Editorial Note
Replies to the Department’s circular telegram of August 16 (page 1317) were sent by various posts beginning August 19. Damascus (telegram 491, August 19), Baghdad (telegram 500, August 20), Beirut (telegram 432, August 20), Amman (telegram 320, August 22), and Cairo (airgram 896, August 24) agreed on the desirability of shifting emphasis from political to economic factors. Jidda (telegram 493, August 20) made no direct comment but offered no objection. Tel Aviv (telegram 640, August 19) concurred.
Jerusalem (telegram 526, August 22), on the other hand, expressed doubts on the efficacy of the shift on the grounds that an “Instinctive reaction may occur on part of both Arabs and Israelis against creation of ‘yet another commission’”. Jerusalem also noted the “Problem of formulating terms of reference of economic mission consistent with UN resolutions and of such nature both Israel and Arab states will agree give great weight to its recommendations.” Jerusalem’s “most serious objection” centered on the fact that the “Establishment of economic survey mission and shift to economic grounds might be construed as acceptance of present political status quo involving achievement by Israel of objectives re refugees and boundaries.”
London (telegram 3351, August 23) agreed that new tactics were required but considered “it important that in shifting to economic approach, we should not relax pressure for political settlement lest we encounter pitfall Beith points out.” Mr. Beith had noted that [Page 1327] with the shift of emphasis from political settlement, there would be a tendency for the territorial situation to freeze.
All replies cited above are filed under 501.BB Palestine.