501.BB Palestine/12–749
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Secretary of State1
| Participants: | The Secretary |
| Deputy Under Secretary Rusk | |
| Mr. Moshe Sharett, Israeli Foreign Minister | |
| Mr. Eliahu Elath, Israeli Ambassador | |
| Mr. Wilkins—ANE |
Problem: Current developments at the UN regarding Palestine.
Action required: None
Action assigned to: ANE
Mr. Sharett called on me this afternoon for the purpose of paying his respects during his current visit to the United States to attend the present session of the General Assembly and for the purpose of making known Israeli views on certain aspects of the Palestine problem.
Mr. Sharett informed me that it was a great relief for him to leave the present nightmare at Lake Success for the calm of Washington. He indicated that an “unholy alliance” of Arab states, Latin American states, the USSR and its satellites had brought about, in subcommittee of the ad hoc political committee, the adoption of an amended Australian resolution providing for rigid internationalization in the Jerusalem area. Mr. Sharett said that the ghost of November 29, 19472 was “stalking the scene” and that many representatives in the United Nations were bowing down before it.
I asked Mr. Sharett if any progress had been made in recently reported conversations between representatives of Israel and representatives of the Vatican in Rome. Mr. Sharett said he could tell me confidentially that while it should be understood that the Vatican did not approve of present Israel proposals regarding Jerusalem, a message had been sent to him to the effect that he continue his present line and that conversations could be continued later. Mr. Sharett said that this message meant the Vatican was not displeased with the manner in which the Israeli Government was conducting its relations with Catholic representatives within Israel and that, as the Vatican did not expect any action at the present session of the General Assembly, representatives of Israel and the Vatican could continue their current talks thereafter. Mr. Sharett believed that the Vatican was divided regarding the question of full internationalization for the Jerusalem area, but that it would maintain its present position of support for full internationalization pending action by the GA.
I asked Mr. Sharett what the views of the Israeli Government were with respect to Jerusalem. He informed me that his Government considered an agreement between the United Nations and Israel with respect to the Holy Places through the medium of a UN commissioner appeared to be adequate and said that arrangements of this character would make it possible for Israel and Jordan to take care of the practical affairs of everyday life in Jerusalem.
I observed that when I had last seen Mr. Sharett in the spring of this year3 I had pointed out to him that we envisaged, in the light [Page 1526] of the General Assembly resolution of December 11, 1948, a practical arrangement for the Jerusalem area under the general supervision of the United Nations in which the authorities of the adjoining states would have responsibility for administration. I remarked that he had previously indicated that we were in general agreement and that his present views were at some variance with his former position.
I asked Mr. Sharett what he thought of the Swedish-Netherlands proposal4 regarding the Jerusalem area. Mr. Sharett replied that its concept appeared acceptable but that it contained a number of serious faults, including suspension of laws and regulations by the UN commissioner, the character of the Consular Court, and the prohibition on the establishment of national administrative agencies within Jerusalem. He also indicated that Israel had a number of other reservations and amendments to this proposal.
I asked Mr. Sharett what action he thought the United Nations might take regarding Jerusalem. Mr. Sharett replied that he thought the United Nations should restrict itself to a reaffirmation of its previously stated principles regarding the Holy Places, to a request to the parties concerned that they make arrangements with the United Nations regarding the Holy Places and to a call upon the parties that they cooperate with the United Nations in the reestablishment of peace in Jerusalem.
Mr. Sharett told me that, at Jordan’s request, Israeli representatives had been holding a series of exploratory talks with King Abdullah and his representatives and that, while he could not report any substantial progress, his Government was hopeful of the outcome. He said that this optimism was based on the present position of both governments in Israel and Jordan and that Israel was prepared to offer agreement to the incorporation of Arab Palestine in Jordan in return for peace from Abdullah. He said that no serious question of territory existed between Israel and Jordan and that Abdullah, desiring a port in the Mediterranean, was anxious to obtain the Gaza strip from Egypt and subsequently access, by means of road or strip, from Israel. Transfer of the Gaza strip was a matter solely between Jordan and Egypt. Israel would not be in a position to offer Jordan a territorial strip which would cut Israel in two but would be in a position to offer Abdullah free access from Jordan to Gaza.
I asked Mr. Sharett if Israel and Jordan had discussed the refugee question. Mr. Sharett said their representatives had not.
Mr. Sharett concluded by informing me that Israel was seriously apprehensive regarding frequent Arab announcements of a “second [Page 1527] round” with Israel and regarding Arab rearmament through shipments of British jets and tanks. He said that Israel would appreciate my authorizing shipments of military supplies from the United States through the granting of export licenses. I said that I was not informed on this subject and that we would study it. Ambassador Elath said he would supply us with additional details regarding this matter.5
- Drafted by Mr. Wilkins.↩
- The date of the resolution by the General Assembly which called for the partition of Palestine and the establishment of Jerusalem as a corpus separatum.↩
- See Secretary Acheson’s memorandum of conversation of April 5, p. 890.↩
- The text of the draft resolution submitted by the Netherlands and Sweden on December 5 is printed in GA, 4th sess., Ad Hoc Political Committee, Annex, vol. i, p. 60.↩
- Mr. Hare had sent a memorandum to the
Secretary of State on December 7, prior to the latter’s meeting
with Mr. Sharett, to brief him on the Israeli and United States
positions on various important questions. The memorandum
ventured into two questions which were not brought up directly
during the Acheson-Sharett conversation, as follows:
“F. Iraqi Jews—Israel has expressed official concern to the United States Government over the alleged persecution of Iraqi Jews and has conducted a strenuous campaign, both in the United States and elsewhere, on this subject.
“It is the well-established policy of the United States Government to urge that minorities of whatever faith in Near Eastern countries be treated in a manner compatible with the objectives of the United Nations with respect to human rights and fundamental freedoms. This question has been discussed by the American Embassy in Baghdad with many members of the Jewish community in Iraq, with American and European residents of Baghdad and Basra and with Christian and Moslem Iraqis of varying shades of political opinion. Our Embassy reports that despite certain difficulties experienced by the Jewish community in Iraq, factual evidence does not support the conclusion that Iraqis of the Jewish faith are being subjected to a campaign of genocide or of general persecution. Our Embassy is continuing to discuss this matter with the Iraqi Government and we hope that Israel and Iraq will bear in mind the need for approaching such questions in a moderate manner in order to avoid aggravating the situation.
“G. Arab Collective Security Pact and Israel’s Relations with the Arab States— Israel has expressed concern regarding the proposed Arab Collective Security Pact and has emphasized the dangers of such a Pact unless the Arab states cease to talk about preparations for a ‘second round’ war with Israel. Mr. Sharett has informed our Ambassador in Tel Aviv that United States or United Kingdom support for such a Pact prior to peace between Israel and the Arab States would strengthen Arab intransigeance and delay the achievement of such peace.
“We understand a committee of the Arab League is presently drafting a text of this Pact. We have not yet been informed of its full content. We have not, however, received any preliminary information, which would indicate that this Pact is preliminary to a resumption of hostilities by the Arab States against Israel.” (867N.01/12–749)
↩