Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume VI

501.BB Palestine/1–1849: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Consulate General in Jerusalem ¹

secret

Washington, January 19, 1949—7 p. m.

35. Urtels 35² and 54.³ Herewith Dept general views re desirability direct Israeli-Transjordan negots on future administration Jerusalem:

1. Israel and Transjordan should be encouraged reach any agreement on future Arab and Jewish administrative responsibilities in Jerusalem compatible with para 8 of GA Palestine Res. of 11 Dec ’48. In particular, this might include agreement on areas of Jerusalem which Arabs and Jews will separately administer, either by local population alone or with assistance of Transjordan and Israel.

2. U.S. as Member of U.N. and Conciliation Comm can give support only to such arrangements for Jerusalem as fall within GA Resolution, requiring inter alia, that the Jerusalem area “be accorded special and separate treatment from the rest of Palestine” and that Conciliation Comm present next GA “detailed proposals for a permanent international regime for the Jerusalem area”. US cannot therefore support any arrangements which would purport to authorize estab of Israeli or TJ sovereignty over parts of Jerusalem area.

3. Dept does not consider that GA reference to “permanent international regime” requires direct administration by U.N. of Jerusalem area. Res. itself states objective of “maximum local autonomy for distinctive groups consistent with the special international status of the Jerusalem area”. However, while this would permit exercise of broad administrative responsibilities by Arabs and Jews in areas defined by mutual agreement, some clear representation of U.N. interest in Jerusalem area is required. Dept is considering various forms which latter might take.

4. Arrangements re Jerusalem agreed upon by Israel and Transjordan should be of provisional character and subject to approval by GA. However, GA could be expected view with much sympathy any proposal re Jerusalem mutually accepted by Arabs and Jews even though direct responsibility of U.N. thereunder might be less extensive than certain U.N. Delegations have thought necessary.

5. Conciliation Comm should be brought into any Israeli-Transjordan discussions re Jerusalem at any early stage. Suggestions advanced by Israel envisage area for direct U.N. administration and other U.N. responsibilities. Moreover, Comm has specific obligation make proposals to next GA on Jerusalem and Holy Places. Comm can advise parties on kind arrangements compatible with GA Res. and likely to be accepted by U.N.

View Deptel 30 Jan 18 Dept desires you not carry out plan outlined last para ur 54 Jan 18.

Communicate this tel to US Rep Palestine Conciliation Comm on arrival Jerusalem.

Lovett

1. This telegram was repeated to London and Amman.
2. Dated January 13, p. 661.
3. Dated January 18; it outlined a proposed agreement on the future administration of Jerusalem which had been prepared by Consul Burdett and the French Consul General. The last paragraph of the telegram read as follows: “French ConGen and I propose present above outline including suggestions as to demarcation line and international enclaves to both Dayan and Abdullah on twenty-[here follows garbled portion]. Will act in purely personal capacity but any indication Department may be able give of its approval of proposals in general would be most helpful.” (501.BB Palestine/1–1849)