501.BB Palestine/3–548: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin)
niact
107. Careful review has been made of draft statement on United Nations responsibility for Palestine as of May 15, 1948 and of your 242, March 4.
It is our opinion that the essential factor in Security Council’s consideration of Palestine problem is whether or not Council will accept plan of partition with economic union recommended by General Assembly last Nov. 29. This question is posed specifically to Council in Par. 1 of US Res of Feb. 25. You again laid stress on this essential question in your remarks to Council on March 2.
We had thought it preferable to bring this issue to sharp focus in the vote today on US Res, of Feb. 25 and Belgian amendment seeking: to delete Para. 1 of that res., dated Feb. 27.
However, following telephone conversations with USUN we defer to your judgment that it is essential for Council’s conciliatory machinery to be used before final decision is taken. We shall be guided by your opinion that issue will mature more naturally in a week or ten days’ time and that the conciliatory machinery of the Council will result in [Page 680] showing beyond any doubt whatsoever that the differing attitudes of the Jews for partition, Arabs against partition, and the Mandatory Power for leaving Palestine, are at present irreconcilable.
Should the conciliatory process reach what seems to be this inevitable conclusion there is still need of a clear-cut decision by the Council on whether or not to accept the requests made of it by the General Assembly. We do not feel it incumbent on the United States to draw its own conclusions after the results of conciliation are known and then to suggest the specific program outlined in your 242. Rather, we feel that the matter should be brought to a vote, not at the instance of the United States but on the motion of some colleague such as Colombia or China. This could be done, for example, in a resolution pointing to the negative results of conciliation as confirming the Council’s previous negative vote on paragraph 1 of the United States resolution of February 25.
On such a resolution the United States would abstain on the ground that it did not wish to cast a veto. This would indicate that we were impressed by the facts reported by the Conciliation Committee but would not force us to go on record as voting against partition.
As for the debate in the Council today, on the United States and Belgian Resolutions, you have already been instructed by telephone to indicate our strong opposition to the essential aim of the Belgian Resolution which is to delete Paragraph 1 of the United States Resolution. You will point out that a bare ten weeks intervene between now and May 15, the announced date of termination of UK responsibility for Palestine. You will stress that the Council cannot evade a decision on whether or not to accept the requests of the General Assembly’s Resolution of November 29.
The approved text of the proposed statement on United Nations responsibility for Palestine after May 15 follows by separate telegram, with certain minor textual changes. You should add the following conclusion:
“Now that these conclusions have been made clear, what is the next task of this Council?
By the vote on March ______ it is evident that the Security Council has rejected the requests made of it by the General Assembly in its resolution of November 29, 1947. It is evident that the Security Council has rejected the partition of Palestine.
As I pointed out a few moments ago, my Government believes that the plan proposed by the General Assembly was an integral plan and, as the Chairman of the Palestine Commission clearly indicated, it would not succeed unless each of its parts were carried out.
The decision of the Security Council has been taken. This decision is contrary to the position which the United States Delegation has [Page 681] taken but as a loyal member of this Council we defer to the will of the majority.
The Security Council now has before it clear evidence that the Jews and Arabs of Palestine and the Mandatory Power are not prepared to implement the General Assembly plan of partition through peaceful means. The announced determination of the Mandatory Power to terminate the Mandate on May 15, 1948, if carried out by the UK, would clearly result, in light of information now available, in chaos and heavy fighting in Palestine. We cannot believe that the UN, the Mandatory Power, or the inhabitants of Palestine could permit such a result. We believe that every possible effort should be made by all concerned to find a peaceful settlement prior to departure of British forces from that country.
The United States believes that the Security Council should take immediate steps for the maintenance of international peace and security and for finding of a settlement of the Palestine problem. The United States believes that the Security Council should now:
(a) Take all measures under the Charter to ensure that the situation in Palestine shall not become a threat to international peace and security.
(b) Request the Secretary-General to convoke immediately a special session of the General Assembly to consider further the question of Palestine.
(c) Continue its efforts, in consultation with Representatives of the principal committees of Palestine and the Mandatory Power, to ascertain whether there is any basis for agreement on a future government of Palestine which would permit the early attainment of independence by that country.
(d) In the event that the consultation foreseen in (c) above proves without affirmative result, to consider recommendation to the Special Session of the General Assembly that until the people of Palestine are ready for self-government they should be placed under the trusteeship system of the United Nations.
(e) Request the UK to reconsider its decision to terminate the mandate on May 15, 1948, pending further consideration of the problem by the General Assembly and in order that the United Nations may make further efforts to find a peaceful solution.
(f) Instruct the Palestine Commission to suspend its activities pending further recommendations by the General Assembly.
The United States makes these suggestions to the Council because of our deep concern over the prospective course of events in Palestine. As I stated in my remarks to Council on February 24, the United States seeks a solution for Palestine within the framework of the United Nations. That means, of course, that we would be glad to consider any other proposals from any source which might provide an answer for this complicated question. We are convinced, however, that whatever is to be done must be done promptly, and that further delay may become synonymous with disaster.”