Discussions on beginning negotiations – UNCCP 48th meeting (Lausanne) – Summary Record

UNITED NATIONS CONCILIATION COMMISSION FOR PALESTINE

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FORTY-EIGHTH MEETING

held at Lausanne on Monday,
2 May 1949, at 10:30 a.m.

The CHAIRMAN observed that in a conversation he had had with Mr. Eytan of the Israeli delegation, the latter had expressed himself as eager to begin negotiations immediately; he had also shown a willingness to make the agenda very flexible.

The PRINCIPAL SECRETARY reported that he had talked with the Arab delegations the previous day, with the purpose of welcoming them and of ascertaining their views on the questions to be discussed. He had found the delegations in general reluctant to accept the idea of direct conversations with the Israeli representatives, and still less favourable to the idea of separate negotiations for each Arab State. It appeared, however, that all the Arab delegations were now prepared to relinquish their demand that the refugee question should be dealt with first, and to agree to discussion of the territorial question and all other outstanding matters. He had also interviewed Mr. Eytan, who, while favouring direct and separate negotiations, was aware that it would be undesirable to press the Arab States on the point, and had therefore agreed to general discussions of all questions with all the delegations.

As regards the Commission's procedure at this stage, the Arab representatives thought it desirable that the Commission should continue its personal contacts with the various delegations throughout the week; at the end of that period it would be able to establish a general basis for further negotiations covering all questions and leading toward a general settlement of the Palestine problem. They had made it clear that they expected the Commission to take the initiative in the matter.

The Principal Secretary had received the impression that in the opinion of the Arab delegations the most suitable basis for territorial negotiations would be the 1947 partition plan.

Mr. de BOISANGER said that the impressions he had received during his general conversations with the Arab and Israeli delegations coincided with those of the Principal Secretary. Nevertheless, he felt that the agenda must not be too general and flexible; the Commission must retain its freedom to discuss certain questions separately with the different delegations,

Even though the Arabs had now declared themselves ready to discuss the question of boundaries, it was the Commission's responsibility to press the Israeli delegation for a statement on the refugee question. In his conversation with Mr. Eytan he had emphasized the fact that the Commission had not yet received a reply to its memorandum on that question, and that such a reply must be forthcoming promptly from the Israeli delegation. If no precise answers could be given at the present time, the Government of Israel must in any case indicate a general attitude on the question.

The CHAIRMAN expressed the opinion that in view of current developments at Lake Success, the Commission should not press the Arab delegations too much at the present time on the question of an agenda. The members of the Commission would continue their informal contacts with the delegations during the week: the Principal Secretary, in the meantime, might proceed with the drafting of a working paper for the Commission’s consideration, embodying the general outlines of what the Commission hoped to achieve.

Mr. de BOISANGER pointed out that the Commission had not yet formally received Mr. Eytan. He suggested a meeting in the near future at which the Israeli delegation should be asked to indicate its views on the territorial question; such views might be expressed in general terms without implying any formal commitments.

Mr. YALCIN said he had been informed that morning by Mr. Hirsch that the Israeli Government intended to send the Commission a letter accepting several of the points laid down in the Commission’s memorandum on the refugee question. After seeing this letter the Commission would be able to take a decision.  He agreed with Mr. de Boisanger that the Commission should press the Israeli delegation for a firm statement in order to have some basis for negotiation.

It was agreed that the Commission would receive the Israeli delegation as soon as the latter was prepared to make a statement, if possible at 10 o’clock the following morning.