501.BB Palestine/2–248: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin)
50. Your tel 121, Feb. 21. Careful study of first report submitted by Palestine Commission does not indicate that action by SC is necessary or desirable at this time. In fact Commission’s report points to need for continuing negotiations with the Mandatory Power and to Commission’s second special report on security and enforcement aspects of Palestine partition problem. This study by the Commission will be forthcoming by Feb. 15.
Accordingly in SC session Feb. 10 we feel that you should not participate in debate except, if discussion should wax acrimonious and emotional, to counsel patience and make a plea for objective thinking on the problem. You should state that you are much impressed by diligence and objectivity evidenced in Commission’s first report and thank Commissioners for their effective contribution. You should then add that your Govt. believes Council should not undertake a full-dress debate or seek to reach definite decisions at this stage in light of Commission’s first report which lays emphasis on need for further negotiations [Page 605]with the Mandatory Power, for negotiations with the Representatives of the Jewish and, if at all possible, the Arab communities in Palestine, and the fact that the Commission will next week introduce its special report on security and enforcement. These reasons impel your Govt. to feel that the Council’s decisions can only be taken after thorough study of the Commission’s next report, particularly since it is due within so brief a space of time.
For similar reasons should JA seek admission before Council to present its views you may make it clear that while we shall support right of JA and AHC to be heard (as authorized in Deptel 37, Jan. 302), we question whether Council should now hear JA Representatives before having had opportunity to study Security Report of Palestine Commission.
Should question of Council’s authority to assume jurisdiction in Palestine matter arise please be guided by terms of memorandum sent you under cover of Rusk’s letter of Feb. 3 but in no circumstances indicate at this time whether this Govt. favors action being taken by SC. Jurisdictional question should be dealt with as technical matter only. Should question of submitting any aspect of Palestine problem to ICJ be broached please state that you must consult your Govt. We agree with your recommendation that communication of AHC set forth in your tel. 46  Feb. 6,3 should best be met by dignified silence.
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed; it gave the text of a statement of February 6 communicated to the Secretary-General of the United Nations by Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee. The statement maintained that the partition resolution did not represent the sentiments of the United Nations and denounced the pressure allegedly put by the United States Delegation and Government on certain nations as “nothing short of political blackmail.” (501.BB Palestine/2–648) The text of the statement is printed in United Nations document A/AC.21/10.↩