Israel Delegate at U.N. Reiterates Warning Against Internationalization of Jerusalem
Menu JTA Search

Israel Delegate at U.N. Reiterates Warning Against Internationalization of Jerusalem

Download PDF for this date

Any attempt on the part of the United Nations to impose internationalization on the people of Jerusalem would bring the “record of the General Assembly in Jerusalem to a fantastic pitch of negation,” Aubrey Eban, permanent Israel delegate to the U.N., told the Special Political Committee today.

Confining himself to the Australian resolution voted upon favorably by a subcommittee last week, Mr. Eban declared that the people of Jerusalem “do not exist to be adapted at will to the interest or dogma of the outside world,” and he asked: “Whence do the distinguished advocates of this resolution derive the moral right to play fast and loose with thousands of human beings in this way?”

He called the plan for establishing Jerusalem as a corpus separatum under U.N. Trusteeship Council control “a program for replacing the pride and freedom of Jerusalem today by anarchy and discontent, endangering both its religious and its secular peace.” He pointed out that many countries representing important sections of Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Moslem opinion opposed the Australian resolution, and he quoted documents to show that significant sectors of Christian opinion would be content solely with protection of the Holy Places which, he recalled, Israel has “freely offered to the world.”

Declaring that the subcommittee had done nothing but vote on one proposal before the Committee rather than seek a meeting of ideas, Mr. Eban said: “We are forced to come back to the central issue (of implementation) with all persistence and tenacity.” He repeated the many obstacles in the way of implementing the scheme of internationalization that he and Israel Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett have insistently detailed to the delegates since the start of debate on the subject.

Mr. Khan called the Committee’s attention to the other proposals before it, most of which, he said, “show a far more constructive and responsible desire to achieve the religious objectives of the United Nations and testify to a growing skepticism with regard to the principle of internationalization.” He said that the Israel delegation would comment on those before votes on them are taken.

The Australian resolution is considered to have simple majority support in the Committee, but not a two-thirds majority necessary for adoption in the Assembly. It is not felt, however, that the compromise resolution submitted by the Netherlands and Sweden has at this stage won anything like a two-thirds majority either.


The pronounced trend for a workable compromise to solve the Jerusalem issue was advanced today by the introduction of a Cuban amendment to the Australian resolution, eliminating from it the concept of a corpus separatism and an authority under the Trusteeship Council, in favor of a General Assembly statute which would limit international control to supervision and protection of the Holy Places. Observers noted that the basic elements of the Cuban amendment were lifted bodily from the Netherlands and Swedish resolution which was introduced yesterday.

Chile came out today in favor of the Netherlands-Swedish resolution, while Colombia supported the Australian resolution, showing wide divergence in the views of the Latin American bloc. At the same time, Bolivia withdrew its resolution in favor of the Dutch-Swedish proposal because of close similarity between them. Poland, Australia and Lebanon challenged the Cuban amendment as actually a new resolution and the chairman ruled in their favor, thus avoiding a test vote on the sentiment of the Committee over basic conflicting views, as between a complete internationalized city or U.N. supervision over the Holy Places alone.


Transjordan declared itself willing to sign an agreement with the U.N. to guarantee freedom of worship and access to the Holy Places, adding, however, that this or any form of internationalization would serve no purpose since the Holy Places were safe and secure under the rule of his government.

Egypt argued that it was a “dangerous mistake” to consider only the Holy Places as requiring internationalization. All of Jerusalem is a holy city, the Egyptian delegate said. Great Britain, on the other hand, questioned the wisdom of a “perfectionist resolution that would be added to the limbo of disregarded Assembly resolutions of the past.”

The U.N. Secretary-General received today a message from the Palestine Arab Higher Committee asserting that the problems of the Arab refugees and the future of Jerusalem were integral to the main issue of the full independence of Palestine and that any “piecemeal” General Assembly decision not emanating from the wishes of the Palestine Arabs “must be wholly disregarded.”

Founding Funders

The digitization of the JTA Archive would not have been possible without the generous support of the following donors:
  • The Gottesman Fund
  • Righteous Persons Foundation
  • Charles H. Revson Foundation
  • Elisa Spungen Bildner and Robert Bildner, in honor of Norma Spungen
  • George S. Blumenthal
  • Grace and Scott Offen Charitable Fund