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

501.BB Palestine/6–1848: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

secret
us urgent

Washington, June 22, 1948—noon.

2332. We share Bevin’s concern, as reported your 2702, June 18, for continued functioning of important oil refinery at Haifa. However, it would seem that since neither Jews nor Arabs can profit by operation of oil refinery without agreement between themselves, since Jews will control refinery and Arabs the crude oil, there exists in the case of Haifa a unique opportunity for mutual accommodation which may serve as a constructive example of how Jews and Arabs can manage to get along peaceably throughout all of Palestine and the Near East.

We do not find it easy to give advice to Mr. Bevin regarding evacuation of Haifa by British forces during period of cease-fire. We feel that person best qualified to give advice on this subject is Count, Bernadotte, who is charged with maintaining the truce and cease-fire and who, as Bevin hopes according to Para. 7, your 2701, June 18, we trust will be successful in extending the present truce and cease-fire.

Re specific questions put in your 2702, June 18, para. 6, please see Deptel 2302, June 18.¹ Following are answers seriatim:

a. We see no impropriety in UK informing Mediator of approaches to it by Jews and Arabs re reopening Haifa.

b. We think it would be useful for UK to inform Mediator of its views regarding an arrangement for Haifa along lines of Para. 4 of reference telegram.

c. We shall be glad to inform Bernadotte of our views as set forth in (a) and (b) above and have no objection if UK likewise informs him of our concurrence.

It would seem from para. 3, urtel 2700, June 18,² that there have been conversations in London between unofficial representative of PGI and UK FonOff regarding Haifa refinery. We are encouraged by Goldmann’s reported remark that PGI would not object if representative of Mediator controlled production in Haifa refinery, Arabs receiving a fair share of output.

We believe that Mediator will wish to keep in mind importance of Haifa production going to ERP and to legitimate civilian requirements of Near East, including Israel. In conformity with principles of truce agreement we do not feel that Haifa production should be used to increase military potential of either Israel or Arab States.³

Marshall

1. Not printed.
2. Not printed.
3. In telegram 172, June 23, 6 p. m., to Haifa, the Department furnished the text of 2332 “for your info and communication to UN Mediator if he is in your vicinity.” No. 172 was repeated for action, if necessary, to Jerusalem and Cairo (501.BB Palestine/6–2348). The following day, the Department authorized Cairo to convey informally the contente of 2332 to the French Ambassador there, stating that “We see no objection to French Govt making representations to UN Mediator with regard to protecting Haifa refinery and securing its rapid resumption of full production in interest not only of Near East economy but of ERP.” (Telegram 860, 501.BB Palestine/6–2448)