Arabs Urge Action by Security Council, NY Herald Tribune, May 27, 1948.

But Say Any U. N. Move Must Bar Jewish Arms Imports, Immigration

Click here for the original article.

By John G. Rogers

LAKE SUCCESS, L. I, May 26.-The Arab states rejected tonight the United Nations Security Council’s latest plea for a Palestine truce, and said they could not consider cessation of hostilities unless the Council would stop Jewish immigration, arms imports and efforts toward building the Jewish state of Israel.

In demanding Jewish military and political capitulation as the price for the silencing of Arab guns, the Arab states delivered to the Security Council a message that was interpreted by some as an ultimatum to the Council to produce within forty-eight hours a new Palestine plan acceptable to the Arabs.

The message, which was interpreted in various ways, even among Arab delegates, was also taken by some to mean that any time the Council saw fit to devise a new Palestine plan that might be acceptable to the Arabs, the Arabs promised to give it speedy consideration and return their answer within forty-eight hours.

U. N. Persuasion a Failure

At any rate, whatever the message meant, the Council was left in no doubt tonight that it has exhausted its efforts to stop the Palestine war by persuasion and that it must attempt stronger measures or admit its failure and leave the issue has to be settled by force between Arabs and Jews.

After hearing the Arab speeches tonight, which came after Israel had accepted the truce plea on condition that the Arabs would comply with it, the Council adjourned. It will meet again tomorrow afternoon, after delegates consult their home governments for new instructions.

The principal immediate question was whether the United States would now revive its program, rejected by the Council on Saturday, to “order” a Palestine truce-not “appeal” for one-and to back up the “order” with the theoretical threat of economic sanctions against the Arab states and of U. N. military intervention in the Holy Land.

Today the American delegation was not certain whether or how soon it would revive its drive for stronger measures, and it appeared possible the Americans might mark time for a few days, waiting to see whether American-British talks in London produced any British action effective enough to diminish or halt the Arab fighting

It was Dr. Nagy El Asil, of Iraq, speaking on behalf of all the Arab states, who delivered the main Arab address tonight and who called for assurances to block the Zionist program before the Arabs could agree to lay down their arms and return their armies to their countries of origin.

When Dr. El. Asil had finished speaking, Aubrey S. Eban, of Israel, replied charging the Arabs with a “flat and defiant” rejection of the Council’s cease-fire appeal. Mr. Eban said-

“If the Arab states wanted peace with Israel, they could have had it. It they want war, they can have that, too. But the Arab slates misunderstood their own position profoundly if they imagine that having failed to defeat Israel in war they can persuade it to commit suicide for the sake of peace.”

Jewish immigration into Israel, Mr. Eban said, is not the business of the Arab League, and as for armed forces that might be controlled or reduced, he suggested that the Security Council look at the Arab “aggressive” armies rather than the Jewish “defensive” armies.

He called on the Council formally to pronounce the Palestine situation a breach of international peace and an example of Arab aggression, under a U. N. formula that could lead in theory at least, to economic sanctions or U. N. military intervention, as proposed last week by the United States.

On this day that marked another turning point in the progress of the U. N.’s Palestine problem, the Security Council met twice for a total of six and a half hours, but it was not until the last hour of that period that attention was turned to Palestine.

Background of Rejection

The situation was this- On Saturday the truce appeal was voted, with 1 p. m. Monday, New York time, the deadline for compliance. Before the deadline, Israel announced cease-fire compliance. Several hours after the deadline, the Arabs asked a forty-eight-hour extension for consideration.

That made the new deadline 1 p. m. today. New York time. Israel announced re-compliance. But all through the day the Council marked time discussing the Kashmir and Czechoslovak questions, awaiting the arrival and then the decoding of the messages which the Arab delegates received from the meeting of their Foreign Ministers at Amman, capital of Trans-Jordan.

Just before 6 p. m. the Arabs said they were ready. Their messages all had been deciphered from diplomatic code. The meeting switched to the subject of Palestine and Council President Alexander Parodi, of France, read several new communications dealing with the Palestine problem.

Then Mahmoud Bey Fawzi, of Egypt, became the first Arab delegate to speak. Egypt, he said, wouldn’t hesitate to observe the truce plea if it would do any good. But, he explained, during such a truce the Jews would continue importing arms and immigrants and soon fighting would break out again.

Warns of Terrorists

To cease fire now, Mr. Fawzi continued, would leave the military advantage with Jewish terrorist bends and would jeopardize the interests of Palestine’s Arab majority which wants a single Palestine state under Arab control.

Egypt could consider a cease-fire in Palestine, Mr. Fawzi said. if the Security Council would curb Jewish immigration and arms imports and take some action to prevent other countries from giving material support to the “Jewish terrorists.”

Dr. Asil, of Iraq, was next. He was speaking for all the Arab states, and said he had two communications from the Arab League session at Amman. The first one charged that whereas the Arabs had agreed to a truce for Jerusalem, the Jews had broken it by attacking the walled Old City on May 14. An Arab liaison group, he said, was still willing to meet with the Security Council Truce Commission in Palestine.

On the subject of the cease-fire appeal, Dr. Asil said the Arabs had accepted an earlier Security Council resolution, approved on April 17 and calling for a complete military and political standstill in Palestine. The Jews violated that resolution, he said, by declaring a state and by opening a military campaign of “massacre” and town-grabbing against defenseless Arabs.

He said 250,000 Arab refugees had to flee Palestine and seek haven in other Arab areas. As a result, he said, the Arab states had to intervene militarily in a program to restore Palestine peace and repatriate the 250,000 refugees.

“Now,” he continued, “and after the Jews had taken the utmost advantage to change the political and military status before May 15 in utter disregard of the Security Council’s resolution of April 17, the Arab states are now asked to stop their measures to protect themselves and restore peace and harmony.

“The important questions to be asked in this respect are these- Is the cease-fire likely to stop the flow of Jewish immigrants going to Palestine to fight the Arabs, as well as the importation of arms? Is the cease-fire likely to stop the terrorists from their acts of violence and guarantee the safety of the Arab civilian population?

Dr. Asil closed with the possible ultimatum, which he delivered in these words- “I am authorized to inform you that the political committee of the Arab League is ready to study within the time limit of forty-eight hours any suggestion which the Security Council may make to them along the line of a solution of the Palestine problem.”

Interpretations Differ

Asked later what this meant, Dr. Asil said it meant he gave the Council forty-eight hours from that moment to devise a new Palestine plan. Other Arab diplomats, however, said it meant that whenever the Council devised a new plan, the Arab League would return its acceptance or rejection within forty-eight hours.

Mr. Eban, speaking for Israel, said the issue was now clear, Israel accepted a truce. The Arabs rejected. The forty-eight hours of delay asked by the Arabs, he said, were used for fresh Egyptian and Arab Legion attacks on both new and old Jerusalem.

Israel, he said, will fight its own war against the Arabs, but Jerusalem is a U. N. charge. Until the U. N. takes charge, he said, the Jews of Jerusalem will fight to keep King Abdullah of Trans Jordan from grabbing the holy city.

“History,” he said, “never forgets anything which happens to Jerusalem, and it will have an unenviable place in its gallery for this modern destroyer (Abdullah) of Jerusalem’s buildings and shrines, and for all who are associated with him in any way in that sacrilegious adventure.”

Those last words of Mr. Eban’s were a slam at the British, who finance and officer the Arab Legion commanded by King Abdullah.

At the close of the Eban speech, Mr. Parodi said, with understatement, that the Council faced a “very grave and serious situation.” American delegate Warren R. Austin said the situation was so serious that he, for one, wanted an interval to consult his government.