87. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, August 25, 19591
SUBJECT
- Various matters pertaining to UNRWA
PARTICIPANTS
- Dr. John H. Davis, Director UNRWA
- IO—Mr. Francis O. Wilcox, Assistant Secretary
- NEA—Mr. Randolph Roberts
- UNP—Mr. Stephen E. Palmer, Jr.
At the outset Dr. Davis presented his view that UNRWA could not be expected to solve the Palestine refugee question and that it should act only as a relief agency. UNRWA should not be tied to economic development plans in the area; rather, jobs should be created in ways unrelated to UNRWA and not formally connected with any plans for integration of the refugees.
According to Dr. Davis, Lebanon, because of the delicate confessional balance there, is more seriously opposed to integration than are the other host countries. It was the Lebanese who pressed for the Sawfar Conference of experts.2 It was only under Lebanese pressure that the UAR and Jordan assented to attend the conference.
The individual grant and loan program in Jordan is very successful, Dr. Davis stated. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Construction and Development (Nashishibi) told Dr. Davis about ten days ago that they were in favor of this program’s being expanded. Mr. Wilcox inquired if Director Davis thought the Arabs would really welcome economic development assistance of a nature which would in effect lead to some integration. Dr. Davis replied in the affirmative, provided the programs were formally unrelated to the refugee question.
Dr. Davis stressed the point that despite the facade of apparent unanimity, there are as many different official Arab attitudes regarding the Palestine refugee question as there are Arab countries. Gohar of the UAR told Dr. Davis the day before the Sawfar Conference began not to be concerned if he (Gohar) were quoted as having taken a stand at variance with Mr. Hammarskjold’s understanding of the UAR position.
In response to Mr. Wilcox’s inquiry about the total number of refugees now registered with UNRWA, Dr. Davis replied that there are about one million, although not all of these receive rations. In an exchange about the possibility of rectifying the refugee relief rolls, Dr. Davis conjectured that such an operation would probably not result in a significant reduction. There are, for instance, between 120,000 and 150,000 persons illegally on the rolls in Jordan, but there are about 120,000 children who should be added. Seventeen or eighteen per cent of the original Palestine refugees have died in the last 12 years, but the natural increase now is about 30,000 a year. Dr. Davis said that only forty-five per cent of the registered refugees are now in camps and that it is hoped to have all of the refugees in “permanent housing” by the end of this year.
Mr. Wilcox asked whether the younger refugees would take jobs if they could get them. Dr. Davis said that this is indeed the case, although it is very difficult for any of the refugees in the Strip (Gaza) [Page 192] to leave, and the refugees in Lebanon are far from welcome in the local labor market. Due to lack of funds, he added, there are six times as many applications for loans and grants as can be approved. The $350,000 which is being spent on “self-support” loans and grants in Jordan this year will result in the permanent resettlement of about 90 families.
The question of the correction of the relief rolls was brought up again by Mr. Wilcox and here Dr. Davis emphasized that this is one improvement for which the U.S. should hold out strongly. He believed that it could be presented as a humanitarian matter, in that needy children would be added and that “greedy people” would be taken off the rolls. Dr. Davis said that the Jordanian Prime Minister recently promised UNRWA the death registration lists. Dr. Davis also recommended that the U.S. support an increase in the self-help programs. The new budget would provide $500,000 for the expansion of the vocational programs and $1,000,000 for self-help programs in Jordan. Dr. Davis warned, however, that we should not relate these programs directly to integration.
On the question of the turnover of the responsibility for educational administration to the host governments, Dr. Davis stated that the Arabs will resist this if the General Assembly “crams it down their throats.” In other words it would be best if this were not included in the UNRWA resolution. Rather, UNRWA could approach the host governments separately and work out with them such a turnover by promising UNRWA subsidies for a certain period of time.
Dr. Davis, in an exchange about U.S. tactics at the General Assembly, advised us not to announce our policy at the outset. We should let the Arabs speak first and even then not react significantly, but rather let the Arab spokesmen think further about the situation. In other words, we should not at the beginning present a convenient target to the Arabs. Later we should push for a correction of the relief rolls and increased vocational training, but present the latter on the basis of aid to individuals and not relate it to integration.
Mr. Wilcox stressed that we are under constant pressure from Congress to secure some meaningful programs on the Palestine refugee matter. Dr. Davis, expressed the belief that Congress should be persuaded it is “buying stability in the Middle East with its contributions to UNRWA.” This, said Dr. Davis, is a very valuable asset and is the most that can be expected of UNRWA. Director Davis suggested that we support extension of UNRWA’s mandate for the next five years. Then another reappraisal could be made. He said this would conform to the “pattern” already set.
Mr. Wilcox asked for Dr. Davis’ views on the current Arab suggestion that UNRWA contributions be put under the regular UN operating budget. Dr. Davis replied that he could not see how the Arabs [Page 193] could gain by such a move. The ten per cent of the UNRWA which is provided for by countries other than the U.S. and the UK has always been the most difficult to obtain. If this percentage were increased to thirty-five or forty per cent, UNRWA’s financial state could not help but be worse. Before Dr. Davis left he remarked that there had been some difficulty about the new UNRWA budget, and implied that he had come from Beirut to see Hammarskjold almost solely about this subject. He stated that the problem had now been solved.
After the meeting Dr. Davis remembered that he had meant to bring up, with Mr. Wilcox and at an earlier meeting with Assistant Secretary Jones,3 the question of UNRWA assistance to the Azazma bedouin. He pointed out that perhaps two thousand of these people had died of starvation in the last year or two, and that there are only six thousand left. Mr. Roberts stated our view that whatever the need of these bedouin and certain other peoples in the area, UNRWA is not the proper vehicle for the administration of aid to them. He added that if UNRWA began to assist this group, a precedent would be set for the expansion of UNRWA’s responsibility to hundreds of thousands of other needy people in the Middle East. Dr. Davis suggested as a possibility that the U.S. Government might make available to UNRWA food for the Azazma bedouin. UNRWA would serve only as the distributor, and it could perform this function more efficiently than we could under our direct aid programs.
In this subsequent conversation the Director also remarked that he had solved the budget problem by merely splitting his 1960 budget into two equal parts. He said that the first part would be the regular budget for the first half of the year, and the second would be called an “estimate” of the regular expenses for the last six months of 1960.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 320.511/8–2359. Confidential. Drafted by Palmer on August 26. A briefing memorandum for the conversation is ibid.,IO Files: Lot 65 D 30, UNRWA.↩
- Documentation on the conference of Arab League experts, held August 8–18, is ibid., Central File 320.511.↩
- Davis presented the same arguments to Jones at the earlier meeting. A memorandum of their conversation is ibid., 320.511/8–2359.↩