form of other resolutions or amendments to our draft, as would tend in any way to obscure or cut across that initiative.

During the course of the general debate a number of delegates expressed doubts about the results achieved so far by Dr. Johnson. Others have spoken well of his record and almost everyone has commented favorably on his high qualities of integrity, impartiality and good will. Difficult as his task is, we urge that it not be in any way further complicated.

The United States sincerely believes the Palestine Conciliation Commission should be allowed to proceed further, undisturbed, with the rather tentative exploratory steps taken so far. The Commission's initiative does not commit any of the parties involved in this problem to any particular solution or procedure. They have and will have every opportunity to express fully their views, hopes, and misgivings with regard to the issue. We deeply hope that the quiet effort thus begun will have the cooperative support of those parties.

After having heard the extensive debate which has covered many different aspects of this difficult and intricate problem and after careful review again of all the complex factors involved, the United States Delegation remains convinced that the resolution we have placed before the Committee provides the best hope at this moment for opening the door to the progress on the tragic and important problem of the Palestine Refugees which all of us so deeply desire.

291. REQUEST FOR INTENSIFICATION OF THE EFFORTS OF THE PALESTINE CONCILIATION COMMISSION IN CARRYING OUT ITS MANDATE: Resolution 1725 (XVI), Adopted by the U.N. General Assembly, December 20, 1961 19 (and Table of Contributions to UNWRA)

The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolutions 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, 302 (IV) of 8 December 1949, 393 (V) and 394 (V) of 2 and 14 December 1950, 512 (VI) and 513 (VI) of 26 January 1952, 614 (VII) of 6 November 1952, 720 (VIII) of 27 November 1953, 818 (IX) of 4 December 1954, 916 (X) of 3 December 1955, 1018 (XI) of 28 February 1957, 1191 (XII) of 12 December 1957, 1315 (XIII) of 12 December 1958, 1456 (XIV) of 9 December 1959 20 and 1604 (XV) of 21 April 1961,1

Noting the annual report of the Director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period 1 July 1960–30 June 1961,22

19 U.N. General Assembly Official Records, Sixteenth Session, Supplement No. 17 (A/5100), p. 11. This resolution, sponsored by the Representative of the United States, was adopted by a vote of 62 to 0, with 37 abstentions.

20 For the source citations of these resolutions, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1959, p. 1044, footnotes 2-12.

21 Ante, doc. 289.

"U.N. doc. A/4861; cited as an unnumbered title, ante, p. 678.

Noting with deep regret that repatriation or compensation of the refugees as provided for in paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194 (III) 23 has not been effected, that no substantial progress has been made in the programme endorsed in paragraph 2 of resolution 513 (VI) for the reintegration of refugees either by repatriation or resettlement and that, therefore, the situation of the refugees continues to be a matter of serious concern,

1. Takes note of the efforts of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, pursuant to the request contained in General Assembly resolutions 1456 (XIV) and 1604 (XV), to secure the implementation of paragraph 11 of Assembly resolution 194 (III),

and:

(a) Requests the Commission to intensify its efforts for the implementation of paragraph 11 of resolution 194 (III) and urges the Arab host Governments and Israel to co-operate with the Commission in this regard;

(b) Further requests the Commission to intensify its work on the identification and evaluation of Arab refugee immovable properties in Palestine as at 15 May 1948, and to make every effort to complete that work by 1 September 1962;

(c) Requests the Secretary-General to make available to the Commission such additional staff and administrative facilities as may be required;

2. Directs attention to the precarious financial position of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and urges non-contributing Governments to contribute, and contributing Governments to consider increasing their contributions, so that the Agency can carry out its essential programmes ;24 3. Expresses its thanks to the Director and the staff of the Agency for their continued faithful efforts to provide essential services for the Palestine refugees, and to the specialized agencies and private organizations for their valuable work in assisting the refugees.

23 Of Dec. 11, 1948; text in A Decade of American Foreign Policy: Basic Documents, 1941-1949, pp. 851–853.

24 See the table below.

GOVERNMENT PLEDGES AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO UNRWA FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1961 25

(Showing the equivalent in U.S. dollars of pledges and contributions in cash,

kind and services)

*The United States pledge for the fiscal period 1 July 1960-30 June 1961 came to $23,500,000, and for the fiscal period 1 July 1961-30 June 1962, it amounted to $24,700,000. In both cases it was payable on a matching basis not to exceed 70 per cent of contributions paid by all Governments. The Agency, for its own accounting purposes, arbitrarily allocated these pledges between its 1960, 1961, and 1962 fiscal years. [Note in source text.]

