Assessment of the Submission of the Johnson Plan to
the PCC
(August 27, 1962)
This telegram evaluates
the U.S. decision to propose the Johnson
Plan to the Palestinian Conciliation Commission,
in addition to addressing some of the qualms
that other countries such as France and
Turkey may have with the plan, and the means
through which the U.S. can try and push
for their proposal.
From the Secretary. Arab refugees./2/
I. If feasible, as next step we would like have Johnson submit his
Arab refugee Plan to PCC meeting to be convened for that purpose on
August 31. We would also like have PCC authorize Johnson at that time
present and discuss his Plan with parties, so that its consideration
by them and PCC could proceed concurrently.
From USUN's telegrams and tentative reaction to advance copies of Plan
given confidentially by Johnson, we aware there may be resistance to
Plan itself and to this procedure on part of our French and Turkish
PCC colleagues. Accordingly, we wish undertake high level representations
with those governments in order persuade them of merits we now see in
Plan, and win their support for above procedure. Later we would wish
their support with other governments as appropriate.
II. Highest priority is with French since Dauge, their representative
on PCC, will be at Quai on consultation August 27 through morning August
29 before returning to New York. He has suggested and we agree that
approach to his Government take place in that period. To kick this off
at an appropriately high level, Chargé Lyon should seek appointment
with Foreign Minister late morning or early afternoon August 28. Lyon
has in hand copies of Johnson's Plan and "Explanation" thereof
(Talbot-Lyon letter August 8)./3/ The approach to de Murville should
be general in nature and along following lines:
/3/On August 8, Talbot forwarded to various concerned posts in the
Near East and Europe the attachments to Document 15. Responses from
the posts are in Department of State, Central File 325.84. Talbot's
August 8 letter has not been found.
GOF has received through its representative on PCC a draft of Plan
for settlement Arab refugee problem [Plan?] evolved after more than
one year of highly skillful, quiet diplomatic endeavor by the Conciliation
Commission Special Representative, Dr. Johnson. Highest levels USG have
examined Plan and consider it best that could be devised in the difficult
circumstances surrounding this problem. We are convinced the effort
should be made, we believe there is some chance of its succeeding and
we see no reasonable alternative. However, there would also be advantages
even if it were to fail, for the entire problem and host of UNGA resolutions
concerning it could then be re-examined in a new light. We feel there
is an urgency in this. If a small start on questioning process Dr. Johnson
proposes can be made prior to debate on this matter at the General Assembly
(which we would hope to defer until late in the session), our respective
tasks in dealing with an abrasive, difficult item will be greatly eased
in that we could point to a useful process under way and seek support
for its continuation rather than being drawn into prolonged futile discussion
of likely Arab and Israeli proposals which can have no useful effect.
Additionally, there would be merit in having Johnson's proposals under
implementation so that we could avoid a debate on their specifics in
the GA, which we are convinced would result in their rejection. We hope
GOF, which has cooperated most helpfully in PCC context since start
of this initiative, will be able approve Plan and give it GOF support.
We understand Dr. Johnson would like to submit Plan to PCC at a meeting
to be convened for this purpose on August 31. We think it would be helpful
if, after that meeting Johnson were to hand Plan to parties and begin
discussions of it with them. In this way, Plan's consideration by Israel
and its four neighbors and by PCC would proceed concurrently. This has
advantages in that PCC would not be put in position of approving Plan
to find it was later summarily rejected by the parties. We believe GOF
might find it useful review with us at the working level some of the
implications of the Plan. To facilitate this review we have asked Ambassador
Stevenson to dispatch Robert Blake to Paris tonight. Blake is the member
of USUN who is most fully conversant with its implications as we see
them. FYI: While we would regret French reluctance approve Plan, our
minimum first objective with them now should be to get their acquiescence
that Plan be given to parties. End FYI.
After Lyon meeting with de Murville, Blake and Dauge could undertake
detailed review of Plan implications with Quai working level.
III. As regards the Turks, Department would suggest approaches in both
Ankara and New York. Stevenson scheduled see Kural in New York August
28. In Ankara, Ambassador Hare should at earliest opportunity speak
to whatever level GOT officials he regards as likely be most effective
in ensuring that Turks, also, go along with procedure described paragraph
I above. Representations in Ankara should take same general line as
that proposed for use in Paris.
IV. For London: Embassy should take early opportunity bring Foreign
Office up to date on details of Johnson Plan. We doing same with Embassy
here.
V. We recognize SYG also hesitant involve his position and prestige
in Johnson Plan. However, we hope his objection can be overcome and
to this end Ambassador Stevenson should have detailed review with him
soonest after SYG's return from Europe September 4.
Rusk
/1/Source: Department of
State, Central Files, 325.84/8-2762. Secret;
Niact; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Crawford;
cleared by Talbot, Cleveland, and Slater;
and approved by Rusk. Also sent to Paris,
Ankara, London, Amman, Damascus, Beirut,
Cairo, and Tel Aviv.
/2/On August 27, between
5 and 6:06 p.m., Rusk, Barbour, Talbot, McGeorge
Bundy, Strong, and Feldman met with President
Kennedy at the White House to discuss the
Johnson plan initiative. No account of that
conversation has been found. (Kennedy Library,
President's Appointment Books) An August
25 memorandum from Davies (NEA/NE) to Grant
delineates several questions for discussion
at the White House on August 27. (Kennedy
Library, National Security Files, Countries
Series, Palestine, Refugees, Vol. II)
Sources: Foreign
Relations of the United States, 1961-1963: Near East, 1962-1963,
V. XVIII. DC: GPO,
2000. |