320.2AA/11–2550: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Legation in Jordan1
91. Urtels 96 Nov 19 and 98 Nov 25.2 Jordan Min Washington informed Dept Nov 21 that Jordan Govt not prepared support Dutch-Swedish res re Jerusalem. He stated Jordan cld adequately protect interests Holy Places Old City and claimed res as drafted wld permit Jews enter Old City at will. Dept pointed out draft res did not attempt settle present polit or mil problems Jerusalem. Implementation res, particularly re free access for Jews and Arabs and demilitarization, actually depended on final or interim settlement which was entirely outside scope this res.
FYI Brit Emb rep called Dept Nov 24 to report fol which may already be known to you. Brit Min Amman has reported having seen letter from Haikal to Jordan Govt recommending strongly latter not support draft res which Haikal considered Western plot deprive Arabs of their rights. Emb rep believed Haikal’s position might have been motivated by what he considers humiliating treatment of him in SC discussions re Yarmuk–Jordan situation. Issa Bandak, Jordan UNDel, reportedly wrote Jordan Govt that if latter shld support res he wld resign and publicly attack Govt. To date Tuqan has made no report to Jordan Govt.
Dept informed that Tuqan stated Nov 23 he had recd instrs not to accept Swedish-Dutch res. While Dept’s position remains same—we are not prepared support res which is not acceptable to Jordan, Israel and majority world community—Dept believes it wld be unfortunate from point of view NE stability and interests world community if no practicable res adopted this session. Present draft res appears reasonable and no other presently in sight.
Suggest you concert with your Brit colleague and in your discretion express to Jordan Govt hope Jordan will adopt constructive attitude in UN re Jerusalem and will either indicate support of res or at least acquiesce therein. In our view res does not interfere with Jordan sovereignty in Old City. If Jordan has specific concrete objections to draft res, US certain Dutch and Swedes wld gladly consider amendments which wld make it more acceptable to Jordan. In this connection we do not believe matters such as transfer of Arab quarters southern [Page 1065] Jerusalem are appropriate subjects for inclusion this type of res which not concerned with territorial or military situation in area.
Since there is apparently confusion re instrs Jordan del UN shld fol at present, it is hoped new categoric instrs can be sent by Jordan Govt to its del re stand Jordan will take on question Jerusalem.
FYI Dept believes it highly unlikely any practicable res can be passed this session if Jordan Govt not prepared accept or acquiesce in present draft res. Copy draft statute already forwarded to Leg. Meanwhile Brit Min may be willing permit you see his copy.3
- This telegram was repeated to USUN and London.↩
- Neither printed; regarding the former, see footnote 1, p. 1036. The latter noted that the situation remained confused, with apparent disagreement between the King and his Cabinet (320.2AA/11–2550). No. 98 also advised of information from the British Minister that the King had cabled instructions to the Jordanian Delegation to take no stand for or against the resolution. Minister Drew speculated that if the resolution were adopted, the Jordanian Government might accept it on a de facto basis.↩
-
In telegram Gadel 159, December 5, to Ambassador Austin, the Department reviewed the situation concerning Jerusalem broadly along the lines of telegram 91, November 28, to Amman and concluded that “Should the Swedish-Netherlands proposals appear certain of defeat, the course of action set forth in recommendation 4 of the position paper (SD/A/C.1/342 Rev [1]) should be pursued.”
In a telegram of the same date, which seemed to cross Gadel 159, Ambassador Austin stated that “there seemed to be little prospect for adoption of either Swedish resolution or any other comprehensive, substantive proposal” (Delga 376). Gadel 159 and Delga 376 are both filed under 320/12–550.
↩