Home || Permalink


28 February 1949

Original: English



Held at the King David Hotel, Jerusalem,
on Monday, 28 February 1949, at 5 p.m.

Mr. de Boisanger


Mr. Yalchin(Turkey)
*Mr. Wilkins
*Mr. Halderman (United States of America)
Mr. AzcaratePrincipal Secretary

In the absence of the Chairman, Mr. de Boisanger took the chair.

Draft telegram to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Arab States concerning a meeting in Beirut.

The CHAIRMAN drew attention to the draft telegram to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Arab States which had now been distributed. He commented briefly on the draft, explaining that he had thought the phrase “exchange of views” preferable to the word conference, and that he had worded the first sentence in such a way as to leave the way open for discussion of any question, rather than limiting the talks to the refugee problem.

Mr. WILKINS said he would bring the draft to the attention of Mr. Ethridge.

Question of Jerusalem

In reply to a question from the Chairman regarding the status of the work of the Committee on Jerusalem, Mr. HALDERMAN, Chairman of the Committee, said he thought the time had now come for the Committee to enter upon informal conversations with representatives of both sides, and in the light of the views expressed to begin drawing up its plan for a regime for Jerusalem in accordance with the General Assembly’s resolution.

Mr. YALCHIN considered it essential that such consultations should not be limited to representatives of Israel and Transjordan, since a regime for Jerusalem was of vital interest to all the Arab States.

Mr. HALDERMAN agreed that the views of the other Arab States should in no way be excluded. He felt, however, that the only practical approach to the problem, in the circumstances, was to hold preliminary informal talks with the representatives of Israel and Transjordan, as the two most interested parties; the results of those conversations could then force the basis of more general discussions during the meetings at Beirut.

In his opinion the plan to be submitted to the General Assembly — a plan acceptable to all parties concerned — could only be worked out in the course of such consultations.

Mr. YALCHIN pointed out that the principle of internationalization must not be allowed to become a subject for discussion. It was the Commission’s functions to seek the opinions of the interested parties on the implementation of that principle, as formulated by the General Assembly, not merely to invite opinions concerning the future of Jerusalem.

The CHAIRMAN thought it would be impractical for the Committee to attempt to elicit opinions or suggestions from the Arab representatives without first elaborating, a broad outline of general proposals which could serve as a basis for such comments. He felt that the plan evolved should be shorter and simpler than the statute proposed by the Trusteeship Council; it must be an entirely new plan, suited to the particular needs of Jerusalem. He therefore requested the Committee before undertaking any detailed consultations for instance, to make a study of the various public services such as finance, police, administration of justice etc. with a view to determining which services should be controlled by the two separate municipalities and which, being of common interest, should be under the control of the international administration.. In that connection he endorsed the suggestion of Mr. WILKINS that a study of the statutes of Tangiers and Trieste might prove helpful. The Committee should then present its views to the Commission for discussion.

The meeting rose at 6:15 p.m.

Document in PDF format

Réunions à Beyrouth/Question de Jérusalem – 17e séance de CCNUP - Compte rendu Français