501.BB Summaries/11–2147: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
1244.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(33rd Meeting)
In a three-hour meeting, the Subcommittee on Nov. 20 discussed the implications of the latest UK statement on Palestine. Apparently, there was a general feeling that the changes required by the UK stand would probably not alter the partition report significantly and that these revisions would be acceptable. Both the US and USSR, however, as well as others indicated they would need to consult their governments before proceeding with the amendments. Poland and others expressed concern at lack of “final” UK statements on some problems.
The main changes which would be required were summarized by Pearson (Canada) and incorporated in suggested amendments circulated by him at the close of the meeting. They included: deletion of” the provision for SC approval of the arrangements for mandate termination and transfer of authority; several changes of language to indicate that the UK’s authority would be transferred to the UN commission and not directly to the provisional councils; (“the administration of Palestine, after the termination of the mandate and as the Armed Forces of the mandatory withdraw, shall be progressively turned over to the Commission”) to indicate that the UK would maintain all authority intact until termination of the mandate; and other [Page 1277] wording changes to indicate that the UK alone would be responsible for military authority in areas from which its forces had not yet withdrawn, even after termination of the mandate.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Subcommittee 1 submitted an additional report to the Ad Hoc Committee on November 21 to take account of Mr. Cadogan’s statement of November 20; for text, see GA (II), Ad Hoc Committee, p. 265.↩