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

501.BB Palestine/1–2949

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Robert M. McClintock

secret

[Washington,] January 29, 1949.

Subject: Palestine

Participants:	Mr. Eliahu Epstein, Representative of the Provisional Government of Israel
	Mr. Ethridge, U.S. Member of the U.N. Palestine Conciliation Commission
	Mr. Satterthwaite, NEA
	Mr. Rockwell, NE
	Mr. McClintock, UNA

Mr. Epstein called on Mr. Ethridge at the Department at 11 a. m., January 29. He said that he had promptly reported to his Government the interview he had had on the preceding day with Mr. Satterthwaite but had not received any further word from Tel Aviv.

The Department’s Officers laid great stress on the evacuation of the Faluja garrison and said that on the basis of their talk with the Egyptian Ambassador it seemed that this was the key point which, if removed, would cause the diplomatic log jam to break. Mr. Epstein went into a long explanation that the Faluja agreement was merely one aspect of the over-all armistice agreement. He said, “We will let them out of Faluja if they will agree to our staying at El Auja.”

At this point Mr. McClintock read Mr. Epstein a private telegram from Dr. Bunche to Mr. Rusk, which made very clear that the Faluja agreement had been unconditional and was in no way dependent upon the conclusion of an over-all armistice. Mr. Epstein seemed considerably taken aback but stuck to his guns and reiterated his former thesis.

When it was suggested that possibly a token Egyptian force might also remain at El Auja, Mr. Epstein said vehemently that his Government would never agree to such terms.

(Mr. Ethridge remarked after the interview that he thought the Israelis were unduly rigid with regard to Faluja. He did not seem to have acquired a very good impression of the Israeli case from his talk with Mr. Epstein.)

Regarding the long-range aspects of the Arab refugee problem Mr. Epstein said that he was sure the Israeli Government would welcome back the Christian Arabs. He implied that such a welcome would not be accorded the Moslem Arabs but added that the Mohammedans would not wish to return in any event as they did not feel comfortable as a racial or religious minority group. He commented that it was an interesting facet of Arab character that the Mohammedan Arabs, when in the majority, treated other minorities very well but that they did not feel the same way when occupying the minority position themselves.

Mr. Epstein said that, in addition to these considerations, many of the Arab villages had been destroyed and there were no homes for the refugees to return to. He said that, from the humanitarian aspect, Israel would have to contribute something to the rehabilitation of the refugees but the problem was too vast for any single small government to handle and it could only be solved by the international community. He thought, however, that certain of the Arab States, such as Transjordan and Iraq, were in need of extra population and might be able to take a considerable portion of the refugees.