407. Memorandum From the Under Secretary of State’s Special Assistant (Villard) to the Secretary of State1

SUBJECT

  • Palestine Refugee Problem

Discussion

As a result of my study of the Palestine refugee problem and in light of conditions now prevailing in the Near East, I have come to the conclusion that the IONEA recommendations of July 2, 1957 (Tab IV) should be re-examined.2

I believe it is generally agreed that political developments in the area have made it impractical at this time to attempt the direct solution of the refugee question recommended in the IONEA memorandum. It does not seem possible to predict when the time may be opportune to do so. Meanwhile, we have to deal with the predicament of UNRWA and the fact that even the minimum amount of funds for our contribution may not be forthcoming unless some progress is made toward a refugee solution.

Basically, I feel that the refugee question represents an integral part of an over-all Palestine settlement and that the one cannot be treated separately from the other. I therefore welcome the possibility that the Palestine issue may be explored with the Norwegians3 or another third party, such as Secretary-General Hammarskjold. The results would be helpful in determining our approach to the specific problem of the refugees.

While it does not appear advisable to make an all-out attempt to solve the refugee problem until the climate is more favorable, I think we should in the meanwhile do everything we can to melt down the mass of refugees by encouraging the natural process of attrition which, for the first time, has begun to be noticeable. This would involve the implementation of part of the IONEA recommendations, directed primarily at providing bilateral assistance to friendly host governments. It is the purpose of the attached memorandum (Tab II)4 to analyze the present situation as I see it and to suggest, as a start, the desirability of focusing our attention on reducing the refugee camps in [Page 808] Jordan. This in itself will not produce a dramatic or overnight break in the longstanding deadlock, but would help to promote the ultimate liquidation of the problem without waiting for political negotiations or compromise.

The memorandum was prepared after discussions with Mr. Harry Labouisse, Director of UNRWA, with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with Mr. Eric Johnston. It must be added that Mr. Johnston did not subscribe to the thesis that political conditions were unfavorable for seeking a direct solution at this time. NEA, which has seen the memorandum, agrees with the conclusion that present circumstances are unfavorable and that the IONEA proposals would not succeed at the present time. NEA recommends that these proposals be held in abeyance but that we should be alert for opportunities to put them into operation. NEA also suggests that as part of our effort to improve the present atmosphere, we should encourage quiet exploration by other parties of the possibilities of progress toward a Palestine settlement.5

I have also discussed this paper with IO, which is submitting its comments separately (Tab III),6 and with Mr. Elbert Matthews of S/P, who is in general agreement with the contents.

Recommendations

1.
That the IONEA recommendations for a direct solution remain in abeyance for the time being, but that the refugee problem be explored with the Norwegians or other third parties in the context of an overall Palestine settlement.
2.
That consideration be given to implementing the IO-NEA proposals in regard to UNRWA and bilateral assistance programs (Tab I).7
3.
That you call a meeting at a date convenient to yourself, attended by IO and NEA, for further discussion of the problem in the light of current political developments.
[Page 809]

[Tab II]

