Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The Near and Middle East, Volume IX, Part 1

357.AC/4–1952: Telegram

No. 422
The Secretary of State to the United States Representative on the Palestine Conciliation Commission (Palmer), at New York

confidential

Washington, April 19, 1952—1:40 p.m.

394. For Amb Palmer. Re PCC. While we believe you fully understand and are in accord with Dept’s views re mtg Mon Apr 21, we believe fol wld be helpful guidance for you:

1. Future activity PCC: GA Res at last GA¹ indicates that primary responsibility for settling Pal problem rests with parties, and in view this and past unhappy record PCC shld engage in minimum formal activity for present year. It shld remain on stand-by basis. Such activities as are undertaken might best be directed toward settlement of question of blocked accts and possibly some further efforts toward estimating compensation and ascertaining means for payment compensation.

2. Blocked accts: PCC has thoroughly explored this problem in the past. Efforts this year shld be directed toward formulating joint diplomatic action which might be undertaken by members vis-à-vis Israel in effort persuade that Govt unfreeze accts as significant step contributing to better relations with Arab states.

3. Compensation: Such activity as PCC might undertake shld be directed toward elaboration of report prepared by refugee office last year. The rate of progress on any PCC considerations on compensation must be determined by (a) Arab refugees’ indicating willingness to accept compensation or reparation, but not both, and (b) how and when Israel will be able to pay compensation. Administrative actions suggested by Berncastle paper shld be opposed at least for time being. We believe that distribution of questionnaires to Arab refugees wld have most unhappy political consequences particularly in face unlikelihood any early payment of compensation. If other Dels advance, re possible sources and means of Israel paying compensation, ideas associating settlement of Arab compensation claims with Israel-Ger reparation talks you shld indicate we are opposed, since we believe two negots are and shld remain separated. In any event they cannot properly be associated by UN. Can only be done by parties directly concerned.

4. PCC Rep in Jerusalem: We believe we are under no firm commitment to agree to appointment of PCC Rep for Jerusalem. We believe, however, that you may indicate that, in our opinion, important point is that, if appointed and sent to Jerusalem, Rep shld be in Jerusalem only under specific assignment and terms of ref and shld be there only so long as his terms of ref require he be in area. While we appreciate you have all arguments at your disposal on this point against appointment of a full time Rep, it shld be pointed out that if any negots of a detailed or intricate nature were to be suggested by the parties PCC cld determine at that time wisdom and necessity of its returning to Jerusalem. We believe if pressure is strong for Rep being in Jerusalem to manifest UN interest in area and maintain UN hold over Govt House, you shld indicate belief that logical and simpler alternative solution to problem is to urge Gen Riley to move to Govt House. If this suggestion does not meet with approval and you are placed under pressure by UN SYG, Fr and Turk colleagues to agree to appointment full-time Jerusalem Rep, you shld request opportunity further consultation with Dept.

5. We agree desirability some cognizance be taken of past valuable services of Azcarate.

Acheson

1. U.N General Assembly Resolution 512 (V), Document 391.