501.BB Palestine/9–349: Telegram
Mr. Stuart W. Rockwell to the Secretary of State
Palun 299. PCC September 3 sent letter to Israeli Delegation referring to Israeli reply to PCC territorial question and stating that in opinion PCC any reference to armistice agreements in connection with final settlement territorial question should be considered in light clauses in agreements safeguarding rights and claims of parties and stating that armistice demarcation lines are not to be construed in any sense, as political or territorial boundaries.
PCC felt it desirable make this formal representation for record and to avoid possible misunderstanding in future.1
- Mr. Rockwell, on September 5, informed the Secretary of State that Article 16 of the Jerusalem instrument “does not delineate line between [Arab and Israeli] zones. In letter transmitted SYG September 1, PCC explained that since demarcation line intimately connected final settlement Palestine problem, PCC does not deem advisable for present make any proposal re actual demarcation and believes instrument can be put into effect with present line as provisional without prejudice to establishment definitive line at later stage. Possibility PCC proposing specific demarcation line to GA thus left open.” (Palun 300 from Lausanne, 501.BB Palestine/9–549)↩