501.BB Palestine/4–1949: Telegram
The Consul at Jerusalem (Burdett) to the Secretary of State
309. Palun 130. From Ethridge for the President and Acheson. Please read this in connection with Palun 129 April 19.1
[Here follow first two paragraphs requesting Mr. Ethridge’s relief as American member of the Palestine Conciliation Commission, to return to his newspapers.]
As for the work here: We are beginning to see the beginning of the end. I assume a Jerusalem plan acceptable to the US and in major degree to countries involved can be worked out. In fact it is in the making and Halderman will present it to Department when he comes home. At any rate, it will not be presented to Assembly until September.
After nine weeks we have persuaded Arabs to sit down for peace talks with the Jews. If there is full-dress debate at Lake Success on admission of Israel, there will be a delay of several weeks in beginning those talks on any effective basis for reasons set out in Palum 129. If such a delay were inevitable, I would in any case have to ask for relief. If fight over Israel’s admission is not serious, negotiations would go along quickly at Lausanne, I am convinced. Egypt and Israel apparently both anxious to sign; outstanding difficulties between Israel and Lebanon and Syria not so serious that long negotiations would be involved. Major negotiations between Transjordan and Israel, and my belief is that Israel will get pretty much what she wants and give very little, if anything.
Refugee problem, most serious of all, is one that will hang on for two or three years. Commission cannot solve it, but can set up machinery for solution providing US Government agrees to general plan. [Page 924] Neither French nor Turks want to take initiative on that, but are willing to work under guidance of US. I have agreed with George McGhee on a plan which he will present to Department. My colleagues on Commission have agreed that if State Department approves in consultation with British, French, and Turks, they will accept any plan American Delegate introduces. In any case, Department will no doubt shortly give an answer on general procedure and Commission can set up machinery.
Frazer Wilkins of US Delegation thoroughly familiar with everything that has gone on and could be deputized to continue in Lausanne. I would be glad of course to be at the Department’s call in the States and to give all the help there that I can.
[Here follow the last two sentences of the telegram, bearing on Mr. Ethridge’s return to the United States, with May 15 being the suggested date of arrival.] [Ethridge.]
- Identified also as telegram 308 from Jerusalem,
not printed; Mr. Ethridge reported that at the Israeli Prime
Minister’s request, he had “proceeded from Jerusalem to Tiberias
April 18 for purpose of further discussions re refugees and
Jerusalem prior to PCC departure
for Lausanne. Ben-Gurion added nothing new of substance to his
previous statements of Israeli policy to PCC but made some interesting remarks re details
which are being reported separately.”
Following this meeting, Mr. Ethridge saw Mr. Comay, who informed that the Israeli Foreign Office was “considerably concerned” because the question of Israeli admission to the United Nations had been referred to Committee One by the General Assembly. Mr. Comay was unsure whether this action was merely a delaying device by the “Arabs, British and others” or whether a full-dress debate would follow “during which it would be necessary for Israel substantively to state its position re such outstanding questions as refugees and Jerusalem.” Mr. Ethridge concluded that “In view of Israel’s intransigeance particularly on refugees and territorial questions and her unwillingness to heed advice from US which I believe would have kept her out of her jam at GA, it would probably be salutary to have world public opinion brought to bear upon her through UN.” (501.BB Palestine/4–1949)
↩