PALESTINE REFUGEE PROBLEM

I

1.
Political developments in the Middle East over the last few months, beginning with the Syrian crisis, have prevented the implementation of the IONEA recommendations of July 2, 1957 on the Palestine refugee problem. Those recommendations were based on the assumption that conditions were favorable for making a constructive move in regard to the refugees. It is now generally believed that the contrary is the case and that it would be a mistake to press for a solution to this delicate and long-standing problem at the present time.
2.
The IONEA recommendations were further based on the assumption that the refugee question could best be solved by isolating it from the main body of unresolved Palestine issues and attacking it as a thing in itself. Public opinion, as well as the sentiment of Congress and area leaders, was believed to favor this position rather than inclusion of the refugee problem in the context of a general Arab-Israeli settlement. However, there seem to be no grounds for the belief that the former approach offers more hope at present than the latter. In the words of the Director of UNRWA, the refugee problem is “inextricably linked” to the political background of the Palestine problem. Consideration of the one without relation to the other is an impracticability.
3.
There have been indications recently that the time may be near when it will be possible to undertake quiet explorations looking toward a general Palestine settlement. The Secretary-General of the United Nations has expressed his intention to survey the situation with Fawzi of Egypt. Charles Malik of Lebanon is actively concerned with the problem. The interest of Norway has been made clear. In each case, the importance of an over-all settlement is recognized, although a separate approach on the refugee aspect is not ruled out.
4.
Despite regional rivalries which divide the Arabs, there is complete unity among them on the question of the Palestine refugees. While some Arab leaders may privately profess a desire for the solution of this question, none would dare move openly toward that end unless it were the policy of the Arab League to do so. Cairo’s vicious campaign against Jordan on the subject is a warning what to expect if one country should get out of line. Again to quote the Director of UNRWA, the refugee problem represents for all the Arab governments “a burning issue of internal and foreign policy.” So far, there has been no indication that any Arab country or group of countries would agree to a refugee settlement in the absence of an over-all Palestine solution.
5.
Arab antagonism for Israel is, if anything, on the increase. It is certainly not being weakened by the increased flow of arms to Arab countries from abroad and by the military confidence which this engenders among the Arabs. Furthermore, the Arab sense of unity has been reinforced by the public reaction of their governments to the question of communist activities in Syria. In Arab eyes the spectre of Zionism is still the major threat. An attempt to detach and solve the sensitive problem of the refugees in this charged atmosphere, without reference to such fundamental political factors as boundary adjustments and Israel’s unrestricted immigration policy, would not seem to hold much prospect of success.
6.
Success of the IONEA plan depends on acceptance by Israel of the principle of repatriation and the establishment of an international loan to enable Israel to pay refugees opting for compensation in lieu of repatriation. To date, there is nothing to indicate that Israel would be willing to accommodate itself to the Arab point of view represented by acceptance of the repatriation principle. Unless Israel receives what it considers to be an adequate quid pro quo, in the form of as yet unspecified financial assistance from the United States, it will in all probability decline to accept even a few thousand refugees on a quota basis, the admission of which would have no appreciable effect in reducing the total number of refugees in the host countries.
7.
The principle of repatriation, to be acceptable to the Arabs, must be unconditional. Refugee sentiment, whipped up by agitators, has hitherto been united and adamant on this score. Owing to its current policy of unrestricted immigration, as well as the financial difficulties besetting that country, it is highly unlikely that Israel would agree to a repatriation plan without limitations and safeguards which in turn would cause its rejection by the Arabs. There is a danger that rejection of such a plan by the Arabs might relieve Israel, in its view, of any further responsibility, and the problem of resettling the refugees would be no nearer solution. If the United States were associated with a plan turned down by the Arabs, the United States would be charged—at least in Cairo and Damascus—with having been the author of a “Zionist imperialist plot.”
8.
While there are a number of organizations which purport to speak in their behalf, none can be said to represent the refugees either officially or unofficially. The same is true of the self-appointed personalities associated with the camps or with the refugee body as a whole who seek to interpret refugee attitudes and objectives. These so-called leaders have a stake in the situation only because of the property or its equivalent which they hope to recover from Israel. The Palestine Conciliation Commission, which is engaged in evaluating the property of all Arab refugees in Israel, estimates the total value of such property at $460,000,000. The political pressures in the refugee problem would [Page 811] tend to disappear if the principal agitators were silenced by compensation for their losses and if opportunities for permanent resettlement outside of Palestine were provided for the rank and file of the rest.
9.
Establishment of an international loan to enable Israel to pay refugees opting for compensation has certain drawbacks. While it is true that we have committed ourselves, in the Secretary’s speech of August 1955, to a proposal of this nature, there is a danger that such payments would be interpreted by those desiring to exploit the situation as a fee to the refugees for the sale of their birthright. Interminable haggling over any sum that might be offered, whether to property owners or not, must also be expected, especially since the refugees have no authorized spokesman to negotiate in their collective behalf. To avoid such difficulties it might be better to provide compensation, in the form of economic aid, to those governments willing to resettle refugees at so much per head. This in turn would have to be handled with due regard for the inflationary aspects of large amounts of money entering a given country at one time.
10.
It is believed that not more than 50,000—or at most 100,000—refugees would be prepared actually to return to the land of their birth if a plan of repatriation were agreed to by Israel and accepted by the Arabs. The main problem of resettlement would remain. A careful survey of the neighboring territories where resettlement might be possible demonstrates that only Iraq could absorb or provide employment for a substantial number of refugees. It is unreasonable to suppose, however, that Iraq would accept a mass transfer of Palestinians unless the move were fully in line with Arab policy on the Palestine question. Furthermore, Iraq has economic and social problems of its own. Palestinians constitute an alien group, not too popular with the indigenous population, whose introduction into the country on a scale that might contribute substantially to reduction of the refugee total would be a questionable matter from the political standpoint. While an increasing number of refugees can be absorbed in the normal fulfillment of economic opportunities, a large-scale influx for settlement purposes would be virtually impractical if for no other reason than that strong opposition would be engendered to Palestinians taking up traditional and jealously-held tribal lands.
11.
Economic development projects, supported by the United States, could help to drain off refugee labor and thus reduce the number of unemployed. However, it is unrealistic to expect such schemes to bear fruit if they are in any way associated in the Arab mind with a “plan” or “proposal” for settlement of the refugee problem. The most promising program for economic development in the area is the Jordan River Project (the “Johnston Plan”), which would provide for approximately 175,000 refugees or, in Mr. Johnston’s revised plan, something over half that number. Because of its political connotations, [Page 812] this plan is regarded with such suspicion in the area at present that it would be futile to attempt to put it into effect, at least under the Johnston label.