C. Observance of the Arab-Israel General Armistice Agreements of 1949

PROHIBITION OF THE STATIONING OF HEAVY MILITARY ARMAMENT IN THE ISRAEL SECTOR OF JERUSALEM: Decision of the Jordan-Israel Mixed Armistice Commission, Adopted March 20, 1961 1

1

JORDANIAN REQUEST FOR A MEETING OF THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ISRAEL'S INTENTION TO HOLD ITS THIRTEENTH ANNIVERSARY MILITARY PARADE IN JERUSALEM: Letter From the Jordanian Representative at the U.N. (Rifa'i) to the President of the U.N. Security Council (Subasinghe), April 1, 1961 2

"THE SUBMISSION OF A COMPLAINT BY JORDAN TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL... IS CALCULATED... TO STIR UP TENSION AT A TIME WHEN THE ISRAEL-JORDAN BORDER HAS... BEEN RELATIVELY QUIET": Letter From the Israel Acting Representative at the U.N. (Lourie) to the President of the U.N. Security Council (Subasinghe), April 2, 1961 3

3

292. "COMPLIANCE WITH THE [ARAB-ISRAEL] GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENTS IS NOT A UNILATERAL OBLIGATION": Statement Made by the Deputy U.S. Representative (Plimpton) in the U.N. Security Council, April 11, 1961 +

4

The United States Government regrets that a case involving a breach of the armistice agreement between Jordan and Israel is again before the Security Council. This is the first time in 2 years we have had to deal with such a problem." At the same time it is ap

1Contained in U.N. doc. S/4776, Mar. 31, 1961. The text of this decision was transmitted, Mar. 30, by the Representative of Jordan at the U.N. to the U.N. Secretary-General with the request that it be circulated among the members of the U.N. Security Council.

· U.N. doc. S/4777.

U.N. doc. S/4778.

U.S.-U.N. press release 3687 (text as printed in the Department of State Bulletin, May 1, 1961, pp. 649-650).

See the unnumbered titles, supra.

Reference to the consideration by the Security Council of an Israel complaint against the United Arab Republic Jan. 30, 1959; see the Department of State Bulletin, Feb. 23, 1959, pp. 284-285, and U.N. doc. S/PV. 845.

propriate that the discussion has centered on the specific issue brought before us by Jordan, and I am hopeful that we can continue to concentrate our attention on that specific issue.

In our view the rehearsal for a military parade conducted by Israel in Jerusalem on March 17 in preparation for the Independence Day parade of April 20 was contrary to the General Armistice Agreement. A violation of the armistice agreement involving only a holiday parade may or may not constitute a threat to peace, as has been alleged. The degree to which such a violation of the armistice agreement might become a threat to the peace depends primarily on the respective attitudes of the parties. In this connection I note that the distinguished representative of Israel has sought to reassure the Government of Jordan of the peaceful nature of the Israeli celebration.

It may well be that both parties in the past have been responsible for violations of article VII of the armistice agreement, violations involving varying amounts and types of military equipment. It may well be that these violations were not hostile in intention and, in substance, constituted no threat to the peace. And it may well be that the parade proposed by the Israeli Government for the 20th of April will, in substance, not constitute a threat to the peace. But the crucial question is: What effect do such violations have on the force of the armistice agreements and on the attitudes of the parties toward them?

In the case before us, one of the parties has lodged a complaint with the Mixed Armistice Commission, and the Commission has decided that the episode did indeed constitute a violation of the General Armistice Agreement. If we do not act wisely now, we may be faced with a series of formal complaints submitted by both parties which will erode the armistice agreement and the will of the parties to carry it out. That would indeed constitute a threat to the peace. Such a situation can easily be avoided by adherence in the future not only to the substance but to the form of the armistice agreement. It is true that the Mixed Armistice Commission might have been able to handle this matter in another way, perhaps along the lines of the experience of the 1958 Israeli military parade in Jerusalem, which, we understand, was held pursuant to arrangements worked out in the field by the Commission. But this has not happened. Instead we have before us a specific finding by the Mixed Armistice Commission made according to the proper procedures.

We believe the authority of the truce supervision machinery on the spot should be upheld. We realize the imperfections of the armistice agreements. We are aware that all parts of the agreement are not fully implemented and that others are occasionally violated. Nevertheless we are convinced that the armistice agreement and the machinery to carry it out is an essential element of peace and stability. We support the armistice agreements fully.

7

For the text of the Jordan-Israel General Armistice Agreement of Apr. 3. 1949. see American Foreign Policy, 1950-1955: Basic Documents, pp. 712-718. 8 See U.N. doc. S/4778, par. 3.

9 See U.N. doc. S/4776, cited as an unnumbered title above.