Discussion of Chairman’s paper “Basic Principles of International Regime for Jerusalem” – UNCCP Cttee on Jerusalem’s 10th mtg – Summary record

COMMITTEE ON JERUSALEM

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE TENTH MEETING

held in Bethlehem on 9 March, 1949 at 11 a.m.

The CHAIRMAN presented for the Committee’s consideration a draft Working Paper prepared by him with the aid of the Legal Adviser, entitled “Basic Principles of International. Regime for Jerusalem”, which summarized the conclusions arrived at by the Committee in the course of its discussions and consultations.

The Committee accepted the paper as a statement of position based on the requirements of the General Assembly’s resolution. Nothing further could be done until the attitude of the Israeli authorities to those principles had been ascertained in the course of the conversations arranged for the following week.

It was agreed that the stand taken by the Government of Israel would form an essential part of the Committee’s report to the Commission and would set the tone for a progress report which should probably be submitted by the Commission to the General Assembly at its forthcoming session in April. In the event of Israel’s refusal to accept the principles laid down by the General Assembly, or of its proposing a reasonable compromise scheme, the Committee’s report to the Commission should state that under its present terms of reference which did not permit of negotiation, its position was now unrealistic. The report might then present two alternative plans — the Committee’s plan, and a compromise scheme which represented the best that could be achieved in the circumstances. The Commission might then wish to pass on the Committee’s recommendations regarding its terms of reference to the General Assembly in a progress report, and have the question added to the agenda for the April session.

It was emphasized that since the Commission’s mandate lasted until the General Assembly’s, session of September 1949, any report by the Commission to the April session should by no means be definitive, but merely in the nature of a progress report. It should be stated, not that the task was impossible, but that it would be difficult.

It was agreed that following the conversations with. Israeli Government representatives early in the week, the Secretary, in consultation with the Legal Adviser would prepare a draft of the Committee’s report. The report should be presented, if possible, to the Commission when it held its next full meeting, in Beirut, during the forthcoming conversations with the Arab Governments. It was also felt that the Committee itself should go to Beirut to hold conversations with the Arab representatives concerning its own problem.