II

12.
Out of a total of 933,556 refugees registered with UNRWA as of June 1957,8 more than half, or 517,388 are in Jordan. A breakdown shows that 292,330 are fifteen years of age and over, 219,640 are children from one to fifteen, and the remaining 5,418 are infants under one year. These represent a total of 99,939 families. They enjoy Jordanian citizenship and thus represent a politically important segment of the population. The next largest group, numbering 221,058, is in the Gaza Strip. Of the remainder, there are 102,586 refugees in Lebanon and 92,524 in Syria. The figures do not take account of several thousand Palestinians not on relief rolls who have found refuge in Jordan and in other Arab countries.
13.
Outside of Jordan, “automatic reintegration” has gone forward to a considerable degree and may be expected to continue in Lebanon, despite opposition to the settlement of Arab refugees on the ground it would upset the delicate Christian–Moslem balance. In Syria, the process of “automatic reintegration” has already reached the point where international relief could be withdrawn without appreciable personal hardship. Gaza presents a special and difficult situation. The refugees here are without the prospect of assimilation into the life of the country, except to a most limited extent, and cannot expect assistance from an indifferent government in Egypt. It is probable that the Gaza refugees will have to depend primarily on relief operations sponsored by the international community for some time to come.
14.
It is clear that Jordan, where the problem is greatest numerically, constitutes the heart of the refugee question, and that because of its serious economic and political aspects, a solution is more urgent here than anywhere else. If, irrespective of political arrangements that might be concluded with Israel and the Arab governments at some future date, a start could be made to provide permanent settlement and an economic future for as many as possible of the 100,000 refugee families now encamped within the Kingdom of Jordan, the whole problem would receive an impetus toward eventual solution. This could best be accomplished through bilateral agreements between the United States and Jordan for a program of vocational training and projects for self-support, as outlined in the NEAIO memorandum of July 2. Such a program would provide a sound foundation for the gradual whittling down of the mass of refugees and their absorption in the economy of Jordan and other Arab countries. It should not, of [Page 813] course, be labeled a “plan” for a refugee “settlement”, but represented as United States financial assistance to enable Jordan to take over and to continue some of the responsibilities which UNRWA, with its depleted finances, is no longer in a position to discharge.
15.
There is a steadily growing feeling among responsible Jordanians … that resettlement of the refugees should not be attempted by political negotiations but by gradually melting the refugee concentrations away. Foreign Minister Samir Rifai is convinced that a conference table approach would be doomed to failure. Rifai is known to be privately concerned over the large camps in the immediate vicinity of political centers like Amman and Zorka, and to favor breaking them down into smaller units which might facilitate integration of the refugees into the community life of scattered towns and villages. Likewise, he feels that relocating some of the refugees in Jordan would not only help to diminish political opposition to the idea of resettlement but, by converting idle refugees into productive citizens, would benefit the Jordanian economy.
16.

