501.BB Palestine/5–2449: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Legation in Switzerland
us urgent
682. Unpal 116. Eyes alone for Ethridge from Rusk. Fol is draft note developed by Dept’s staff along lines to be handed Israeli Amb. in Washington. Text has not been considered by Acting Secy nor by Pres. To expedite matters, however, we would greatly appreciate your comments, to include (1) accuracy, (2) underlying policy, (3) your estimate whether note of this sort would strengthen your hand in Lausanne discussions, (4) any suggested modifications. For obvious reasons request utmost security this draft text. Dispatch of note presupposes basic decision to take specific steps, initially in the economic field, to demonstrate US determination to modify Israeli attitude.
“Excellency: I have the honor to inform Your Excellency that the Pres. of the US has instructed me to inform the Govt. of Israel as fols:
The Govt. of the US is seriously disturbed by the attitude of Israel with respect to a territorial settlement in Palestine and to the question of Palestinian refugees, as set forth to Mr. Mark Ethridge by Dr. Eytan on May 19, 1949 at Lausanne upon instructions of His Excellency the FonMin of Israel.1 According to Dr, Eytan, the Israeli Govt. will do nothing further about Palestinian refugees at the present time. In connection with territorial matters, the position taken by Dr. Eytan apparently contemplates not only the retention of all territory now held under military occupation by Israel, which is clearly in excess of the partition boundaries of Nov. 29, 1947, but an additional acquisition of further territory both within and outside Palestine.
As a mem. of the UN PCC and as a nation which has consistently striven to give practical effect to the principles of the UN, the US Govt. has recently made a number of representations to the Israeli [Page 1052] Govt. concerning the repatriation of refugees who fled from the conflict in Palestine. These representations were in conformity with the principles set forth in the resolution of the GA of Dec. 11, 1948, and urged the acceptance of the principle of substantial repatriation and the immediate beginnings of repatriation on a reasonable scale which would be well within the numbers to be agreed in a final settlement. The US Govt. conceded that a final settlement of the refugee problem must await a definitive peace settlement. These representations, as well as those made concurrently to the Arab States concerning the resettlement outside of Palestine of a substantial portion of Palestine refugees, were made in the firm conviction that they pointed the way to a lasting peace in that area.
In the interests of a just and equitable solution of territorial questions the US Govt., in the UN and as a mem. of the PCC, has supported the position that Israel should be expected to offer territorial compensation for any territorial acquisition which it expects to effect beyond the boundaries set forth in the res. of the GA of Nov. 29, 1947. The Govt. of Israel has been well aware of this position and of the view of the US Govt, that it is based upon elementary principles of fairness and equity.
The US Govt. is deeply concerned to learn from Dr. Eytan’s statements that the suggestions both on refugees and on territorial questions which have been made by it for the sole purpose of advancing prospects of peace have made so little impression upon the Govt. of Israel.
The US attitude of sympathy and support for Israel has arisen out of broad Amer interests and principles, particularly out of its support for the UN and its desire to achieve peace and security in the Near East on a realistic basis. The US Govt. and people have given generous support to the creation of Israel because they have been convinced of the justice of this aspiration. The US Govt does not, however, regard the present attitude of the Israeli Govt. as being consistent with the principles upon which US support has been based. The US Govt. is gravely concerned lest Israel now endanger the possibility of arriving at a solution of the Palestine problem in such a way as to contribute to the establishment of sound and friendly relations between Israel and its neighbors.
The Govt. of Israel should entertain no doubt whatever that the US Govt. relies upon it to take responsible and positive action concerning Palestine refugees and that, far from supporting excessive Israeli claims to further territory both inside and outside Palestine, the US Govt. believes that it is necessary for Israel to offer territorial compensation for territory which it expects to acquire beyond the boundaries of the Nov. 29, 1947 res. of the GA.
The Govt. of Israel must be aware that the attitude which it has thus far assumed at Lausanne must inevitably lead to a rupture in those conversations. The US Govt. must state in candor that it considers that the Govt. of Israel must provide a basis for a continuation of such talks under the auspices of the PCC and that a rupture arising out of the rigid attitude of the Govt. of Israel would place a heavy responsibility upon that Govt. and people.
If the Govt. of Israel continues to reject the basic principles set forth by the res. of the GA of Dec. 11, 1948 and the friendly advice [Page 1053] offered by the US Govt. for the sole purpose of facilitating a genuine peace in Palestine, the US Govt. will regretfully be forced to the conclusion that a revision of its attitude toward Israel has become unavoidable.”