Stalin, Soviets and İsraeli Question - then and now - 16 - from 1949 Secret Documents
April 14, 1949
Secret
During the month of March, the general political situation in the Middle East was characterized by a kind of lull, under the cover of which active preparations were made for violent events that resulted in a coup d'etat in Syria at the end of March.
The main issues during this period include the following:
1. The Palestinian question
After signing on February 24 this year. The Egyptian-Israeli armistice agreement was followed by the Transjordan-Israeli and the Lebanese-Israeli negotiations continued and the signing of the Lebanese-Israeli agreement on March 23 and the Transjordan-Israeli agreement on April 3 this year. In addition, after a very long and sharp hesitation, the Syrian government in the twenties of March finally decided to negotiate with Israel, which began on April 5 after the accomplished coup d'état in Syria.
A very lively Anglo-American struggle was waged around these negotiations all the time, into which both sides involved their agents and extremely nationalist reactionary elements of the Arab countries. The fact is that, in spite of the most unbridled chauvinist propaganda, the broad masses of the Arab countries began to understand and feel the grave consequences of the Palestinian adventure started by the ruling clique, so they began to put pressure on their governments and force them to end the Palestinian question. However, an agreement between the Arab countries and Israel would deprive the British and Americans of the opportunity to carry out their plans in the Middle East.
In view of this, Great Britain has thrown out a new trick. It allowed the King of Transjordan, Abdullah, to conclude a truce with Israel, since his refusal would have shown the British game too openly and would have made it somewhat difficult for him to develop the Arab part of Palestine, but forced Iraq to take an implacable position, leaving Iraqi troops in Palestine.
In parallel with the bilateral negotiations between individual Arab countries and Israel and the signing of these ceasefire agreements in the Middle East, the United Nations Conciliation Commission on Palestine which, after visiting Jerusalem and bypassing the capitals of Arab states, began to hold meetings with representatives of the Arab countries on the settlement of the Palestinian question.
At these meetings, the following main issues were discussed:
About the fate of Arab refugees from Palestine, who, according to some sources, number over 800 thousand people. Moreover, about half of this number refers to those areas that, according to the decision of the UN General Assembly of November 29, 1947, should go to the Arab state, but in the process of armed struggle in Palestine were captured by Jews.
On the Statute of Jerusalem and On the Possibilities of Establishing Peace in Palestine.
According to the materials available to us, the main difficulty in the work of the commission was and still is the question of refugees, although it is not the main issue, for with the establishment of peace in Palestine, the situation of refugees would have been determined without any particular difficulties.
Representatives of all Arab countries strongly insist on the unconditional return of all refugees without exception to their former places of residence with full return or compensation for their property.
The State of Israel, referring to the changed conditions as a result of the hostilities in Palestine, refuses to accept all Arab refugees and agrees to accept only a known small part of them.
Thus, those who like to muddy the waters have turned the issue of refugees upside down in such a way that under the current circumstances it is really difficult to find a solution, especially since, according to individual statements of Arab politicians, Arab countries insist on the return of all Arab refugees, not because there is nowhere to place them in the rest. Arab countries or in the Arab part of Palestine, but because they want to have a kind of fifth column on the territory of the Jewish state, which in case of resumption of hostilities in the future will be able to provide serious support to the Arab offensive.
On the issue of the statute of Jerusalem, the Arab countries do not yet have a unanimous opinion. Some states, such as Syria, agree to grant Jerusalem an international statute, while Transjordan has indicated its intention to share Jerusalem with Israel.
Regarding a general solution to the Palestinian question in some Arab countries, even in the highest ruling circles, sentiments are beginning to appear about the adoption of the UN General Assembly decision of November 29, 1947 as a basis.
The commission stopped its work on April 3, having not found an acceptable solution to any of these issues, having achieved only the consent of the Arab countries, except for Iraq, to begin negotiations by the end of April in one of the European countries in Switzerland or Austria through the mediation of the commission with representatives of Israel.
2. Arab League
The December-January defeat of Egypt in Palestine finally revealed that the contradictions existing between the Arab countries and the dependence of some of them on Great Britain are much stronger than the capabilities of the Arab League, which actually ceased to exist. However, after the truce negotiations began with Israel and passions gradually subsided, the Arab ruling circles took a number of measures in order to find ways to prevent the official open collapse of the Arab League and to maintain its formal existence. The situation was further complicated by the fact that the month of March was approaching, during which, according to the charter of the Arab League, the next session of the League Council should take place. Consequently, the disruption of the convening of the session of the Council in March would mean not only the actual, but also the formal collapse of the League.
