Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XVII, Near East, 1961–1962

34. Circular Telegram From the Department of State to Certain Near Eastern and North African Posts⁰

Washington, April 15, 1961, 5:05 p.m.

1592. Since it appears show-down re UNRWA item at UNGA will probably occur early week of April 17, it may be useful review developments to date and USG attitude.

1. Subject of UNGA item which being discussed in Special Political Committee is “The Report of Director of UNRWA”.¹ Technically discussion should be confined to this subject, particularly with view toward assuring efficient and effective UNRWA operations. Normally item has resulted in resolution approving director’s report and urging support for UNRWA’s continuing program.

2. In 1959, UNGA passed Resolution 1456² extending UNRWA mandate three years and providing for a review of UNRWA program at end of two years, i.e., XVIth session UNGA this coming autumn.

3. However, Arabs insist UNRWA has widespread political ramifications. Hence Arab speeches tend to range from dawn of Arab-Israel problem to continuing criticism of USG for its friendliness toward Israel.

4. At Arab League meeting at Shtaura last August, decision was made to establish Palestine “personality” or “entity” with implication of Algerian-type movement designed ultimately to eliminate Israel. While longer range plans include military organization and Palestine government, Arabs apparently plan take steps gradually. At last fall’s UNGA meeting, Arab UN delegates promoted concept of UN custodian for Arab properties left in Israel apparently as suitable first post-Shtaura gambit. They obviously encouraged by new composition of UN, believing that through mutual back-scratching tactics they can parlay Afro-Asian and Soviet bloc votes into series of votes progressively hostile to Israel. Upset by Nkrumah’s opening speech which urged Near East states to be “realistic” and implied Arabs should agree to Arab-Israel settlement, all Arab delegates engaged in lengthy harangues rehashing whole Palestine problem to “educate” new delegations.

5. Since USG and other contributing countries resisted custodian gambit, no resolution was achieved at fall session and whole matter was deferred to current resumed session. Apparently persuaded they have sufficient votes to press custodian proposal, Arab delegates after numerous friendly negotiating sessions with US and other contributing country reps finally decided to part ways and seek approval their controversial proposal. They succeeded in obtaining co-sponsorship by five Moslem countries, i.e., Afghanistan, Malaya, Indonesia, Pakistan and Somalia.

6. USG position has consistently been that no resolution is necessary since 1959 resolution authorized UNRWA operations for three-year period. However, in effort to be responsive, USG and contributors indicated they would agree to resolution not going beyond standard resolution of previous years. Arabs insisted on reference to custodian proposal in one form or another, finally offering “mild” proposal to effect UNGA would in fall give consideration to “establishment of machinery” for protecting Arabs’ property rights. Although negotiations continued most friendly, USG insisted nothing new or substantive should be introduced and sought to offer counter-language to effect that UNGA should next fall consider steps in interests “general welfare of refugees”. This unacceptable to Arabs, who promptly had five Moslem powers table their resolution with custodian concept and USG subsequently tabled its amendments seeking to generalize Arab resolution. In Parliamentary ploy Iraq and Libya then proposed sub-amendments which in effect reinserted Arab concepts into US amendments. This is status as show-down approaches.

7. USG believes custodian concept involves all sorts of complications, including legality of interfering in a sovereign country’s right to jurisdiction over property under its control. Cf. Egypt’s assertion of this right is case of Suez. Egypt refused outside custodianship for Canal and it doubtful if Arabs would agree to custodian for Jewish properties left in Arab countries. FYI. It certain Israel will reject such a proposal. End FYI.

8. USG bases its position not on merits or demerits of custodian proposal, but rather on propriety and wisdom of introducing an extraneous and controversial issue of this type at this time. Our contention is that Resolution 1456 provided for general review in autumn UNGA and that Arab insistence in raising controversial issue is an obvious provocation at precise time when Arab representatives have repeatedly been telling new US administration that present tranquility in Near East should be preserved and no disturbing initiatives undertaken.

9. Thus in our view issue is not custodian proposal but question of tranquility in New East. If Arabs choose by this method to upset present calm, they must hold themselves responsible. They aware USG support re refugee rights as in Para 11, Res. 194.³ They must also be aware that as country which contributes 70% of UNRWA funds, some $23,000,000 annually, USG has clearly established its sympathy for refugees and it would be matter of deep regret if foolhardiness on part of few ambitious Arab extremists would jeopardize both UNRWA’s effective operation and peace in Near East.

In conversations with local officials you authorized to draw on foregoing as may be appropriate.

Rusk

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 325.84/4–1561. Official Use Only; Priority. Drafted by Meyer; cleared by Ludlow, Palmer, Eilts (NEA/NE), and Cargo (IO/UNP); and approved by Meyer who signed for Rusk. Sent to Khartoum, Amman, Cairo, Beirut, Baghdad, Jidda, Tripoli, Rabat, Tunis, Damascus, Jerusalem, and Dhahran and repeated to London, Paris, Ankara, Karachi, Tehran, Tel Aviv, and USUN.
1. Annual Report of Director of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in Near East, 1 July 1959–30 June 1960; U.N. doc. A/4478.
2. Adopted December 9, 1959; U.N. doc. A/4354. For text, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1959, pp. 1044–1046.
3. Reference is to the resolution adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on December 11, 1948, that created the Palestine Conciliation Commission and defined its mission to seek a resolution to the Palestinian refugee problem. Article II dealt with the question of repatriation of those Palestinians who wished to return to their homes and of compensation for those who did not. For complete text, see Official Records of the Third Session of the General Assembly, Part I, 21 September–12 December, 1948, Resolutions; U.N. doc. A/810, pp. 21–25. Also printed in A Decade of American Foreign Policy: Basic Documents, 1941–1949, pp. 718–719.