Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume V, Part 2

501.BB Palestine/4–948: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

top secret

Washington, April 9, 1948—7 p. m.

1260. Cirtel April 6 outlines Dept views regarding necessity for truce and trusteeship for Palestine. Working draft possible trusteeship agreement has been furnished UKDel New York and additional copies being forwarded you airmail.¹

You are requested to see Bevin earliest practicable and seek UK agreement to following joint course of action:

1. US, UK and France to use maximum effort diplomatic and other means to obtain truce between Arabs and Jews of Palestine. Terms of truce should be conditional on attitude of parties but elementary basis would have to be military cease-fire coupled with political stand-still.

2. US, UK and France to agree to present trusteeship proposal jointly to GA. Dept considers draft statute for Jerusalem, recently worked out by TC (in which UKDel played most active and helpful role) could be quickly adapted for Palestine as whole and substantially shorten task of agreeing upon draft for joint sponsorship. This is, in effect, basis of working draft mentioned in Par. 1. Refinements could be worked out during course GA consideration.

3. Reference #7 general principles contained Cirtel April 6, US, UK and France to agree to accept jointly responsibility for assisting Governor-General Palestine maintain security if his locally recruited police and volunteers need reinforcement. Present expectation, of course, is that reinforcement will be required, scale depending upon course of truce negotiations.

4. US, UK and France to join in inviting number of other members UN to share security responsibility in order to provide broad UN basis and to maintain solid group of friendly states interested in peaceful settlement Palestine problem. Dept tentatively suggests such joint invitations be extended to Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden. UK suggestions regarding such list would be welcome.

In presenting matter to Bevin you should make following points to impress upon HMG critical importance to world peace and to security of US–UK that war in Palestine be avoided:

1. Security of Middle East is essential to security of Western World.

2. Large-scale fighting between Jews and Arabs over political settlement in Palestine must be prevented for humanitarian reasons. The continuance of such fighting would probably result in further Soviet exploitation of the situation which might result in the establishment of a Soviet satellite in at least a part of Palestine.

3. Present efforts to ensure the security of Greece, Turkey and Iran would be threatened by Soviet penetration of Palestine; settlement of the Palestine question for the time being would open the way for further steps by US and UK to ensure the security of the Middle East.

4. The temporary location of US, UK and French forces in Palestine would exert a stabilizing effect in this area which is particularly important at this time.

5. US cannot undertake unilateral commitments in the Middle East; if US and UK are unable to cooperate in preventing development of a situation in Palestine which would render that country vulnerable to Soviet penetration, joint efforts on our part to maintain security of the whole Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East will be jeopardized.

6. Continued heavy fighting in the Middle East would seriously jeopardize ERP success because large scale European oil requirements from Middle East could not be met.

7. Unless some temporary settlement can be found, competing Jewish and Arab governments will be declared on May 15, each urging legal claim to legitimacy. Each would obtain recognition by a number of states and precipitate a situation of utmost gravity.

8. Failure of US, UK and France to bring about peaceful conditions in Palestine after May 15 would seriously impair prestige of the three governments and of UN and would result in loss of support of other nations which will be needed if the general political situation continues to deteriorate.

9. Unless US, UK and France exert genuine and responsible leadership in this situation, it will not be possible to obtain the firm action by overwhelming majority of UN necessary to settle Palestine question without giving USSR opportunity for exploitation of Palestine situation.

10. In view of UK insistence upon termination of mandate May 15, trusteeship offers only possibility providing emergency government for Palestine. Trusteeship is firmly rooted in governmental powers which UN has under the Charter and does not rest upon recommendation; under the Charter, UK is an essential party to a trusteeship agreement, else no legal basis for UN action exists.

11. As matters now stand, there will be no authority in Palestine (UN or otherwise) after May 15 capable of exercising governmental or administrative responsibility. The abandonment of Palestine under such circumstances will make UK in the eyes of world opinion solely responsible for the results of such abandonment.

12. Other members UN openly expressing increasing irritation at lack of UK cooperation in finding and sharing in UN solution to problem which UK itself placed before UN for recommendation. If UK continues to adhere to present attitude of refusal to participate in working out solution public opinion in this country is certain to be deeply aroused and may handicap us in obtaining the kind of close British-American cooperation which the international situation demands.

Instruction along same general lines is being sent to Paris.²

Repeated to USUN New York 202 for info.

Lovett

1. See footnote 1, p. 778.
2. Telegram 1178, April 9, 7 p. m., not printed; it instructed the Ambassador in France to seek the agreement of Foreign Minister Bidault to the proposed joint action. It was virtually identical in wording to the telegram to London, except that points 5 and 12 were omitted from the message to Paris (501.BB Palestine/4–948). The following day, the Department instructed Paris to delete the words “by US and UK” in paragraph 3 of the points to be pressed on the Foreign Minister (telegram 1179, 501.BB Palestine/4–1048).