Encouragement is lent to the economic, rather than the political, approach to the refugee problem by a significant change in the attitude of the refugees themselves. Hitherto, most of them have been opposed to self-support projects because these have been linked in the refugee mind with permanent resettlement and the abandonment of hopes of repatriation. This year the Director of UNRWA reports for the first time a desire on the part of the refugees for self-support and rehabilitation, looking toward an improvement in their conditions of life and prospects for the future. The 1957 UNRWA Report states that:

“This shift is noticeable not only in the increased demands for assistance in individual self-support projects, but also in the substantial rise in interest in vocational training of all types, and even in the frequent requests for more and better housing.”

This trend has been consciously under-played in the Report, because of the Director’s feeling that to emphasize such a development might have political consequences. It has, however, been noted by other qualified observers who see the possibility that some of the refugees are beginning to be reconciled to the permanent loss of their homes in Palestine. This is particularly true of the younger element who remember few ties with the mother country, who are increasingly impatient with their present static lot, and who in many instances have emphasized their preference for rehabilitation instead of relief.

17.
Through its individual grants program (agriculture, commercial and industrial), UNRWA has rehabilitated 5,400 refugees in Jordan at a cost of approximately $400 per person. When this activity, which only began in 1955, was suspended owing to lack of funds it had a backlog of 1,600 applicants, each representing a family, all members of [Page 814] which would have benefited from the grant and become self-supporting. (In Syria 1,800 refugees were rehabilitated.) Moreover, hundreds of additional applications continued to pour in afterwards. A modest program of this type must be regarded as offset by the number of births among refugee families each year, but it indicates one of the paths to resettlement and rehabilitation on a larger scale if facilities were expanded and if adequate funds were provided through bilateral assistance programs.
18.
The UNRWA report suggests other ways in which the refugee problem may, with proper assistance, tend ultimately to solve itself. As a result of increased demands from governments and private industry, many refugees have been able to find jobs in the expanding economy of the Middle East; some have been assisted in emigrating to the United States or elsewhere. As an indication of the training provided for them in Middle East institutions, scholarships have been awarded in agriculture, arts, commerce, dentistry, education, engineering, medicine, pharmacy, science and veterinary. The services of refugee school teachers have been widely requested. Existing facilities for vocational training have been quite inadequate to cope with the growing demand for trained personnel in the host countries as well as in the neighboring Arab states. There seems to be no reason why an expanded and adequately financed program for vocational training could not, in time, settle in permanent homes a considerable number of refugees outside the old borders of Palestine. In addition, there are, of course, the approximately 5,000 refugees who find their way into the labor market of Iraq each year. This drift may be expected to continue, whether the refugees have special qualifications or not.