Perhaps, under other circumstances, this would have been easily reconciled, but in view of the fact that all the attempts of the British to put together the Small Eastern Bloc or to implement the project of Greater Syria and the Blessed Crescent did not give noticeable results, and the unambiguous American campaign unfolding at that time to put together the Mediterranean Entente temptation from the ruling elite of some of the Arab countries, the collapse of the Arab League could seriously weaken the British position in the Middle East. In view of this, it was very important for the British, at least for a while, to preserve the Arab League, which in many difficult turns made it possible to keep the Arab countries under British influence. To save the League, the British resorted to the services of their Lebanese agent Kamil Chamoun, who at the end of February and during the first half of March traveled to the Arab capitals: Cairo, Damascus, Baghdad and Amman, in which he obtained the consent of the Arab governments to a formal convocation on March 17 in Cairo regular 10th session of the Council of the Arab League.
The artificial nature of this session is evident from the fact that the delegates were third-rate representatives of the Arab governments, who, after several sessions of the Council, quietly interrupted their work, did not touch upon any pressing issues. But nevertheless, they fulfilled their task, preserving the formal existence of the Arab League.
3. Blocks
To strengthen its influence in the Middle East, to preserve its positions in the Arab countries, Great Britain has been striving for a very long time and persistently to carry out either the formation of Greater Syria, or the Union of the Fertile Crescent, or to achieve the conclusion of bilateral treaties of alliance and joint defense. But, when none of these intentions could be realized due to serious disagreements between the main inspirers of these blocs - Great Britain and the United States - and also because of the obvious objections, protests and even indignation of the Arab peoples against these blocs, then the British, apparently, decided temporarily abandon their projects and start giving power in the already existing Arab countries to their protégés and obedient lackeys such as Abdallah in Transjordan and Nuri Said Pasha in Iraq.
The main attention of the British was directed to Syria, in which Lawrence's associate Colonel Sterling, who remained in Syria as a "correspondent," has significantly strengthened his activities. During February and March, prominent British intelligence officers John Trudbeck and Getwood, Air Force Commander in the Middle East, Air Marshal William Dixon visited Syria, and Chief of General Staff General Dixon arrived at the British military base on the Suez Canal in Fayyad. In addition, the commander of the Transjordanian army, the notorious Glabb Pasha, allegedly also met with the commander of the Syrian army, Colonel Husni al-Zaim, who carried out a coup d'etat in Syria shortly thereafter.
Thus, a certain lull in open political activity in the Middle East that was observed in March in fact meant a change in the methods of action of the British and a deeply conspiratorial preparation of a new strike, this time delivered to Syria. [...]
Messenger D Malt
WUA RF. F. 0106. Op. 8.P. 10.D. 1.L. 7-12, 15.
LETTER FROM THE AMBASSADOR OF THE USSR IN LEBANON D.S. MALT TO THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES OF THE USSR MFA I.I. BAKULINA
June 28, 1949
Secret
At the same time, I am sending you the materials and newspaper reports we have about the arrival at the end of May in the Near and Middle East of the British Permanent Undersecretary for Foreign Affairs Sir William Strang and the US Department of State Eastern Affairs Adviser Samuel Cooper.
As can be seen from the attached materials, the trip of Strang and Cooper quite clearly reflects all the growing Anglo-American contradictions in the Near and Middle East, caused by the desire of each of these imperialist powers to strengthen their positions and influence in these countries to the detriment of each other.
A common reason for Strang's trip is the failure of British events in the countries of the Near and Middle East, and especially in the Arab countries, as well as the systematic and increasing displacement of the British by American expansion into these countries.
The immediate reason for Strang's trip to the Arab countries is the sharp rupture of Syria by Husni Zaim with the Hashemites and her transition to the anti-Hashemite camp1. Therefore, the British made a last attempt to weaken the very adverse consequences of this transition, as well as to prepare more thoroughly for the upcoming meeting of British diplomatic representatives in the Near and Middle East at the end of July.
In addition, it seemed to the British that Israel's admission to the United Nations at the second part of the third session of the UN General Assembly is a very convenient pretext for involving the Arab countries in the system of concluding bilateral agreements on alliance and joint defense with Great Britain.
