UNITED NATIONS (Nov. 22)
Hope that the resolution censuring Israel for the Kibya incident–introduced at the United Nations Security Council last Friday by the United States, Great Britain and France–may still be modified before it is voted upon either Tuesday or Thursday was expressed here today by U.N. delegates who are convinced that a resolution of censure will not end the Arab-Israel border incidents.
Numerous delegates believe that instead of censuring Israel, the Security Council could achieve better results by acting on Israel’s proposal that direct Jordan-Israel talks be started at the U.N. headquarters with the participation of U.N. truce chief Gen. Vagn Bennike who has been summoned to the Security Council session. Jordan refuses to accept this proposal and is openly supported in this move by Britain.
Israel has so far received no official reply from the United States on the note sent to the State Department last week asking support of Israel’s proposal for direct talks in New York on the border problems. Sir Gladwyn Jebb, British delegate, has been severely criticized by the Israelis here for backing Jordan’s rejection of the meeting.
The New York Times and the New York Herald Tribune, America’s leading newspapers, came out with editorials questioning the wisdom of the proposed Three Power resolution censuring Israel. Both papers drew attention to Israel’s proposal for direct Israel-Jordan talks at U.N. headquarters and to Jordan’s rejection of this proposal. The Times editorial pointed out that Israel’s proposal “is a constructive offer, and in ignoring it, the representative of Jordan has put himself in the wrong.”
Dr. Israel Goldstein, president of the American Jewish Congress, sent a telegram to Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., head of the American delegation at the U.N., calling for reconsideration of the U.S. position in co-sponsoring, with Britain and France, the resolution censuring Israel.