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

501.BB Palestine/9–1349: Telegram

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

confidential

Jerusalem, September 13, 1949—4 p. m.

565. Deptel 360, September 7.¹ ConGen wishes reiterate view expressed Contel 495 July 27 re importance delineating final line between Jewish and Arab zones in Jerusalem instrument to be presented to GA. Believes decision as to where line should run within international area of Jerusalem need not be affected by final boundary settlement and can be determined independently. It is supposed that in any final settlement Israel will retain corridor linking Jerusalem to Coast. Therefore same military and other factors must be considered in drawing line regardless of exact final boundaries. ConGen is obliged to differ strongly with PCC belief that present “provisional line” can be used without prejudice to establishment of definitive line later. Israel attitude towards “temporary” armistice lines indicated only too dearly its probable reaction to any future change. While under no illusion as to difficulties of imposing boundaries on Israel, ConGen firmly believes that only possibility of change lies in incorporating specific final line in Jerusalem instrument now. It is assumed PCC and US not prepared accept present line. Prospects of Arab support for international regime will be greatly increased by return of Arab quarters, while Israel opposition must be assumed in any event.

Following factors should be taken into account in drawing final line:

1. UN previously unwilling to recognize that conquest of territory by force confers legal right, particularly in Jerusalem which theoretically has been continuously under UN protection. Thus logical starting point is status quo November 29, 1947.

2. At same time, for practical administrative reasons, essential that Jewish and Arab zones be homogeneous entities avoiding to maximum extent possible corridors and enclaves. Therefore lines should be drawn creating compact Jewish and Arab zones which will involve retention by Jewish zone of some conquered Arab areas while surrendering large Arab quarters in southern Jerusalem and in addition certain Jewish sections which cut Arab quarters off from main Arab zone. In practice Israel would receive larger area than held on November 29.

3. Mount Scopus should be attached to Jewish zone probably by road to San Hadriya skirting Sheikh Jerrah quarter.²

Sent Department, repeated Tel Aviv 108; Department pass Amman 66, Bern 61.

Burdett

1. Not printed.
2. The Department of State, in reply on September 19, stated that the “PCC has not yet made final decision re inclusion demarcation line in proposals prior their presentation for consideration by GA” but was studying the situation. The Department of State also indicated that it would bear the suggestions in mind and would “consult with USDel, PCC, re problem prior next PCC session.” (telegram 378, 501.BB Palestine/9–1349)