Canada Calis for Direct Arab-jewish Negotiations; Warns Israel Cannot Be Destroyed

Lester B. Pearson, newly-appointed Canadian Minister for External Affairs and head of the Canadian delegation at the United Nations, today told the Political Committee that a peace settlement in Palestine must be worked out by the Jews and Arabs through negotiations. He also called on the Arabs to admit the futility of trying to destroy Israel by force and urged them to recognize Israel’s existence by negotiating with the Jews.

Making its first declaration on Palestine in the Committee, the Soviet Union today proclaimed its firm opposition to any solution in Palestine other than one based on last November’s partition decision providing for the establishment of independent Jewish and Arab states. At the same time, it was learned that Australia will tomorrow introduce a resolution proposing that all outstanding questions between Israel and the Arab states be negotiated on the basis of the partition decision.

In line with his point that the final Palestine settlement must be worked out by the people who live in the country, Pearson suggested that the “United Nations can and should” make available its good offices to bring the parties together. He appealed to Israel to limit its demands, declaring that “the Jewish community cannot have it both ways. It cannot have all the territory given it by the November 29 resolution together with all the additional territory which it has been able to take by force of arms.”

If the Jewish state moderated its demands, he continued, it would have the right to demand peace and recognition in return. Israel, the Canadian Minister declared, cannot be asked to “enter into negotiations for a settlement unless it is given some right to expect that such a settlement will mean peace for itself in Palestine.” He suggested that the General Assembly act at this session on the following three principles:

1. Recognition of the Jewish state. Perhaps it is unnecessary, he said, to defer recognition until the boundaries are finally established. He made it clear that Canada will Judge Israel’s fitness for U.N. membership on the basis of its compliance with the Security Council’s truce and armistice resolutions.

2. The establishment of a small body of officers to assist the Arabs and the Jews in working out a final settlement based on the partition decision and the Bernadotte plan, while taking into account the de facto situation, in Palestine. He opposed forcing the proposed Bernadotte territorial solution on the Jews and Arabs as presently embodied in the British resolution.

3. Endorsement of last November’s resolution for international control of Jerusalem.

In a veiled reference to Britain’s obstruction of the partition decision, Pearson said that the U.N. decision of last year has not been implemented, “encouraged or indeed permitted.” He warned the Arabs that Israel was a powerful reality, asserting that the U.N. would be doing the Arabs a disservice “if it encouraged them or permitted them to continue efforts to destroy by arms the Jewish state.”

Russia’s Semyon Tearapkin took the Security Council to task for failing to do its duty in the Palestine case; instead of implementing the partition resolution, it moved under British and American leadership toward a revision of that decision, he said. He charged that the late Count Folke Bernadotte had exceeded his authority in preparing a final solution and asserted that in doing so the mediator had obeyed the wishes of the U.S. and Britain.

SOVIET DELEGATE ASSAILS PROPOSAL TO EXCHANGE NEGEV FOR GALILEE

Tsarapkin warned that if the General Assembly adopted Bernadotte’s recommendations the very life of the Jewish state would be imperilled. He assailed the proposal to exchange a tiny area in Galilee for two-thirds of the territory of the Jewish state. The Soviet delegate also charged that the Bernadotte proposal was aimed at planting the seeds of discord between the Jews and Arabs.

He denounced the Security Council’s reference to Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter (which deals with threats to or breaches of the peace or acts of aggression) after the Jews had gained a military advantage, and blamed the policies of the Anglo-American bloc for causing the partition decision to remain a paper decision and for making a fiasco of the mediator’s work. The Soviet Union, Tsarapkin said, demanded the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of Israel and the Arab part of Palestine. He also said the Security Council should seek measures to prevent the resumption of hostilities.

Oscar Lange of Poland, too, called on the Assembly to return to the partition decision. The details of territorial arrangements, economic union and cooperation between Israel and the Arab part of Palestine should be settled by direct negotiations without outside interference, Lange said. He charged Britain and the United States with complicity in the Arab attack on the Jews which, he said, weakened the Arab armies.

Since the war started, he pointed out, nothing has been heard in the U.N. concerning Egypt’s demand for the evacuation of Suez by the British, and Iraq’s opposition to its present treaty with Britain. These demands have been forfeited as the price for British support, the Pole declared.

Henry Cattan, representing the Palestine Arab Higher Committee, again assailed the partition decision and called for the creation of a unitary Arab state in all of Palestine. He charged the Jews with throwing Palestine into chaos, causing bloodshed, forcing 250,000 Arabs to become refugees, looting Arab property and not sparing the Holy Places.

AUSTRALIA AIMS TO REMOVE PALESTINE ISSUE FROM PRESENT ASSEMBLY SESSION

A member of the Australian delegation tonight expressed confidence that when the Australian resolution is introduced tomorrow it would obtain the support of a majority of the Political Committee. He said he was convinced that the bulk of the Latin American bloc, at least three British dominions and probably the Slavic bloc would vote for it. Such an array of voting strength behind the Australian resolution would doom the British resolution.

It is reported that Australian Minister for External Affairs Herbert V. Evatt has agreed to go along with the other proposals on the internationalization of the whole of Jerusalem rather than leave that an open question to be settled by the Social and Economic Council. It is said that the Australian resolution would take the entire Palestine issue out of the hands of this session of the Assembly by providing for a conciliation commission to report back to the next session in the event direct negotiations fail.