867N.01/8–1349
The Acting Representative at Vatican City (Gowen) to the Secretary of State
No. 24
Sir: I have the honor to enclose a copy of an undated statement entitled “The Present Situation in Jerusalem”1 which was handed to me on August 12, 1949 by the Acting Secretary of State of the Holy See, Monsignor Domenico Tardini. The statement which, he said, has just been prepared by the Secretariat of State of His Holiness sets forth the latest views of the Holy See on the problem of Jerusalem and is now being forwarded by the Vatican to all Apostolic Nuncios and other high ranking members of the Catholic hierarchy for their information.
Monsignor Tardini remarked that this statement is an “unofficial compendium of certain de facto and de jure considerations which according to the Holy See should be borne in mind for a proper [Page 1309] appraisal of the position of the Holy See on the problem of Jerusalem and for a just, proper and permanent settlement of that vital issue”. An informal English translation2 is attached for immediate reference.
The gist of the statement is that in the opinion of the Holy See only complete internationalization of Jerusalem, its environs and all the Holy Places in Palestine can bring a true, fair, and lasting peace to the Holy Land, and that all other proposed solutions are inadequate.
After a description of the “now very critical situation in Jerusalem” the statement goes on to point out what the Vatican believes would be a satisfactory solution of the problem, viz:
[Here follow nine points said to offer a satisfactory solution of the problem of Jerusalem and a reference to the Pope’s Encyclical Letters of October 24, 1948, and April 15, 1949, “in which he recommended international control for Jerusalem, its environs and all the Holy Places in Palestine.”]3
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩
- Mr.
Gowen, on August 4, had raised the question whether the
Department would object to his arranging an appointment for
Brigadier General Riley with the Vatican Acting Secretary of
State, in order to deliver a message to the Vatican from Israeli
Foreign Minister Sharett (telegram 30 from Vatican City, 501.BB
Pales tine/8–449). The message as summarized in the telegram
stated that Mr. Sharett “was anxious to know just what Vatican
wanted done with Jerusalem problem. Was Vatican interested only
internationalization Jerusalem under international regime? If
so, then Israel saw no solution to problem as Israel does not
consider possible to place some 100,000 Jews now residing in New
City under such control. It would mean these Jews would be
outside Israel and subject only to protection of such
administrative body against attack by Arabs. Sharett suggested
(a) international control and/or
supervision of holy places in Jerusalem area with same body
supervising to lesser degree holy places in other parts
Palestine. Free access to all holy places would be guaranteed;
(b) internationalization of Old City
with Israel rendering such assistance as necessary to ease
economic and living conditions there. Even if Old City was
returned to Arabs similar arrangements could be made; (c) under (b) free
access to holy places in new Jerusalem and other parts of Israel
could be arranged. Sharett was interested in knowing whether or
not Vatican if interested in (a), (b) and (c) would
be willing to arrange for meeting with Israeli representatives
for purpose of explaining [exploring?]
possibilities looking forward to possible solution.”
The Department, in reply on August 9, stated that “General Riley shld not act as intermediary between Israeli FonMin and Vatican. Such action might give rise to unwarranted polit implications in view Riley’s USMC rank and position as Chief of Staff of Acting Mediator. Furthermore, presentation of Israeli views to Vatican by Riley, a function which wld ordinarily be responsibility of Israeli Min Rome, might create impression US concurred in Israeli views. Position of ITS rep on PCC might thereby be prejudiced and work of PCC re Jerusalem might be seriously affected.” (telegram 13 to Rome, 501.BB Palestine/8–949)
↩