The purpose of Cooper's surprise visit to the countries of the Middle East is the desire of Americans to prevent a possible threat to American interests in these countries, which could be created by Strang's presence in these countries, as well as an attempt to negotiate with Arab countries on a solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees outside the United Nations. and to obtain the consent of the governments of the states of the Middle and Near East to agree to the extension of the Marshall Plan to these countries either directly or through Truman's proposed "aid" to the backward regions.
Based on the preliminary data we have, both of these missions did not produce the expected results, as, among other things, Cooper contributed significantly to the failure of the Strang mission. He himself could not achieve much, as the current Arab leaders are afraid to make far-reaching commitments to the United States in view of the existing general precarious situation in the Middle East, as well as in view of the manifestation of clear signs of an impending global economic crisis.
Appendix to the text on pages 26.
Messenger D Malt
WUA RF. F. 0106. Op. 8.P. 10.D. 1.L. 31-32.
ABSTRACTS ON THE SPEECH BY THE USSR DELEGATION AT THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON THE QUESTION OF ASSISTANCE TO PALESTINIAN REFUGEES
July 15, 1949
Secret
1. The question of Palestinian refugees is an inseparable part of the Palestinian problem as a whole. A radical solution to this issue, like the entire problem, now depends on the early implementation of the decision of the UN General Assembly of November 29, 1947 regarding the creation of an independent Arab state on the territory of the Arab part of Palestine, which makes it possible to return a significant part of the refugees to their homes and peaceful creative work. ...
2. The problem of Palestinian refugees is the result of the policy of certain monopoly circles in Britain and the United States, interested in delaying a general settlement of the question of Palestine and seeking to revise the General Assembly decision of November 29, 1947. This selfish policy, which has nothing to do with the interests of the Arab and Jewish peoples, was and remains the main reason for the complication of the entire problem of Palestine, the ensuing military adventure and the disasters it caused for the Arab peoples.
3. The same monopoly circles, whose efforts actually gave rise to the problem of Palestinian refugees, are now trying to take advantage of the suffering of the victims of their own policies, continuing to resist the general peace settlement in Palestine and replacing it with palliative, ostentatious measures that can only partially alleviate the plight. refugees, but not eliminate it and not completely resolve the whole problem.
4. The United Nations can no longer accept the delay in a radical solution to the refugee issue and its replacement with palliative temporary voluntary assistance. It must focus its efforts on achieving a solution to the issue that would enable the Palestine refugees to use their labor effectively and thus create a secure and sufficient means of subsistence.
5. The only way for such a radical solution to the refugee problem is the earliest implementation of the General Assembly decision of November 29, 1947 on the establishment of an independent Arab state on the territory of the Arab part of Palestine and an immediate general peace settlement through direct negotiations between all interested Arab states and the State of Israel. The conclusion of peace and the mutual guarantee of the rights of the Jewish and Arab national minorities will make it possible to return refugees to normal, creative work, which will provide them with the necessary means of subsistence.
WUA RF. F. 0118. Op. 2.P. 3.D. 13.L. 142-143.
DRAFT PROPOSAL OF THE USSR DELEGATION AT THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON THE QUESTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL STATUTE OF JERUSALEM AND THE PROTECTION OF HOLY PLACES
July 15, 1949
Sov. secretly
Whereas the General Assembly of the United Nations, in its resolution of November 29, 1947, decided that the city of Jerusalem, whose boundaries are established in accordance with the provisions of this resolution, should be established as a separate entity enjoying a special international regime and be under the United Nations Office;
Whereas the General Assembly has entrusted the Trusteeship Council with the responsibility of establishing a permanent international regime for Jerusalem and has entrusted the Trusteeship Council with administering the City of Jerusalem on behalf of the United Nations;
Whereas the Trusteeship Council has already done significant work in shaping the international regime of Jerusalem and is the most appropriate organ of the United Nations for this purpose, as well as for administering the city on behalf of the United Nations;
The session of the United Nations General Assembly DECIDES:
1. Instruct the Trusteeship Council to complete and approve, during the fourth session of the General Assembly, the permanent international statute of Jerusalem and to retain the right to administer Jerusalem on behalf of the United Nations.
2. Instruct the Trusteeship Council to provide for the protection of holy sites in the International Statute of Jerusalem, as an integral part of the International Statute of Jerusalem, and also provide for the protection of holy sites in Palestine outside the established borders of Jerusalem.
