501.BB Palestine/10–1849: Telegram
The Ambassador in Israel (McDonald) to the Secretary of State
756. In conference lasting 90 minutes with Foreign Minister October 17, Ford and I discussed substance Deptel 636,1 6372 and 647.3 [Page 1445] Foreign Minister first apologized his inability see Ford sooner explaining “press of business” had kept him otherwise occupied.
Re general question Jerusalem and particularly PCC proposals Foreign Minister did not depart materially from position heretofore laid down by lesser officials of Foreign Office (Embtels 726, October 5, and 740, October 10).4 He called PCC proposals “provocative, anachronistic” document, saying both immigration limitation and demilitarization features particularly “unrealistic”. He said Israel “fully aware” deep interest Christian world in safeguarding holy places but pointed out “fully 90 percent” these places in Arab hands and thus he was unable understand why Israel being “repeatedly importuned” in matter actually outside its control. He added Israel just as much concerned safeguarding its own holy place (specifying Wailing Wall and Rachael’s Tomb) which likewise remained Arab hands. He concluded by saying Israel “fully prepared approach Jerusalem question coldly and dispassionately” and “to give all consideration outside world opinion provided such outside opinion gives similar consideration to Israel’s interests”.
Re violence press campaign against PCC proposals and threats physical violence implied in Jerusalem Congentel 609 and from other “mysterious” sources, Foreign Minister inclined dismiss latter as “work of irresponsible but harmless trouble makers”. Press reaction showed depth of Jewish feeling re Jerusalem “which had lasted some thousands of years” and which PCC plan has merely “fanned into new flame”. This connection Foreign Minister cited “violent anti-Israel campaign” recently conducted by world Catholic press, all of which he said was based on “slanderous lies and misrepresentation”.
Comment: Ford concurs with me in belief that, pending discussion Jerusalem question by GA, no useful purpose would be served in further presentation subject here. I gather these people have formulated plans of their own for GA debate, and until then they appear to be stalling by plowing old ground. Moreover, rather graver subject discussed at same long conference (Embtel 752, October 185) has tended distract Foreign Minister’s attention from Jerusalem issue which for moment appears have more of an academic than active interest for him.
I am inclined to agree with Foreign Minister’s estimate of anonymous threats of violence although in view last year’s tragic happenings I propose bring each instance this nature, however far fetched, promptly to Foreign Minister’s attention. End comment.
Sent Department 756; repeated Jerusalem 93; Department pass Amman 57.
- Dated September 30, not printed, but see footnote 2 to memorandum by Wilkins, September 26, p. 1407.↩
- Dated September 30, not printed, but see footnote 2, p. 1412.↩
- Not printed; it directed Tel Aviv to bring to the attention of the Israeli Foreign Office the substance of telegram 609, October 6, from Jerusalem (501.BB Palestine/10–649). No. 609 advised that the Consulate General had received a “visiting card” from the New Underground for the Freedom of Jerusalem. The reverse of the card was said to bear a handwritten inscription to “tell Truman and Acheson through your facilities we will deliver all information to them.” The message also informed that General Riley had received a similar card, with the statement “withdraw your proposals and inform all your agents. Stop it. Otherwise you will go the same way as Bernadotte.” (867N.00/10–649)↩
- Latter not printed.↩
- Not printed, but see footnote 3, p. 1441.↩