501.BB Palestine/9–2249: Telegram
The Consul at Jerusalem (Burdett) to the Secretary of State
587. Message contained Deptel 3791 delivered to Riley last night.
He is considerably “perturbed” over Israel attitude and endeavoring to fathom motives. Feels Israel may be attempting to eliminate gradually UN participation in MAC’s in belief can obtain greater advantages without restraining influence of UN. Israel particularly annoyed at chairman’s developing into arbiter and at large adverse majority votes.
Developments follow: Egyptian MAC—Riley in receipt of another letter from Eytan stating Israel distressed to learn of Egypt’s refusal to accept “compromise” relocation of line (Contel 575, seventeenth)2 and expressing belief this due to Egypt’s effort to obtain military and political advantage from armistice. Eytan reasserted own position on line and stated Israel would use every legal means at its disposal to obtain acceptance. Claimed any effort to force different interpretation by action of MAC would be tantamount to alteration of armistice agreement and thus beyond competence of MAC (this statement opens way to declaring any decision by MAC interpreting armistice as alteration of terms and thus outside its jurisdiction). Riley called on Sharett to discuss question and latter reiterated Israel arguments stressing that armistice stood by itself and any other agreement at Rhodes could not be used in interpreting it. Riley differed strongly and suggested Israel accept MAC views on location of line; if Egypt later raised question of military post could argue troops were based on settlement (troops based on settlements permitted in defensive zone but armistice does not specify whether new settlements may be founded in defensive zone). Sharett agreed reconsider matter and answer today.
Jordan MAC—Special committee investigating also alteration of line to permit inclusion of Wadi Fukin within Arab zone. In exchange Israel now requesting area including other Arab villages. Question of Govt House again arisen. Previous efforts agree on line dividing area between Israel and Jordan not successful.
Jordan has presented complaint to MAC that Israel constructing blockhouses within former neutral zone which not yet divided. Israel [Page 1399] claims are houses. Riley and UN officers consider edifices are constructed for use as military installations and give command of Jericho road. This is violation of article 2, paragraph 1 of armistice. Chairman raised matter informally with Biran, Israel deputy member MAC, who stated that if MAC by majority vote ordered investigation people and army would “become very excited” and shooting might occur. Riley feels best approach is to seek again agreement between Jordan and Israel on division of area and concurrently obtain Israel consent to demolish blockhouses. Hopes Israel will agree if area divided. He also considers demarcation line proposed during last negotiations as equitable.
Department may wish consider desirability pointing out to Jordan Government advantages of reaching agreement on Government House division thus perhaps eliminating this troublesome question.
Syrian MAC—during visit to Damascus, Riley persuaded Colonel Hinnawi to agree that chairman should determine what constitutes return to normal civilian life in demilitarized zones. Chairman thus can permit construction of houses Ein Gev area. Israel has taken no action on letter from MAC chairman calling for destruction of fortifications at Ein Gev.
Sent Department 587; repeated Tel Aviv 60, Beirut 114, Damascus 73; Department pass Amman 113, Cairo 30.
- Dated September 19, not printed; it expressed the Department’s serious concern about the situation developing in the Jordan, Syrian and Egyptian Mixed Armistice Commissions and its disquiet about various incidents and the “Israeli attitude in general.” It also instructed Jerusalem to inform General Riley of the Department’s concern and to keep the Department fully informed of developments (867N.01/9–1349). No. 379 was repeated to Amman, Damascus, Beirut, Cairo, and New York.↩
- Not printed.↩