785.00/2–150: Telegram
The Chargé in Jordan (Fritzlan) to the Secretary of State
12. Discussed latest Jordan Israeli meeting of month with Samir and British Minister Kirkbride. Meeting attended by Samir, Fawzi [Page 717] Mulki and Khulusi Kheiri (latter two Jordan Ministers). Following seems to have been course of meeting:
- 1.
- Jordan delegation proposed discuss Jerusalem partition basis Fitzgerald line of 19471 but this naturally completely unacceptable Israelis.
- 2.
- Israelis proposed possible solution along lines radical change present armistice line which would make demarcation run NE to SW giving Israel Mt. Scopus and Jordan [Jerusalem?] Arab quarters. Unacceptable Jordan delegation as strategically important position Nablus road would be Israeli hands.
- 3.
- Alternative Israelis proposed minor rectifications present armistice lines basis “plot for plot and access for access.” They demanded absolute sovereignty over Wailing Wall and access to it and over Jewish quarter as well as access to and use of Mt. Scopus institutions. For those Arab quarters not restored Israel would give cash compensation. Pains taken point out this offer compensation independent of and without prejudice final settlement which would involve claims and counter claims for compensation.
- 4.
- Jordan delegation stated without authority accept Israeli proposal but would report matter to government.
- 5.
- Next meeting tentatively set February 3 [in] Israeli controlled Jerusalem.
Comment: Prime Minister Tawfiq Pasha seemed determined February 3 meeting take place though he expressed strong unwillingness relinquish Jordan control over Wailing Wall and Jewish quarter. His sentiment seems dictated by probable adverse reaction other Arab states. From strategic standpoint Glubb2 feels Jordan could afford relinquish control this area if it held Government House Ridge.
Interesting facts emerging last meeting are Israeli offer cash compensation and apparent desire Prime Minister explore every avenue facilitate success of talks.
Seems likely negotiations [re] Jerusalem will succeed but complete stalemate reached re general settlement. In recent conversation with King and Samir both expressed hope US could exert some pressure on Israel and I reiterated our desire keep hands off and permit settlement take place result interplay respective bargaining positions.
In conversation with Kirkbride this morning he expressed view time approaching when serious consideration must be given desirability [Page 718] giving each party [a] prod, equally applied, in hope achieving early settlement. Without such pressure which he thinks should be joint US–UK, he sees no hope for settlement.
Following seems clear: 1) US strongly desirous settlement Palestine problem and has given encouragement all parties liquidate affair, and 2) Israel, Jordan talks for general settlement have virtually broken down. Is US interest in settlement strong enough to warrant impartial application some form pressure to hasten settlement. Department’s comments will be appreciated.
Sent Department 12; Department pass London 7, Tel Aviv 5, Jerusalem 5, Geneva 4; pouched Arab capitals from Amman, Geneva for USPCC 5, USTC 3.
- Sir William Fitzgerald was Chief Justice of Palestine under the Mandatory Government. He was appointed in 1945 to inquire into the local administration of Jerusalem and to recommend a solution to the crisis occasioned by the inability of the Jerusalem Municipality to be governed because of Arab-Jewish non-cooperation. The Chief Justice made his report on August 30, 1945, and recommended that the Walled City be placed under a British administrative council and that the rest of the city be divided into autonomous Arab and Jewish boroughs. The plan was not implemented; see H. Eugene Bovis, The Jerusalem Question, 1917–1968 (Stanford, California, Hoover Institution Press, 1971), pp. 33–36.↩
- Maj. Gen. John Bagot Glubb, Chief of Staff of the Arab Legion.↩