Karel Lisicky, chairman of the U.N. Palestine Commission, today indicated at a press conference that the members of the Commission believe that the Security Council will support their request for an adequate international armed force to back implementation of the U.N. partition decision.
Asked if the Commission will go to Palestine without an armed force, he avoided a direct reply, but declared that the Commission “believes in its work.” In the event that the Security Council does not agree to provide armed support, the Commission will at that time determine what to do next, he stated.
Lisicky refused to comment on how an international force should be constituted. This, he said, was up to the Council to decide, in consultation with military experts. Frequently in the past, armed forces have been supplied quickly, he pointed out. “It is possible that this is the last time you are meeting the ‘five lonely pilgrims,'” he told the newsmen, adding that he wished to emphasize the word “lonely.”
Asked if non-implementation meant danger to the partition scheme, Lisicky replied that it would imperil implementing the General Assembly plan but not partition. ### evidently drew a distinction between the two concepts.
Questioned on the present status of interim immigration, he replied that the British quota system was in operation by British will. He rebuffed suggestions as to the difficulties and the shortness of time involved in setting up a police force and said all that was involved was “the will” to do it.
ALTERATION OF TIMETABLE ON PARTITION DECISION URGED BY PHILIPPINE MEMBER
A sensation was created here when, following the press conference, Sen. Vincent’s Francisco, Philippine member of the U.N. Palestine Commission, issued a state-{SPAN}###{/SPAN}{SPAN}###{/SPAN} suggesting that the timetable fixed by the General Assembly partition resolution {SPAN}###{/SPAN} altered, if necessary, in order to give the U.N. a chance of settling the Palestine issue “by peaceful means, that is–by negotiation, mediation, arbitration or ether peaceful means agreeable to the Jews and Arabs.”
Although the Philippine member emphasized that he was expressing his “### personal opinion,” his unsolicited statement was interpreted as a trial balloon, fail and there is no alternative for the United Nations other than the formation of an international army to enforce its decision, then the choice of some neutral territory such as France or Italy as a staging area and the choice of supply routes which should not endanger the military or political security or the sphere of influence as defined by the great powers would prove a practical basis for the formation of an international security force.”
Send Francisco urged that if an international armed force is sent to Palestine, it should be composed of units assigned by the great powers, each unit forming only a component part of the force. He suggested that one power send only artillery units, another provide the mechanized force, while a third would be responsible for the air force. In this way no power need fear that the contingent of another nation would possibly remain in Palestine after peace is restored, since each unit could not maintain itself without the others, Francisco’s statement pointed out.
Christopher Mayhew, British Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs and United Kingdom representative at the U.N. Economic and Social Council, today revealed at a press conference a British proposal that the Council call on member states to notify the U.N. of steps they have taken to absorb their share of European refugees. He refused to comment on a question seeking to define the relationship between Britain’s desire to clear the refugees out of Europe and her equally strong desire to keep them out of Palestine.
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.
