Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, The Near East and Africa, Volume V

357.AC/9–1251: Telegram

The United States Representative on the Palestine Conciliation Commission (Palmer) to the Secretary of State

secret
niact

Paris, September 12, 1951—8 p. m.

1610. Palun 440. 1. Fol receipt Unpal 286, Sept 6,¹ USDel submitted to French and Turk reps a redraft of proposals to be submitted to parties conforming to Dept’s suggestions. Final agreement was reached this morning after protracted daily meetings in which French del raised numerous objections both as to form and substance. These objections came as surprise inasmuch as Marchal had indicated his agreement to original USDel proposals at informal meeting in which they were discussed. It is clear he has had difficult time with FonOff where misgivings may be attributable to Brit lack of enthusiasm for conference and French preoccupation with (a) their interest in Israel-Syrian demilitarized zone question and possible French commitment to Syrians in this connection, and (b) their fear that if PCC makes “supreme effort” now and fails, continuance of PCC beyond this year will be unlikely. It is clear to us that French are prepared to seize whatever opportunity arises to inject PCC into Israel-Syrian border question and that they see in possible disappearance PCC, in event conference fails, blow to French influence in Mid East. In any case, they appeared desire continue procedure followed in Lausanne and Geneva and postpone time when PCC wld take initiative by presenting its own proposals as basis discussion.

2. Despite these difficulties, we have succeeded in reaching agreement on text opening statement, text PCC proposals, and following procedure: (1) Opening meetings with Arab and Israel dels morning and afternoon of Sept 13, at which time statement, text of which contained below, will be read by me as chairman; (2) Second meetings with Arab and Israel dels on Monday Sept 17 to give parties opportunity to reply to opening statement (Arabs requested no meetings before Mon in view three-day Moslem holiday); (3) Following these replies Comm to submit proposals, text of which given below, to parties at meeting to be scheduled as soon as practicable.

3. Dept will note from text PCC’s proposals that nonaggression declaration has been incorporated as preamble, with understanding that Comm will emphasize importance of agreement to such declaration as preliminary to consideration of its comprehensive proposals, in accordance with Dept’s views as contained para 1, Unpal 286.² Refs in declaration to relevant articles armistice agreements were not included in view fact Egyptian-Israeli armistice agreement differs with respect to articles from other agreements. Hence only general reference to obligations of members UN and signatories armistice agreements was included.

4. Dept will also note that para 5 has been redrafted to avoid specific reference to future conference for revision armistice agreements in accordance Dept’s views. USDel continues believe there are substantial reasons for PCC’s advocating that questions under para 5 be considered in subsequent meetings for this purpose. We believe such a proposal contains greater hope for direct negotiations between Israel and Arab states than present conference and that it will be inducement Israel consider comprehensive proposals favorably. We also continue feel that PCC is equipped to deal with specific questions under armistice agreements only in general way, and that shld PCC formally take up any of specific questions under para 5, French wld endeavor bring Israeli-Syrian question to forefront. Later conference has merit permitting any UN organ or rep lead discussions and if endorsed by GA wld have greater chance success than at present. We have therefore suggested to our colleagues that at appropriate time PCC might, under para 5, advocate subsequent meetings for full scale consideration questions enumerated and that for present we wld limit our formal efforts to proposal that parties agree in principle to discussion these items. We have also indicated we wld agree have informal discussions of specific questions under para 5 during course present meetings.

5. Fabre, UNRWA liaison officer representing Blandford, was given by Barco full explanation USDel proposals on 6 Sept with request Fabre transmit to Blandford full account. USDel understands Fabre has not done so, on assumption Blandford wld receive indication US position from Dept, altho he has conveyed his belief to Blandford that US proposals are satisfactory from UNRWA standpoint. USDel suggests Dept repeat agreed text PCC proposals to Beirut for Blandford and to other US missions in area, as well as to London and Ankara. USDel still hopes Dept will be able obtain greater UK support our efforts and this connection that UK will be prepared appoint liaison officer for Paris meetings.

6. Agreed text Chairman’s opening statement follows:

“As the Chairman of the Palestine Conciliation Commission during the Comm’s initial meetings here with you, it is my privilege, and it is a pleasure for me, to welcome you on behalf of the Commission as participants in this Paris conf.

“We find in the acceptance of our invitations to this conference, by the govts of the five neighbor states to which the invitations were addressed, encouragement for our belief that those who entered into the armistice agreements have an earnest desire to promote the return of permanent peace in Palestine.

“Those engagements, entered into almost three years ago, had a two-fold purpose: To put an end to bitter warfare and to pave the way for a transition to a lasting peace in a land sacred to three of the world’s great religions.

