357.AB/2–1850: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom 1
priority
783. In light Bevin’s msg Embtel 960 Feb 18, Dept considers that differences US and UK positions Embtels 888 and 9252 more apparent [Page 1387] than real. We are in agreement there shld be no reference partition with plebiscite in SC discussion or res although we consider inclusion in res of wording along lines McNaughton para 6 makes it possible for UN Rep move this direction if circumstances warrant. We also agree emphasis shld be on existing agreement between parties and implementation thereof.
There may remain some differences as to emphasis to be placed on plebiscite and letter of McNaughton proposals but difference is matter of tactics and UK and US Dels NY wld seem in best position determine tactical approach at this stage.
Re last para Embtel 960 Dept does not consider phrase “in concert with ur delegate” inconsistent with Depts desire that UK delegate take initiative in NY consultations.
Re Bevin’s comments re Nimitz we agree later highly qualified candidate for position UN Rep. However, we wish give full consideration other possible candidates such as Bunche before reaching firm position.