320.2AA/10–350: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin)
361. Re Deptel 289, Sept 18. Fol views of Dept re Palestine for ur consideration:
Dept now views submissions to SC of Egyptian complaint against Israel over expulsion Palestine Arabs, Israeli counter complaints against Egypt and HKJ on alleged armistice violations, and possible consideration by SC of Iraqi supported HKJ complaint against Israel’s occupying Jordan territory as possible occasion to let off steam by countries named before consideration of Palestine items in GA. All complaints while likely to engender acrimonious argument appear to be matters which can be settled by essentially dispassionate review of facts by SC, followed by possible SC res or res’s if necessary reaffirming faith of SC in MACs and any other means of direct discussion [Page 1022] between Arabs and Israelis conducive to lasting peace in area. Dept believes since US has SC presidency this month, US should assume initiative in calling for consideration of complaints after careful consideration of time Palestine items likely to be considered in GA Ad Hoc Comite. Obviously desirable subject not be discussed simultaneously in SC and GA. This initiative plus expression earnest desire to have thorough and dispassionate discussion of complaints may strengthen US hand in GA debates. SC debates may also be used as occasion for US and other UN members to assess possibility of anything constructive being done in GA on Jerusalem and Palestine refugees. Accordingly Dept feels US position on items mentioned whether considered together or separately should be along following lines:
- 1.
- Allegations all appear to be ones involving matters of fact. Therefore SC should call upon all parties concerned and Gen Riley to state their views and present such evidence and documentation as they wish.
- 2.
- If evidence presented indicates MACs can handle complaints SC should move to have them do so. If SC feels complaints cannot be handled by MACs, SC should call upon parties concerned to designate Reps immediately to meet with Gen Riley in his capacity as Trace Supervisor to settle differences.
- 3.
- Unless evidence presented shows glaring incapacity of MACs to handle problems involved in complaints, which Dept believes unlikely, SC should reaffirm its faith in MACs and call upon parties a) to abide by armistice agreements and procedures of negotiation contained therein and b) to abide by decisions of MACs.
- 4.
- SC should remind parties of their obligations under armistice agreements to refrain from all actions likely to endanger peace and security of area and of fact that UN membership, and armistice agreements by implication, require understanding by all parties that they have obligations to work out lasting agreements resolving all their outstanding differences.
- 5.
- SC should request Gen Riley to report to SC at end of 3 months on status of problems unresolved before all MACs or to report to SC at any time prior to that set should he deem it advisable.
In special case of Iraqi supported HKJ complaint SC would of course call upon HKJ to accept provisions Article 35, para 2, Charter, and could invoke provisions Article 32. Thinking behind Dept’s feeling Gen Riley should be present is he may be of great assistance in making SC deliberations as dispassionate as possible and since possible general effect of consideration of complaints is attack on overall effectiveness of MACs and enforcement of armistice agreements, Gen Riley should have opportunity to present views.