“The first purpose has been achieved; the warfare between the neighbor states has been stopped. But there has been little progress toward the achievement of the second purpose—that is, the working out of a peaceful settlement of the problems dividing these neighbor states.

“The objective of this conference, in which we hope to continue to find encouragement from your participation, is to see, through mediation, solutions to these problems which, as we see them, can be broadly grouped into two categories: (a) problems mainly affecting the rights and status of individuals, and (b) problems mainly affecting the rights, obligations and relations of states.

“The first group includes such questions as the repatriation, compensation and resettlement of the refugees; claims for indemnification for damages resulting from hostilities; and disposition of blocked accounts.

“Among the specific problems in the second group are: Delineation of boundary and demarcation lines: demilitarized zone and no-man’s lands; arrangements for free-port facilities; water, fishing and navigation rights; communications and telecommunications; and such problems as narcotics, contraband and health control.

“Many of these problems have been the subject of discussions between the Comm and the parties during the past three years. In a sense, these discussions have been useful. They have made abundantly clear the views, aspirations and ideas of the parties to the dispute. But the time has now come to make constructive use of this clarification of views, aspirations and ideas. That is the task the Comm has undertaken by assuming its mediatory functions at this conference and by offering to submit concrete proposals for consideration by the parties.

“In drafting the proposals to be submitted to you, the Comm has been guided by two considerations: fairness and realism. We have tried to take into consideration all the views expressed during the past three years by the parties to the dispute, as well as the political, social and economic realities observed by us. We have come to the conclusion that the Palestine problem must be considered in its entirety, and that its solution must be sought in a fair and realistic spirit of give-and-take.

“In considering the Palestine problem in its entirety, we are following the guidance given to us by the GA. The Assembly res under which our Comm operates—and under which you are cooperating with us—emphasizes the general character of the Palestine problem. In drafting our mediatory proposals for discussion in this conference, we have had to keep in mind that the GA has instructed us to assist the govts and authorities concerned to achieve a final settlement of all questions outstanding between them. We feel certain that in considering our proposals, you will keep in mind that the assembly, in the same resolution, has called upon the parties to the dispute, to seek agreement by negotiations with a view to the final settlement of all outstanding questions. It is impossible to miss the meaning of this call and the clear emphasis of the res on the interdependence of the various elements of the Palestine problem. Experience has shown that concentration on one or the other isolated paragraphs of the res out of context has not helped in the promotion of peace in Palestine. All the elements are necessary, but they are useful only if linked together according to an overall plan. For example, the res instructs us to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and rehabilitation of refugees, and we did not forget that instruction when we drafted our proposals for this conference. Nor did we forget the instruction given us in the same res, to seek agreements between the govts which will facilitate the economic development of the area, including arrangements for free access to ports and airfields and the use of transportation and communication facilities. On the one hand, a sound economic development is impossible in an area with hundreds of thousands of homeless people uncertain of the future and their standing in society. On the other hand, refugees—and non-refugees for that matter—cannot be settled securely anywhere in an area badly lacking economic development.

“Surely the inter-relation of all the aspects of the problem is too obvious to be overlooked.

“The Conciliation Comm has not overlooked it in weighing the mediatory proposals to be placed before you at this conference. In drafting those proposals, we have considered that any solution of the refugee question will involve important commitments by Israel. But we have also considered that Israel cannot be expected to make such commitments unless, at the same time, she receives reasonable assurances from her neighbors as to her national and economic security.

“The solution of the refugee problem proposed by the comm envisages the repatriation and integration of some of the refugees in Israel and the resettlement of others in Arab countries.

“Such undertakings will necessitate the creation of additional land by means of development and irrigation and agreements between the parties on the use of water resources. These agreements will, in turn, involve revisions or extensions in scope of existing armistice agreements, as well as appropriate economic arrangements.

“No constructive progress towards a solution of your problems is possible unless all the parties to the dispute at the outset of our discussions here, express their determination to respect each other’s right to security and freedom from attack, to refrain from warlike or hostile acts against one another, and to promote the return of permanent peace in Palestine.

“These are the considerations which have inspired the comprehensive proposals which the Comm will place before you as the pattern for this conference.

“At this time of our initial meeting here with you, my colleagues and I have endeavored to help you to understand the general pattern of proposals which we desire to submit to you for consideration after you have had an opportunity at our next meeting to respond to this statement. We believe that you will understand our feeling that the measure of the helpfulness of our proposals will be found not only in the extent to which they offer opportunities for progressive action but also in the extent to which we can all work together to make the most of these opportunities.

