Israel’s Peace Plan at U.N. Palesitne Debate

Ambassador Abba S. Eban revealed Israel’s ### plan today during the Palestine debate in the United Nations Special ### Committee. He declared that Israel was prepared to negotiate a final ### with the four Arab governments with which it had signed armistice a agreement.

Mr. Eban called not only for a treaty of peace and joint delimitation of the frontfrens but also a natural security pact, trade and transit agreements and regional comp### to ra(?) the ### of living throughout the entire Middle East. His ### which lasted almost two hours, was hailed as statesmanlike and ###by most delegates at the United Nations.

In fact, the Norwegian delegate intervened after Mr. Eban had finished to say that the ### a full text of what the Israeli delegate had said, as it was “a very important statement”

The Israeli delegate gave his full support to the resolution of the seven neutral powers ### for direct negotiations. Mr. Eban said that to add any qualification about the megotiations, as the Arabs wish to do, would spoil their effect.

He ### Arab claims that they had accepted all U.N. resolutions. He Iisted a number off ###, including Egypt’s disregard of the Security Council resolution ### her to stop the blockade of Israeli bound shipping in the Suez Canal. He ### out ### the Arabs opposed resolutions when they might be accepted and only wanted them invoked when they could not be accepted.

SAYS INDICATIONS POINT TO POSSIBILITY OF ARAB-ISRAEL PEACE

“There are special reasons which cause as to believe that an active quest for {SPAN}###{/SPAN} now {SPAN}###{/SPAN} more {SPAN}###{/SPAN} than before, ” he said. There were signs that the United Nations {SPAN}###{/SPAN} Israel and the Arab states to solve the problem between them, and {SPAN}###{/SPAN} that Arab statesmanship was “{SPAN}###{/SPAN} to a new constructive impulse,” He said. Every circumstance of history and geography, of regional advantage and {SPAN}###{/SPAN} spoke on behalf of peaceful and neighborly relations between Israel and the Arab states.

In his ### , contained Mr. Eban, a simple recommendation by the General ### for a directly negotiated settlement was appropriate, and even overdue. Amy ### to direct and unfettered negotiation would, in effect, mean that no negotiation of any kind would take place. It would “give United Nations sanction for evading normal international intercourse. “If the Arab governments had any requests or claims to submit for Israel’s consideration, they should do so directly, he said.

The argument against tying a negotiated settlement to past resolutions was a substantial one, the representative of Israel asserted. “It is because past resolutions, individually and together, have not produced an agreement or a settlement that we are discussing this problem in the committee today, “he declared.

OUTLINES ISRAEL’S DEMANDS FOR FINAL PEACE SETTLEMENT

Negotiations for a final settlement should include four security provisions of mutual benefit, Mr. Eban said. He listed them as follows: 1. A non-aggression clause; 2. A reasonable limitation of military budgets (an arms limitation); 3. Practical measures for the elimination of demilitarized zones and the delimitation of frontiers; 4. Regional cooperation for security purposes.

The Israeli diplomat said that the Palestine refugee problem rose from the war and was perpetuated by the lack of a settlement. He declared that at the peace negotiations Israel would earnestly discuss an international agreement on the Arab refugees.

He referred to the “unusual” step that Israel had taken in freeing Arab blocked accounts as a sign of its good will in this matter. He said the Israel Government had thought of the plight of the refugees first and the Arab states’ political attitude second in freeing the accounts. He also dwelt at length on the economic side of such peace negotiations.

Every effort should be made to enhance the welfare of the whole of the Middle East, Mr. Eban urged. He listed this under five headings: 1. The replacement of the blockade by normal trade relations; 2. The development of markets which would aid industrial progress in all countries; 3. The development of natural resources by interstate cooperation; 4. Regional irrigation schemes to increase productivity; 5. An exchange of knowledge for “the battle against the desert.”

Israel’s peace plan, he said, envisaged regional cooperation also as far as communications were concerned. Traffic should be resumed on the railway connecting Israel and Egypt. Roads should be built and there should be maritime and air cooperation.

Ambassador Eban pointed out that a statement would increase tourist trade in the whole area. He promised “practical cooperation” as far as combatting diseases which affect the Arab countries. He also spoke of an exchange of ideas on land reforms and labor organization as well as an-interchange of students.

SYRIAN DELEGATE HITS EBAN PEACE PROPOSAL

Ahmed Shukairi of Syria, who followed Mr. Eban, attacked the Israeli representative’s speech, declaring that Mr.Eban’s suggestion that the negotiations not be qualified by past resolutions of the General Assembly “could not be tolerated.” He accused Mr.Eban of having presented “a blueprint for peace with an introduction of aggression.”

In its Declaration of Independence, the Syrian diplomat said, Israel had set the stage for infinite expansion by inviting all the Jews of the world to become citizens and emigrate to that “tiny land, which lacked natural resources and was mostly desert.” Israel does not flow with milk and honey, he declared, but “takes its bread from Australia and its water from Syria and Jordan.”