Office of the Historian

501.BB Palestine/10–2548: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

secret
Washington, October 25, 1949—5 p. m.

3828. US continues favor incorporation Arab Pal in Jordan but Dept considers action premature this time (Deptel 3768 Oct 191). Re action after GA (Embtel 4218 Oct 202) Dept believes matter might be reconsidered then in light GA action re Pal and gen polit and econ developments in NE. We have discussed matter informally with [Page 1452] Brit Emb rep but made clear further consideration depended on developments.3

Acheson
  1. Not printed; it summarized the conversation of Messrs. Wilkins and Greenhill on October 14; see p. 1426.↩
  2. Not printed; it conveyed what was described as the impression of the British Foreign Office that the United States might be “willing agree incorporation Arab Palestine in Jordan after GA.” (867N.014/10–2049)↩
  3. Messrs. Wilkins and Greenhill discussed the Palestine problem again on October 21. The latter stated that “Adequate arrangements should be made for the safety of the Holy Places and access to them.” Later in the discussion, he said that “The United Kingdom was prepared to give general support to the Palestine Conciliation Commission’s plan for the internationalization of the Jerusalem area … It was not anxious, however, to take the initiative or to bring pressure to bear on Israel or the Arab states with regard to the plan.” He also stated that his Government would avoid discussing the incorporation of Arab Palestine into Jordan during the current session of the General Assembly but would wish such action realized at the end of the session.

    Mr. Wilkins’ memorandum of conversation notes that “I pointed out that the views of the Foreign Office with regard to Jerusalem were not completely clear to me. I said that if the United Kingdom Delegation confined its remarks in the General Assembly to the safety of the Holy Places and access to them, the impression might be created in the General Assembly that the United Kingdom did not generally support the internationalization of the Jerusalem area. Mr. Greenhill said this was not the British intention and that he would bring this point to London’s attention.”

    Concerning the formal union of Arab Palestine and Jordan, Mr. Wilkins writes that “I again pointed out that it was too early to tell what action might be taken on this score as it would be necessary to await developments in the General Assembly and to consider the situation in the Near East after the end of the General Assembly before we would be in a position to determine what action could be taken” regarding the matter. (501.BB Palestine/10–2149)

    ↩