“It is now almost three years since the GA formulated a UN policy for the settlement of the problems arising out of the Palestine conflict. Notwithstanding successive efforts to find a way to such a settlement, we have as yet made no progress that to the casual observer is in any way apparent. Without attempting to determine where the primary responsibility for that failure may be, we all here must now recognize that we share the responsibility for coming to grips with these problems in a new spirit of determination, realism and honesty. No one of us can fail to hope that the problems with which we are dealing will be solved, or fail to wish to make his distinct contribution to their solution. It is easy enough to look at the record of the past three years and remain skeptical. What is needed now from all of us is extra determination, extra faith, extra goodwill. Too much depends on the outcome of our efforts here for any of us to indulge in second thoughts, flagging determination or lack of faith in our ability to arrive at a just solution. The conciliation Comm is ready and determined to do its part. In doing its part, it counts on your understanding and cooperation in fullest measures.”

7. Agreed text PCC comprehensive proposals for submission to parties follows:

“On the basis of the considerations set forth by the Chairman in his opening statement, the Comm desires to submit to the parties for consideration a comprehensive pattern of proposals.

“As a part of this comprehensive pattern, the Comm wld emphasize the importance of a preliminary accord in reaffirmation of the undertakings of the parties as signatories to the armistice agreements and as UN members in the form of the fol preamble:

“Preamble:

“In accordance with the obligations of states members of the UN and of signatories to armistice agreements, the govts of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria and the Govt of Israel solemnly affirm their intention and undertake to settle all differences, present or future, solely by resort to pacific procedures, refraining from any use of force or acts of hostility, with full respect for the right of each party to security and freedom from fear of attack, and by these means to promote the return of peace in Palestine.

“Proposals:

“With a view to the settlement of outstanding differences dividing the parties, the Comm submits the fol proposals for their consideration:

• “1. That an agreement be reached concerning war damages arising out of the hostilities of 1948, such an agreement to include, in the Comm’s opinion, mutual cancellation of such claims, by the Govts of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria and the Govt of Israel;
• “2. That the Govt of Israel agree to the repatriation of a specified number of Arab refugees in categories which can be integrated into the economy of the state of Israel and who wish to return and live in peace with their neighbors;
• “3. That the Govt of Israel accept the obligation to pay, as compensation for property abandoned by those refugees not repatriated, a global sum based upon the evaluation arrived at by the Comm’s refugee office; that a payment plan, taking into consideration the Govt of Israel’s ability to pay, be set up by a special comite of economic and financial experts to be established by a UN trustee through whom payment of individual claims for compensation wld be made.
• “4. That the Govts of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria and the Govt of Israel agree upon the mutual release of all blocked bank accounts and to make them payable in pounds sterling.
• “5. That the Govt of Israel and the Govts of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria agree to consider, under UN auspices, and in the light of experience gained during the past three years, the revision or amendment of the armistice agreements between them, especially with regard to the fol questions:
  • “(a) Territorial adjustments, including demilitarized zones;
  • “(b) The creation of an international water authority to deal with the problems of the use of the Jordan and Yarmuk rivers and their tributaries, as well as the waters of Lake Tiberias;
  • “(c) The disposition of the Gaza strip;
  • “(d) The creation of a free port at Haifa;
  • “(e) Border regulations between Israel and her neighbors with special attention to the need for free access to the holy places in the Jerusalem area, including Bethlehem;
  • “(f) Health, narcotics and contraband control along the demarcation lines;
  • “(g) Arrangements which will facilitate the economic development of the areas: resumption of communications and economic relations between Israel and her neighbors.”³

[

Palmer ]

1. Telegram Unpal 286, September 6, identified also as telegram 1407 to Paris for Ambassador Palmer, contained the Department’s views on a draft working paper on the objectives of the forthcoming PCC Conference as transmitted in Palun 437, August 30, neither printed (357.AC/8–3051).
2. In the first paragraph of Unpal 286, the Department suggested that a non-aggression declaration might be submitted to the parties separately from the comprehensive proposals since it would be a document both sides should be able to sign without too much hesitation or reservation. The Department suggested the declaration refer to the obligations of parties under Article 2, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the United Nations Charter and Article 1 and 3 of the respective armistice agreements which remained in force pending a final peace settlement and hoped that a favorable atmosphere could be created through initial consideration of the nonaggression item.
3. The Conference of the Palestine Conciliation Commission was held in Paris from September 13 to November 19, 1951. An account of these meetings is contained in Progress Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine Covering the Period from 23 January to 19 November 1951 (U.N. Doc. A/1985). Reports on the meetings by the U.S. Representative in addition to those here printed are found in Department of State decimal file 357.AC.