683.84A/7–2051: Telegram
The Ambassador in Israel (Davis) to the Department of State 1
60. Re Embtel 36, July 14.2
Comment on Embtel 59, July 20.3 Fon Min spoke with strong feeling of content ltr July 18 from Col Taxis saying it was “new surprise from Gen Riley”. He pointed out it represented complete reversal Israel’s understanding position taken heretofore and quoted Gen Riley’s reply to Mr Von Balluseck, Neth rep, to effect that ISMAC wld have jurisdiction over Palestine Land Development Co concession only where it involves land within demil zone which is the property of Arab refugees. He quoted Gen Riley further as stating this “is the only part of that concession with which we have anything to do. It is not the concession itself but the expropriating of land to carry out the purpose of the Huleh concession.” He explained care had been exercised avoid any trespass on Arab-owned lands and in excavations in river bed opposite Arab property soil removed had been conveyed some distance to non-Arab property. He complained further that such a “highly important, not to say explosive, communication, shld be addressed to a local rep” of the PLDC when it raised questions which cld be decided only on highest level of govt.
I did not undertake to discuss technical aspects Israel’s relationship with UNTSO in Huleh dispute, but stated informally and on my own responsibility that much capital was being made of Israel’s alleged non-compliance with UN dictates, and that Israel can ill afford any policy other than complete and whole-hearted coop with UN.