3. Provide in the International Statute of Jerusalem:
a) The integrity of the city as an independent unit with the simultaneous provision of local autonomy for the Jewish and Arab population of Jerusalem within the framework of the international statute.
6) Broad democratic freedoms for the city's population, including freedom of religion and worship, freedom of access to holy places, freedom of conscience, language, education, speech, press, organizations, meetings, petitions, etc.
c) Free democratic elections to the Legislative Council of the city, consisting of 40 people, of whom 18 are elected by Jews, 18 by Arabs, and the remaining 4 members are freely elected from other ethnic groups of the city's population.
d) Free democratic elections to local autonomous bodies, their subordination to decisions of the General Legislative Council and orders of the governor arising from the rights assigned to him under the international statute of Jerusalem.
e) The procedure for appealing against decisions of the governor, decisions of the local court.
4. Invite the Trusteeship Council to appoint, within five months, a suitable governor to exercise administrative authority in accordance with the international statute of Jerusalem.
5. Make it the responsibility of the governor to immediately report to the Security Council on all threats or acts of aggression against Jerusalem in order to take appropriate measures to ensure the peace and security of Jerusalem.
6. Request the Security Council to urgently consider and decide on the immediate and complete withdrawal of all armed forces from Jerusalem in order to carry out the complete demilitarization of the city and thereby enable the implementation of the international statute in the spirit of the General Assembly decision of 29 November 1947.
WUA RF. F. 0118. Op. 2.P. 3.D. 13.L. 132-134.
FROM THE REFERENCE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE MIDDLE AND MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES OF THE USSR MFA THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION
September 3, 1949
Secret
Conclusions:
1. Over the past two years, the Palestinian problem has not left the UN agenda. This is due to the fact that in Palestine the interests of the British and American imperialists, who seek to strengthen their positions in this country, are crossed, and the decision of the General Assembly of November 29, 1947 confused the imperialist plans and significantly hampered their implementation. These reasons can explain the desire of the British and American imperialists to revise the decision of the General Assembly of November 29, 1947 and to dictate their solution to the problem.
2. The interest in the Palestinian problem of both British and American imperialism and all kinds of intrigues, behind-the-scenes negotiations and pressure exerted on Arabs and Jews caused a difficult political situation and a delay in the solution of the Palestinian problem. Proceeding from their interest, the British and American imperialists are hindering the peaceful settlement of the Palestinian question and are seeking to use the tense situation in the country as one of the means of pressure on the Arabs and Jews in order to secure an advantageous position.
3. The Arab aggression in Palestine provoked by British imperialism revealed the military weakness of the Arab states, exacerbated the contradictions in the Arab camp and further undermined the political prestige of England. Along with this, the Arab aggression in Palestine has raised a number of new and very serious problems: the question of the state borders of the State of Israel and the Arab part of Palestine, the question of Arab refugees and their improvement, the question of peace between the State of Israel and the Arab countries.
4. Despite all the efforts of the British and American imperialists, they failed to prevent the emergence and strengthening of the state of Israel, which has become a reality and is now recognized by 57 states, and also accepted at the 111th session of the General Assembly as a member of the UN. At present, the British and Americans are negotiating mutual concessions at the expense of the Arab part of Palestine. In this regard, the United States does not raise the issue of the formation of an independent Arab state in the Arab part of Palestine, and England is taking all measures to ensure that this part of Palestine is annexed to Transjordan, and is trying to persuade Israel to transfer the southern part of the Negev to the Arabs of Transjordan and receive in return, all of Galilee.
5. The most important task of the UN in solving the Palestinian problem should be: the creation of an independent Arab state in the Arab part of Palestine, which will make it possible to return a significant part of the refugees to their homes and peaceful creative work; the conclusion of peace between the Arab countries, on the one hand, and the state of Israel, on the other; resolution of all controversial issues through direct peace negotiations between Arabs and Jews; the establishment of the international statute of Jerusalem and the protection of the "saints," places. Such a solution to the Palestinian question will meet the interests of the cause of peace and the true aspirations of the Arab and Jewish peoples.
Bakulin
Zaitsev
Gnedykh
Published: Soviet-Israeli relations: Collection of documents. Volume 1: 1941-
1953. Book 2: May 1949 - 1953. M., 2000. Doc. No. 261.
Translated From Russian; Svitlana M.May 2021
.jpg)
No comments