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

501.BB Palestine(E)/9–749: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Legation in Lebanon

secret

Washington, September 15, 1949—8 p. m.

512. Pls seek immediate appointment FonMin and in ur discretion PriMin, and convey fol orally:

Leb reluctance support and cooperate with ESM (urtel 460 Sept 7¹) and reported desire interject question into Arab League politics difficult reconcile with long record Leb cooperation with UN and US. We regret FonMin’s tendency accept Amer press interpretations of ESM as authoritative statements US policy, particularly in light Dept’s assurances (Deptel 476 Sept 3 and Depcirtel Sept 9, 6 a. m.²) that ESM not designed force Israeli-Arab econ cooperation. PCC on repeated occasions and prior activation ESM outlined to Leb and other dels Lausanne objectives ESM, and received their assurances Arab cooperation therewith.

In view repeated discussion Leb officials emphasizing econ burden of refugees, Leb reaction to ESM difficult to understand, since one of ESM’s major purposes is to recommend means lifting such burden from Leb. Leb therefore stands to gain from cooperation with ESM on two counts, namely, in alleviation of strain produced by excessively large refugee population and in obtaining support for Leb’s econ development aspirations.

You shld point out that cooperation with ESM implies no prior commitment accept its recommendations, although we hope that sound techn basis on which they will be formulated will make them acceptable not only to NE states but to all govts in position extend financial support in their implementation.

From point of view USG, if ESM fails obtain necessary cooperation, we see no means obtaining settlement NE problems in foreseeable future. Conversely, if ESM meets with cooperation and good will from NE Govts, report will serve as basis constructive and beneficial action during coming months by GA and interested member states towards solution econ ills of NE.³

Inform Clapp foregoing.

You may make such additions or deletions in foregoing as you feel wld assure effective presentation.⁴

Acheson

1. Not printed.
2. Latter not printed, but see footnote 1, p. 1369.
3. Minister Pinkerton, on September 19, sought authorization to delay the suggested representations to the Lebanese Government, inasmuch as Mr. Clapp had received complete cooperation from the Lebanese Government and because a reshuffling of the Lebanese Government seemed imminent (telegram 480 from Beirut). The Department gave the authorization the following day (telegram 535 to Beirut). This exchange of messages is filed under 501.BB Palestine(E)/9–1949, 9–2049.
4. The Department simultaneously instructed Damascus to arrange an immediate meeting with the Syrian Foreign Minister and make oral, informal representations along the broad lines of telegram 512 to Beirut (telegram 413, September 15, 8 p. m., 501.BB Palestine(E)/9–1549). Minister Keeley did so on September 16. He expressed the opinion that “ESM will be received by Syria following recognition [of the Syrian regime] but am not sanguine about Syrian cooperation in implementing any ESM recommendations that relieves Israel of obligation to carry out UN resolutions.” (telegram 552, September 17, noon, 501.BB Palestine(E)/9–1749)

   The Department, on September 15, also instructed Cairo to “continue to emphasize importance which US attaches to its [ESM’s] success, and shld recall to FonMin that PCC on number occasions prior activation ESM discussed ESM fully with Arab dels Lausanne and recd their assurances Arab cooperation therewith.” (telegram 921, 501.BB Palestine(E)/9–1549)