DEPARTMENT OF STATE Memorandum of Conversation
Date: December 7, 1949
Subject: Palestine
Participants: The Secretary Deputy Under Secretary Rusk Mr. Moshe Sharett, Israeli Foreign Minister Mr. Eliahu Elath, Israeli Ambassador Mr. Wilkins - ANE
Copies to: ANE, NEA (2) UNA
Problem: Current developments at the UN regarding Palestine.
Action required: None
Action assigned to:
Mr. Sharett called on me this morning for the purpose of paying his respects during his current visit to the United States to attend the present session of the General Assembly and for the purpose of making known Israeli views on certain aspects of the Palestine problem.
Mr. Sharett informed me that it was a great relief for him to leave the present nightmare at Lake Success for the calm of Washington. He indicated that an "unholy alliance" of Arab states, Latin American states, the USSR and its satellites had brought about, in subcommittee of the ad hoc political committee, the adoption of an amended Australian resolution providing for rigid internationalization in the Jerusalem area. Mr. Sharett said that the ghost of November 29, 1947 was "stalking the scene" and that many representatives in the United Nations were bowing down before it.
I asked Mr. Sharett if any progress had been made in recently reported conversations between representatives of Israel and representatives of the Vatican in Rome. Mr. Sharett said he could tell me confidentially that, while it should be understood that the Vatican did not approve of present Israel proposals regarding Jerusalem, a message had been sent to him to the effect that he continue his present line and that conversations could be continued later. Mr. Sharett said that this message meant the Vatican was not displeased with the manner in which the Israeli Government was conducting its relations with Catholic representatives within Israel and that, as the Vatican did not expect any action at the present session of the General Assembly, representatives of Israel and the Vatican could continue their current talks thereafter. Mr. Sharett believed that the Vatican was divided regarding the question of full internationalization for the Jerusalem area, but that it would maintain its present position of support for full internationalization pending action by the GA.
I asked Mr. Sharett what the views of the Israeli Government were with respect to Jerusalem. He informed me that his Government considered an agreement between the United Nations and Israel with respect to the Holy Places through the medium of a UN commissioner appeared to be adequate and said that arrangements of this character would make it possible for Israel and Jordan to take care of the practical affairs of everyday life in Jerusalem.
I observed that when I had last seen Mr. Sharett in the spring of this year I had pointed out to him that we envisaged, in the light of the General Assembly resolution of December 11, 1948, a practical arrangement for the Jerusalem area under the general supervision of the United Nations in which the authorities of the adjoining states would have responsibility for administration. I remarked that he had previously indicated that we were in general agreement and that his present views were at some variance with his former position.
I asked Mr. Sharett what he thought of the Swedish-Netherlands proposal regarding the Jerusalem area. Mr. Sharett replied that its concept appeared acceptable but that it contained a number of serious faults, including suspension of laws and regulations by the UN commissioner, the character of the Consular Court, and the prohibition on the establishment of national administrative agencies within Jerusalem. He also indicated that Israel had a number of other reservations and amendments to this proposal.
I asked Mr. Sharett what action he thought the United Nations might take regarding Jerusalem. Mr. Sharett replied that he thought the United Nations should restrict itself to a reaffirmation of its previously stated principles regarding the Holy Places, to a request to the parties concerned that they make arrangements with the United Nations regarding the Holy Places and to a call upon the parties that they cooperate with the United Nations in the establishment of peace in Jerusalem.
Mr. Sharett told me that, at Jordan's request, Israeli representatives had been holding a series of exploratory talks with King Abdullah and his representatives and that, while he could not report any substantial progress, his Government was hopeful of the outcome. He said that this optimism was based on the present position of both governments in Israel and Jordan and that Israel was prepared to offer agreement to the incorporation of Arab Palestine in Jordan in return for peace from Abdullah. He said that no serious question of territory existed between Israel and Jordan and that Abdullah, desiring a port in the Mediterranean, was anxious to obtain the Gaza strip from Egypt and subsequently access, by means of road or strip, from Israel. Transfer of the Gaza strip was a matter solely between Jordan and Egypt. Israel would not be in a position to offer Jordan a territorial strip which would cut Israel in two but would be in a position to offer Abdullah free access from Jordan to Gaza.
I asked Mr. Sharett if Israel and Jordan had discussed the refugee question. Mr. Sharett said their representatives had not.
Mr. Sharett concluded by informing me that Israel was seriously apprehensive regarding frequent Arab announcements of a "second round" with Israel and regarding Arab rearmament through shipments of British jets and tanks. He said that Israel would appreciate my authorizing shipments of military supplies from the United States through the granting of export licenses. I said that I was not informed on this subject and that we would study it. Ambassador Elath said he would supply us with additional details regarding this matter.
NEA:ANE:FWilkins/GC