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

501.BB Palestine/2–2849: Telegram

The Consul at Jerusalem (Burdett) to the Secretary of State

secret

Jerusalem, February 28, 1949—10 a. m.

171. Palun 56. For Acheson from Ethridge. This is summary of my impressions after tour of Arab capitals:

(1) Signing of Egyptian-Israeli armistice has greatly facilitated work of Commission. Despite Bunche’s skill and patience that would not have come about except for Department’s representations. Department can take satisfaction that armistice was warmly welcomed in Israel particularly in circles below officialdom. Dozens of people have told me how happy they are about it. Government is more cautious in its approach to peace than people since government has in mind touchy nature of refugee problem, Jerusalem, upon which it has committed itself pretty far, and in making any concessions of territorial nature because of army soreness.

(2) Immediate key to peace negotiations if not to peace, is refugee problem. Arab League is not dead intellectually even if militarily ineffective. There was complete concert of approach to us with almost open request for imposed peace, for guarantees accompanying it and for beginning of solution of refugee problem as sine qua non of discussions on other questions. To all Arab Governments Commission pointed out utter unrealism of that position and Lebanese Foreign Minister sent word to me through Delatour DuPin of French delegation that he had been convinced it was unrealistic and wrong and was sending a letter immediately to other Arab representatives urging change of policy. I believe Lebanon and Transjordan therefore are willing to go ahead in spite of concerted policy. Commission plans to set date for meeting with Arab representatives under its chairman to explore further refugee problem. Out of that meeting, providing Arab policy has changed in meantime and providing Israel has accepted in principle GA resolution as to refugees, will come discussion of other phases and also arrangements for negotiations between Israel and Arabs.

(3) I pressed strongly upon Shertok that key to peace negotiations lies in hands of Israeli Government. There can be no fruitful negotiations until Arab psychosis as to refugees has been wiped out and Arab public opinion prepared for fact that not all refugees will return. Both sides now regard refugees as political pawn with Arab agitation constantly directed toward inhumanity of Israel’s apparent indifference to them. Israeli Government strongly desirous of using refugee problem as bargaining point upon which it can give something in return perhaps for other concessions. Problem must of course be solved along with all others but generous gesture at moment on part of Israeli Government even if it be words that accept principle of GA resolution, would give Commission entry to other problems. Shertok was impressed with arguments in which I was strongly backed by French and Turkish and said he would lay it before Cabinet. He also urged that I take up with Ben Gurion with his (Shertok’s) support. That was done. I am sure that Israeli Government has under consideration some action or statement as gesture to Arabs if way could be found. Department could give help by encouraging that on part of Israeli Government and by encouraging favorable response on part of Arabs if it comes about. Will have further suggestion as to what Department can do when Commission decides formally on meeting with Arabs.

(4) Moves US has made to indicate to Israeli Government that it wants peace here have been effective. Shertok’s attitude in his latest meeting with Commission and Ben Gurion’s mild approach altogether different from first meeting when Shertok insulted intelligence of Commission with repetition of GA speeches. Maybe only technique but I am inclined to doubt that. I take it as part of natural process of cooling off, of feeling of greater stability on part of government as reaction to stiffened American attitude and also as Commission’s reaction to Shertok’s rantings in first meeting. Commission has shown no disposition to be terrorized by strong talk. [Ethridge.]

Burdett