501.BB Palestine/4–1448: Telegram

The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State

secret

446. For Rusk from Knox. With reference to USUN 4391 containing draft of truce proposal to be discussed at SC meeting Thursday following is gist of comments made at private meeting of SC members, held at USUN office April 14. (All members of the SC were present, except Parodi who was represented by a staff member, Dr. Arce appeared for the first time following his return from Bogotà and Buenos Aires, Sobolev represented Secretariat, Lie was absent):

Lopez explained that working paper containing truce terms which was to be discussed at the meeting had been prepared at the staff level by representatives of Colombia, UK, US, China, Canada and France. [Page 822] Gromyko claimed that he had no knowledge that such drafting group was being formed and he apparently resented that this unofficial document had been prepared in his absence. There was a brief exchange between Gromyko and Lopez during which Lopez became rather heated. The matter ended when Gromyko indicated that the matter was not of great importance and when Lopez apologized for any misunderstanding which he (Lopez) may have unwittingly caused when he announced that this drafting meeting would be held.

Cadogan stated that his government wanted to get the views of the High Commissioner of Palestine on the proposed draft before committing itself.

El Khouri questioned the phrase (paragraph 1–b) “of military age”. This he thought was too vague. It was subsequently changed to “capable of bearing arms”.

Gromyko asked what clause in the resolution guaranteed the prevention of more armed bands from entering Palestine. Syria replied rather aggressively that Jews were coming into Palestine and that the Arabs in view of the present ratio of population had the right to enter Palestine in twice the number in order to keep the proportion even. This matter was settled, at least temporarily, when Lopez stated that the proposal was “for a standstill”, and when Cadogan indicated that for the duration of the mandate the legal immigration quota of 1,500 per month would be continued.

Syria apparently accepted Canada’s (assurance that immigrants not armed or capable of bearing arms would not affect the military position in Palestine. Gromyko challenged point 4 of the proposed draft. This paragraph provided for a truce commission. Gromyko thought that the choice of members of the SC who had consulates in Jerusalem to compose the truce commission was arbitrary. At Lopez’ suggestion this paragraph was eliminated (also some feeling in USUN that the presence of Syria on a truce commission might cause a bad public reaction to the commission and, by implication, to the truce proposal). Syria approved of the truce commission, and seemed determined not to withdraw voluntarily from the commission if it were eligible for membership.

During the paragraph by paragraph examination of the proposed draft, Austin suggested:

Insert “provisional” in paragraph 1 in order to make the phrase read “the following provisional measures”. There was general objection, however, that this addition might shorten the duration of the truce.

In paragraph 1–a, Syria proposed substituting “as well as” in place of “including” and this was generally agreed to. In paragraph 1–b Syria supported by Canada and China replaced “military age” by wording which appears in USUN 439. In paragraph 1–c, Austin attempted [Page 823] to replace “refrain from” by “prevent”. There was general feeling, however, that the word “prevent” would encourage Arabs and Jews to enforce this provision on each other and hence increase the fighting. In paragraph 1–f, Austin suggested “protect” instead of “refrain from any action which will endanger”. Members, however, objected that this might encourage Jews and Arabs to send armed forces to protect the Holy places.

Paragraph 2 was reworded as now appears in USUN 439 at the request of Cadogan. Paragraph 4 was dropped, because of Russian objection but might be introduced in the SC meeting on Thursday.

Austin
  1. Dated April 14, supra.