Although the White House and the State Department insist that U.S. policy in the Middle East is "unchanged" and that it continues within the frame-work of UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, pro-Israeli circles here view with deepening skepticism and suspicion the Administration’s course in pursuit of a settlement in the region.
They are especially concerned and puzzled by President Carter’s press conference remarks last Thursday following two days of talks with Crown Prince Fahd of Saudi Arabia–the last of the four Arab leaders with whom the President has met in recent weeks. He noted that all former American Presidents based U.S. policy in the Mideast on "Security Council resolutions". But those resolutions do not mention a "homeland" or "compensation" for Arab refugees which Carter saw as part of the negotiating framework. His statements are now widely viewed as having fashioned broad new dimensions to U.S. policy that are favorable to the Arabs and upsetting to Israel.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency asked the chief White House media officials for clarification of the President’s news conference statements. The White House made it plain that no evidence can be found to support Carter’s statement. It issued a "Notice to the Press" which said that "As a matter of historical record, UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of November, 1947, provided for the recognition of a Jewish and an Arab state in Palestine and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 of December, 1948, endorsed the right of Palestinians to return to their homes or choose compensation for lost property."
In making that statement available, the White House spokesman volunteered to the JTA that this section of the statement was "not binding" on U.S. policy. However, it was not clear why the White House did not insert "not binding in the statement it had issued. The matter became further complicated at the State Department where spokesman Hodding Carter declared that the two General Assembly resolutions of almost 30 years ago have no "new" binding policy "implications" on U.S. policy.
He said that while "No changes in our fundamental policy approach to the Middle East" have taken place, "compensation" is "to be discussed at some point" and "there will have to be intensive discussions down the road". He added that he was not prepared to respond to a question on whether compensation applies to Jews forced to leave Arab countries. The President spoke only of compensation for Arabs.
In some quarters it was feared that the White House allusion to the 1947 and 1948 resolutions may become a wedge to reopen the entire question of Palestine’s partition and the issue of Jerusalem. Under the 1948 resolution, a Palestine Conciliation Commission consisting of France, Turkey and the U.S. was to present the General Assembly with detailed proposals for a "permanent international regime for the Jerusalem area. . ." The 1947 partition resolution is considered invalid since partition was rejected by the Arabs who subsequently made war on Israel during which Jordan seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
