposition of its mandate. The UK statements indicate a different approach. It will be appreciated if you will discuss this matter with Mr. Bevin along the following lines:
It is clear from Report of Special Committee on Palestine and from statements by US, UK and other members of UN that there is general agreement with regard to early termination of mandate and prompt establishment of independence in Palestine; and that UK intends to terminate mandate and to withdraw its forces and its administration within limited period except in case of agreement between Jews and Arabs or if the UK is able to accept a role in a UN administration.
In this connection, however, question arises as to whether mandate might not be terminated and independence achieved in Palestine in a shorter time than was contemplated in majority plan of UNSCOP. It may not be necessary to envisage an interim period of greater length than that which Government of the UK will require in any event to withdraw its forces and its administration from Palestine.
If the GA adopts recommendations based upon majority plan of UNSCOP, US considers that position of the UK might be substantially met by recommendation that British Government upon withdrawal turn over responsibility to the authorities of the Jewish and Arab states. This would permit passage of responsibility directly to the independent states proposed by the UNSCOP majority without the necessity of passing through any formal transitional period.
In order to facilitate transition to independence, it is suggested that GA’s recommendations to the Government of the UK with regard to the future government of Palestine might provide for the appointment of a UN Commission, headed by a UN High Commissioner, to act as agency of transfer. It is believed that duties of such UN Commission might include making final adjustments in boundaries recommended by UN, assisting in transfer of administration and of assets of government to authorities of Jewish and Arab states, and making final report to GA on termination of mandate and establishment of independence in Palestine. We should appreciate Mr. Bevin’s views on these points, and particularly with regard to the assistance which the UK Govt would be prepared to offer the UN Commission during the transitional period.
US considers it essential for UN recommendation to include the date on which British Mandate would be terminated. This question has already arisen in UN and it is almost impossible to determine upon preparatory steps leading to establishment of the two states in the absence [Page 1209] of a period of known duration prior to their independence. We suggest July 1, 1948 and would be interested in learning British reaction. For your info. USSR Representative has already said that he would insist on a date being set for termination of mandate.
For your background and discrete use we consider that it would be extremely unfortunate for the British at this time to make an announcement regarding a specific date of withdrawal.
It is repeated that the foregoing is based on assumption that majority plan of UNSCOP would meet with approval of ⅔ of Members of GA. If majority plan does not meet with such approval, Govt, of US must, of necessity, reconsider its views with regard to question of Palestine.
Department and US Delegation plan to approach UK representatives in Washington and New York with views expressed above simultaneously with your approach to Mr. Bevin in London. If Mr. Bevin agrees with our general approach, it would be most helpful if he could indicate as much to the UK Delegation in New York.4