Ext 6116/46(S) 'Secret Weekly Political Intelligence Summaries, nos 356-416, August 1946-November 1947' [‎58r] (115/978)

25
not entitle the United Nations to reduce the
Arabs to that position in a part of the
country. The United Nations, he said, had
one simple duty, to apply the Charter.
They should therefore first see whether
Arabs and Jews could agree together. If
could not, they should seek a solution
“ in accordance with the freely expressed
wishes of the peoples concerned,” and the
United Nations could prescribe guarantees
for the rights of the Jewish minorities. He
considered the desire of displaced Jews to
go to Palestine strictly irrelevant.
On the 8th October the Polish delegate
imputed much evil to the British, supported
the majority plan and wished to start by
transferring the 250,000 Jewish displaced
persons to Palestine. Fauzi Bey (Egypt)
thought that displaced persons were a com
mon responsibility. M. Masaryk supported
the majority plan in principle. The dele
gate of Colombia proposed a Sub-committee
on recommendation Six. His colleague
from El Salvador wished the Jews and the
Arabs to meet, and report results to the
present Assembly.
On the 9th October Adil Arslan (Syria)
asked why Jews wished to leave Europe,
and why they could not return to their
countries of origin. Most of the Jewish
displaced persons had, he said, fled from
Poland. Herr Sandler (Sweden), who sup
ported the majority plan, made one prac
tical suggestion and one unpractical:—
there must be an address to which the
Assembly recommendations could be for
warded for action—this was the Security
Council; but he added that the permanent
members of the Council must agree on the
means of enforcement. At this point the
reluctance of the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. to
speak before the other came near to ending
the debate before either had decided to
speak.
Senor Granados (Guatemala) occupied
all the time on the 10th October. He ac
cepted the majority proposals, but. in the
light of the Colonial Secretary’s speech,
made the following suggestions :—either
proposed state might request its inde
pendence before the 1st September 1949. the
Mandatory Power should be replaced by
the United Nations acting through three
delegates elected by the Assembly, from
citizens of member States other than the
Big Five. He would have a police force
(not from the Big Five) equipped and paid
for by the Big Five. He would transfer
Jaffa to the Arabs.
Mrs. Pandit opened the meeting on the
11th October. Her solution was an inde
pendent Arab State with wide powers of
34369
Autonomy for the Jews wherever they pre
dominated. The Palestine problem must,
she said, be simplified by removing from it
the problem of the displaced persons in
Europe.
Mr. Herschel Johnson’s speech came next,
rather a mouse after this long labouring, if
rather a Zionist mouse. He recalled how
the aims of the Balfour Declaration
were embodied in the Mandate, and the
Mandate itself embodied in the Anglo-U.S.
convention on Palestine (1924). His Gov
ernment supported the unanimous recom
mendations and the basic principles of the
majority Report on partition and immi
gration. Modifications should include
giving Jaffa to the Arabs, and, perhaps,
the right of access to ports, water and
power to Arabs and Jews alike, the
strengthening of the power of the Joint
Economic Board, equal economic oppor
tunity to be guaranteed to Arab and Jew
alike. A most important point in his
speech was a denial of the Assembly’s
responsibility for the administration of
Palestine during the transition to indepen
dence. That responsibility lay with the
Mandatory Power. Nevertheless, the
Assembly must consider the problem of
implementation.
Mr. Johnson promised that the U.S.
would assist the United Nations in any
joint programme of settlement during the
transition period, in meeting economic and
financial problems and the problem of in
ternal law and order. For this latter he
mentioned the possibility of enrolling a
voluntary police force recruited by the
United Nations. He assumed that no out
side country would forget its Charter
obligations and attack. The problem, as
he said at the beginning of his speech, was
so urgent that the Assembly must recom
mend a solution at the present session.
Whether a solution will work, depends on
the people of Palestine.
Mr. Tsiang of China followed and was
bland and conciliatory. Paris El Khoury
(Syria) replied to the U.S. on behalf of the
Arab Delegations. A Jewish State could
only exist on American dollars, just as
American dollars had given the Jewish
settlements in Palestine a semblance of
prosperity. The power would be with
Jewish capitalists in New York. He made
play with Dr. Silver being a U.S. citizen,
and ended by announcing his intention of
proposing that the suggestion for the
formation of a Jewish State be submitted
to the International court, to discover
whether it did not go beyond scope of
the Mandate. Persia’s Delegate opposed
E