24.12.2016 Views

1968_4_arabisraelwar

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

UNITED STATES AND UNITED NATIONS / 183<br />

day that the administrative measures adopted by Israel were not intended<br />

to create new political facts, but were required to restore normal services to<br />

a city that had been united throughout history and artificially divided since<br />

the 1948 war. He noted that Jordan had not safeguarded universal religious<br />

interests in the Holy Places when they were under its control: Jewish synagogues<br />

and cemeteries were desecrated; Jews were not allowed to pray at the<br />

Western Wall; Israeli Moslem Arabs were excluded from their mosques;<br />

pilgrimages of Israeli Christian Arabs were severely restricted. Eban pledged<br />

free access to the Holy Places to all, and said that his government was prepared<br />

to discuss arrangements for the safeguarding of the Holy Places with<br />

those concerned, in Israel and elsewhere.<br />

However, many countries were not satisfied with these assurances. At the<br />

General Assembly emergency session, Pakistan introduced a resolution, cosponsored<br />

by Guinea, Iran, Niger, and Turkey, declaring invalid Israeli measures<br />

"to change the status of Jerusalem" and calling upon Israel "to rescind<br />

all measures already taken" and to desist from future action changing the<br />

city's status. The resolution was adopted on July 4, by a vote of 99 to 0,<br />

with 20 abstentions. The United States abstained. A follow-up resolution, on<br />

July 14, deplored Israel's failure to implement the earlier resolution and<br />

reiterated its call to do so. The United States again abstained. Israel did not<br />

vote on either resolution, considering them outside the Assembly's competence.<br />

Ambassador Goldberg explained that the United States had been prepared<br />

to support a resolution declaring that the UN would not accept any permanent<br />

unilateral action affecting the status of Jerusalem and calling on<br />

Israel "to desist" from such action. The United States did not support the<br />

final text because Washington refused to endorse its implication that Israel's<br />

administrative measures in fact constituted annexation. The United States<br />

also considered it unrealistic and unfruitful, he said, to deal with "one aspect<br />

of the problem of Jerusalem as an isolated issue," and not as part of "the<br />

broader arrangements that must be made to restore a just and durable peace."<br />

In line with its opposition to unilateral actions that might prejudice an<br />

overall settlement, the United States, on September 26, asked Israel for<br />

"clarification" of reports that Israel was setting up permanent Jewish settlement<br />

in the occupied areas. Israeli spokesmen replied that the establishment<br />

of Nahal (para-military, agricultural) outposts in occupied areas "does not<br />

imply a decision by the government of Israel with regard to the future of<br />

the area under its control."<br />

Refugee Problem<br />

The basic position of the United States (pp. 176-177) was that the problem<br />

of the persons displaced by war must be dealt with in the framework of<br />

a general peace settlement. President Johnson noted that both sides had resisted<br />

outside mediation efforts "to restore the victims of conflict to their

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!