172. Telegram From the Mission at the United Nations to the Department of State1
Delga 819. Re Palestine—Israeli withdrawal. Lodge conveyed to SYG at Secretary’s request, main points Israeli statement on withdrawal as he had taken them down over phone at 5 p.m.
Hammarskjold indicated that Pineau (France) had, earlier this afternoon, shown SYG his copy of Israeli text, on which SYG had already had a chance to reflect. Pineau had also indicated lines of US speech.
Hammarskjold felt biggest area of progress was in Israel now not publicly insisting on exclusion Egypt from Gaza in any form direct or indirect. He was, however, relatively pessimistic as to implementation in connection Israeli withdrawal. He feared, speaking as Devil’s advocate, that Israel would very shortly seek clarifications regarding his intentions for take over. For instance, he envisaged Israelis seeking to pin him down on UN being “the agency” to take over in Gaza. In this connection he understood from his talk with Pineau that Israel had dropped reference to “initial” take over and spoke only in terms of exclusive UN responsibility for indefinite time. He understood Israel intending express expectation UN would be maintained in Gaza until final peace settlement not merely settlement Gaza status.
SYG also concerned over formulation under which Israel reserved freedom of action. He felt that formulation left it to Ben Gurion to decide for himself whether there was any change in the situation which indicated (to Ben Gurion) a renewed risk of deterioration which would free Israel to take action. Pineau had indicated US, UK, France and others would endorse this.
Hammarskjold said that Pineau had shown him text purporting to be draft of US statement which together with statements from UK, France, Canada, Netherlands and others would follow Israeli declaration. Point in this text which concerned him was that which stated if situation did not lead to peaceful conditions these states would take action inside or outside UN. Lodge said he understood US statement would only indicate that if there were change in the situation which affected peaceful conditions that would be matter for UN to consider.
Hammarskjold was most pessimistic about how things would develop in GA debate. He and Cordier predicted that in addition to those who spoke in support of Israeli declaration 50 speakers would get up and ask questions. He felt this would lead to a very unsatisfactory situation.
[Page 325]Lodge saw Pearson (Canada) right after speaking to SYG. Pearson, too, was most pessimistic as to whether this scheme would work out. Commenting on Fawzi’s (Egypt) statement today, which he said was rather strong for Fawzi, Pearson said this nothing compared with statements we would get after Israel’s declaration.
Georges Picot (France) enquired this evening whether USDel was asking other delegations to make statements similar to US. We said our understanding was that certain other countries were to make similar statements, but that we had received no instructions re asking specific countries to do so.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 674.84A/2–2857. Confidential; Priority. Received at 8:38 p.m.↩