General Assembly Reconvenes to Extend Invitation to Palestine Arab Higher Committee

The prestige of the United Nations suffered a damagin blow today when, under Arab pressure, the General Assembly reconvened for the sole purpose of adopting a resolution which would satisfy the “honor” of the Arab states and guarantee the appearance of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee before the Political and Security Committee.

The bewildering chain of events began this morning when the Political Committee adopted a surprise motion by Indian delegate Asaf Ali instructing Assembly President Dr. Oswaldo Aranha to call a plenary seesion of the General Assembly to endorse a resolution directing the Political Committee to hear the Arab Higher Committee, despite the fact that the Political Committee had already extended an invitation to the Arab group. The motion was adopted 28 to 5, with the Soviet bloc among the 22 nations abstaining. The U.S. and Britain voted for the motion.

Reluctant to assume sole responsibility for reconvening the Assembly, Dr. Aranha called a closed meeting of the General (steering) Committee, which met for two hours and warngled bitterly over the Indian proposal. It is understood that Aranha argued that bowing to Arab pressure would undermine the prestige of the U.N. in the eyes of the world. It is also understood that at one point he threatened to resign the presidency, if the steering committee decided that the Assembly should reconvens to amend its earlier resolution, which directed that the Jewish Agency be given a hearing and provided that all other requests to be heard were to be ruled on by the Political Committee.

ARANHA BACKED BY RUSSIA, FRANCE, BUT OVERRULED BY STEERING COMMITTEE

In his fight against reconvening the Assembly to satisfy the Arabs, who had announced that they had been insulted and threatened to boycott future sessions, Dr. Aranha had the support of Soviet delegate Andrei Gromyko and French delegate Alexander Parodi. However, the steering committee ignored his objections and adopted the following resolution–for passage by the Assembly–which was suggested by Sir Alexander Cadogan, the British delegate:

“The General Assembly affirms that the decision of the Political Committee to grant a hearing to the Palestine Arab Higher Committee gives a correct interpretation of the General Assembly’s intention.”

Immediately following adoption of the resolution by the steering committee the Assembly met under Aranha and adopted the identical text, after Gromyko made a brief statement in which he said he failed to see the necessity for adoption of the resolution and declared that it would weaken the previous decision of the Assembly. The vote was 39 to 1, with 11 abstentions. Guatemala cast the sole negative vote, ? lle the following dele gations abstained: The Soviet Union. Czechoslovakia, Poland, Yugoslavia, Byelorussia, the Ukraine, Swoden, Colombia, Venezuela and Chile.

The Political Committee then reconvened and voted to adjourn until tomorrow, ?en it is expected to hear the representatives of the Jewish Agency and the Arab ?gher Committee.

JEWISH AGENCY SUBMITS LIST OF DELEGATES WHO WILL APPEAR BEFORE U.N.

The Jewish Agency today notified the U.N. Secretariat that its delegation will be composed of David Ben Gurion. Abba Hillel Silver, Moshe Shertok, Nahum Goldmain {SPAN}###{/SPAN} Greenberg, Rose Halperin and Emanuel Neumann. The Agency communication reached the Secretariat just as the sub-committee of the Political Committee announced its decision to reject the requests for a hearing submitted by the Hebrew Committee of National Liberation and other groups including an Arab North African group. At the {SPAN}###{/SPAN} time, the sub-committee postponed a decision until Friday on the request of the ?gudas Israel. Later in the afternoon, the Agudah was reported to have withdrawn to request.

At the Political Committee’s morning session, chairman Lester Pearson assured the committee that no decision on the composition of the fact-finding commission and its terms of reference would be taken until the Jewish Agency and other non-governmental bodies expressed their views. This assurance was given after the Bolivian delegate insisted that discussion of the American and Argentine resolutions on the composition of the inquiry commission be postponed until the Jewish Agency was heard. Only then, the Bolivian delegate said, would the members of the Political Committee have a clear understanding which would enable them to decide both on the composition of the inquiry committee and its terms of reference.

The entire morning session was devoted to a general discussion of the resolutions offered by the delegations of the U.S. and Argentine with regard to the composition of the inquiry commission and the instructions under which the body is to conduct its investigations. Sen. Austin strongly defended his resolution urging that the inquiry commission be composed of seven neutral states without the Big Five and the Arab states. He was strongly supported by Cadogan.

Yugoslavia and other members of the Slav bloc opposed the American resolution and insisted that the Big Five must be included on the commission. Cuba also spoke against the American resolution. Some of the Latin American delegates supported the Argantine resolution, which was in direct contradiction to the American proposal, and suggested an eleven-member commission, including all the Big Five, one of the Arab states and the other five chosen by lot on a geographical distribution.

NORWAY, RUSSIA ASK BODY TO DISCUSS “SUBSTANCE” NOW, “PROCEDURE” LATER

Norway proposed that the terms of reference of the inquiry committee should include a study of the problem of the homeless Jews of Europe and make recommendations for a solution. The Norwegian delegate urged separation of the problem of Jewish refugees and the future status of Palestine, while emphasizing the impossibility of dividing immigration to Palestine from the political question. He appealed to the U.N. members to accept Jewish refugees, either temporarily or permanently, to ease their suffering and to facilitate a political solution by the inquiry committee.

Gromyko strongly supported the Norwegian view, declaring that only the Norwegian had “spoken on the subject which we are supposed to be discussing.” He said that the other delegations, meaning the United States, Argentina and the United Kingdom, “began with the end rather than the beginning” in discussing the composition and instruction of the inquiry committee before a general discussion.

The Australian delegate, Col. Hodgson, proposed that if an eleven-member commission is set up it should consist of neutral members only and exclude the Big Five and the Arab states. As to the terms of reference, he expressed the view of this government that they should be made “wide and elastic and capable of a liberal interpretation.” The commission should be free to go to Palestine or any other place and should also be free to take evidence from any source.