III

19.
Assuming that political conditions do not now permit a direct attack on the refugee problem, and pending consideration of the problem in the context of an over-all Palestine settlement, there seem to be several things we could do in the face of the urgent situation presented by UNRWA’s shortage of funds and its approaching expiration date in 1960. While it does not appear practicable to put the NEAIO proposals into effect at this time, this does not mean they should be discarded in their entirety. The recommendations regarding UNRWA and the furnishing of bilateral assistance to friendly Arab governments (Tab B)9 still appear valid and should receive early consideration regardless of political circumstances in the area. In addition, the following steps could be explored: [Page 815]
(a)
Maximum utilization of UNRWA as a holding operation until 1960. Study of its possible continuance after that date, or its possible replacement by an agency—whether or not under United Nations auspices—primarily designed to assist the refugees in finding an economic future.
(b)
Promotion through bilateral agreements, the United Nations, or Middle East development schemes of economic projects that might attract refugee labor in Jordan, Lebanon or other Arab countries. Such opportunities should be advertised as open to all workers, not specifically to refugees, though the refugee camps might be notified on a priority basis. There should be no political implications in such arrangements.
(c)
Utilization of the of Title III of Public Law 480, providing for donations of farm products to non-profit voluntary agencies for use overseas. The full possibilities of this section of the law do not seem to have been taken into account in connection with the Palestine refugees.
(d)
Consultation with United Nations officials on the possibility of establishing in Gaza, upon the termination of UNRWA, a form of trusteeship administered by the United Nations which would supervise or direct rehabilitation of the refugees. Egypt might be persuaded to acquiesce in this arrangement upon realization that the problem of the Gaza refugees will be on its doorstep when UNRWA ends.
(e)
All-out encouragement of private organizations and of those philanthropic agencies already active in the area to provide funds and services for rehabilitation purposes.
(f)
An approach to some of the smaller countries which have manifested an interest in solution of the problem, with a view to obtaining grants or loans on humanitarian grounds. The Director of UNRWA has suggested Switzerland as an example.
(g)
Emphasizing to the host governments on every suitable occasion, through diplomatic channels, the responsibilities with which they will be faced on the expiration date of UNRWA and the need for early planning on their part.
20.
Obviously, it will be necessary to discuss with Congress the question of funds for the implementation of any future program for the refugees. This would be true whether we were to ask for funds to participate in an international loan to Israel for the purpose of paying compensation to the refugees, to raise our contribution to UNRWA above the 70 percent limit as an emergency measure, to finance economic development projects or to support bilateral assistance agreements designed to make the refugees self-supporting. Our specific objective in this instance should be to remove from the relief rolls as many refugees as possible, particularly in Jordan. This would not only reduce the proportions of the problem as a whole over the course of time but would help Jordan to survive politically and economically. The initial approach could be made in confidence to selected Congressional leaders, in order to examine the realities of the situation and its long-term implications.
21.
While the immediate results to be achieved by economic means might not be spectacular, this plan of attack coincides generally with ideas recently put forward by Secretary-General Hammarskjold, by the French membership in NATO, and by Foreign Minister Pella of Italy. Until the atmosphere for an over-all Palestine settlement is considered favorable, an attempt to break the back of the refugee problem by direct political negotiations courts the risk of failure and the identification of the United States with that failure. On the other hand, an attempt now to encourage the process of attrition by establishing the refugees where they are could serve the ultimate aim of liquidating the camp concentrations as a source of danger and friction in the Near East. The main emphasis in such a course of action should be on the scrupulous avoidance of any semblance of a political arrangement, the very mention of which might well defeat the attainment of the objective.
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 320.51/7–257. Secret. Sent through Under Secretary Herter. The memorandum is item No. 15 of “Palestine Refugee Problem, Villard Study, 1957–58”.
  2. Document 349.
  3. See Document 393.
  4. Printed below. Villard sent to Rountree and Wilcox on November 12 an earlier draft of the attached memorandum for their comments. (Item No. 11 of the Villard Study)
  5. Rountree stated the position of the Bureau of Near Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs in a memorandum to Villard on November 15. (Item No. 12 of the Villard Study) A discussion of additional views within NEA are in Rockwell’s memorandum to Rountree of November 12. (Ibid., 884.411/11–1257)
  6. Infra.
  7. Not attached to the source text, but see part III, subsection 1 of Document 349.
  8. Later statistics place the total at 947,000. [Footnote in the source text.]
  9. Not attached.