501.BB Palestine/12–448: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Delegation at Paris
niact
Gadel 683. According to PW 128 from Garnish and Knapp,1 Dec, 3, Committee 1 approved by a vote of forty-two to one with twelve abstentions, US suggested language for terms of reference of Palestine Conciliation Commission.2 According to this language Commission would be instructed to “assist Governments and authorities concerned to achieve final settlement of all questions outstanding between them”. We realize that your alternative phraseology was all that could be achieved in order to win approval of Committee for some form of a resolution dealing with Palestine problem. Dept approves position taken by Del.
We presume Del has considered position which US might find itself in if appointed member of Conciliation Commission under these terms of reference which are so generalized and vague. Although previously Dept was prepared for US to serve as member of Conciliation Commission together with France and Belgium we now wonder, since Commission lacks directives which had been established in par 4 of revised UK draft resolution, whether we might not find ourselves in position of whipping boy if we served on this body.
Pls let us have your views urgently.
- John H. Garnish and John P. Knapp of the International Broadcasting Division, apparently attached to the United States Delegation at Paris; the editors have been unable to identify PW 128.↩
- The Department’s position on the terms of reference for the Conciliation Commission had been set forth initially in Gadel 522, November 18, and in footnote 2 to that document. The position had been spelled out further in the United States amendments of November 23 and 25 to the British draft resolution; see editorial note, p. 1623. The vote by Committee One on the United States amendments embodied two negative ballots, rather than one, as erroneously given in the text above; see GA, 3rd sess., Pt. I, First Committee, Summary Records, 1948, p. 887.↩