The Consular Truce Committee in 1948…a failed international attempt to stop the fighting in Jerusalem Encyclopedia

On April 27, 1948, the UN Security Council issued a resolution assigning a special committee to examine the situation in Palestine and stop the fighting. The committee was formed from the consuls of 3 countries: the United States of America, France, and Belgium. It aimed to take the necessary measures to implement the order to stop fighting. It was also asked to submit a report on the situation in the city.

Establishment

The Consular Truce Committee was formed in light of the escalation of confrontations between Arabs and armed Zionist gangs in Palestine, in the last weeks of the British occupation period.

The Security Council established this committee by Resolution No. 48 of April 23, 1948, in order to contain the “state of insecurity” and put an end to the conflict that had worsened before the withdrawal of British forces on May 14, 1948.

The committee consisted of the consuls of the United States, Belgium, and France in Jerusalem, after Syria declined to participate.

The committee was charged with supervising the implementation of Security Council Resolution No. 46 (April 17, 1948) relating to the ceasefire, in addition to submitting regular reports on the situation.

From the beginning, the committee faced major obstacles, most notably the refusal of the British High Commissioner in Palestine, Sir Alan Cunningham, to officially recognize it, and he also refused to provide the necessary facilities for its work.

In one of the official meetings, one of the consuls accused the British side of ignoring the expansion of the fighting, which further complicated the committee’s tasks.

Objectives

The committee’s primary mission was to implement Security Council resolutions related to the ceasefire, especially in Jerusalem, and to work on calm until a political settlement is reached.

The committee was given the authority to move freely within Palestine, contact all parties, and propose executive measures to stop the fighting.

On April 29, 1948, the Consular Committee sent a memorandum to King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (Abdullah I) in which it expressed its concern about news regarding imminent movements of the Arab army to enter Palestine, and warned him that any military intervention was considered a “dangerous threat to peace,” calling for adherence to the Security Council resolution.

On April 30, the committee submitted a report to the United Nations in which it explained that the fighting had not stopped in Jerusalem, Jaffa, and other Palestinian areas.

The attacks launched by Zionist gangs, especially on the Qatamon neighborhood, were described as having led to the fall of 35 martyrs among the Mujahideen, and the displacement of more than 4,817 Palestinian families from Jerusalem alone.

Historical circumstances

The establishment of the Armistice Commission coincided with a major escalation after the partition resolution of Palestine (Resolution No. 181) issued by the United Nations General Assembly on November 29, 1947, which stipulated the establishment of two Jewish and Arab states, with the internationalization of the city of Jerusalem.

While the Zionist gangs approved the decision, the Arabs, including the Palestinians, rejected it and refused to internationalize the city.

The United Nations assigned the committee the tasks of monitoring the actual implementation of the cessation of fighting, and trying to defuse the conflict inside Jerusalem.

An interim mayor was appointed to run the city, but he resigned shortly after due to the chaos and deteriorating security and humanitarian situation, which increased the seriousness of the events.

Battle of Jerusalem

Jerusalem witnessed one of the fiercest battles at that stage, and the Truce Commission presented several proposals to stop the fighting, especially in the mixed neighborhoods.

At first, the Israeli side expressed a willingness to accept some forms of truce, due to the deterioration of its military position, but it stipulated the opening of a safe corridor linking Jerusalem to the coast. As for the Arabs, they rejected the idea of ​​internationalizing the city, but they showed a willingness to avoid fighting inside it.

Battles erupted immediately after the withdrawal of British forces on May 14, 1948, and the Israeli occupation took advantage of this vacuum to control large Arab neighborhoods of the city, amid the disintegration of Palestinian defenses and the decline of political coordination.

The committee has repeatedly sought to intervene, but its limited powers have not enabled it to enforce compliance with Security Council resolutions, especially Resolution No. 49 issued on May 22, which called for a cessation of fighting within 36 hours.

Reports and attempts at calm

On April 30, the committee submitted its first detailed report to the Security Council, in which it described the security situation as “catastrophic” and explained that “security chaos” might expand to include neighboring countries. It also later filed reports indicating the Israeli occupation’s ongoing violation of the ceasefire, and its claim that some violations were committed by “undisciplined groups,” an account rejected by the committee.

The Security Council adopted Resolution 50 on May 29, 1948, calling for a 4-week truce. The first armistice entered into force on June 11, 1948, and was followed by a second armistice that began on July 18, 1948, through the mediation of international envoy Count Falke Bernadotte. Despite this, violations continued by the Israeli occupation, which expanded its control over new areas.

In one of its drafts, the committee proposed imposing restrictions on the flow of weapons and allowing the partial return of refugees under international supervision, but the occupation rejected these provisions and insisted on its field superiority.

Recent studies have indicated that the committee was a Western, especially American, tool to undermine the influence of the Soviet Union in the region, especially in the absence of direct Soviet representation in Jerusalem.

Despite the committee’s efforts, its failure reflected the limited effectiveness of the United Nations at that stage, and turned the Palestinian issue into an arena of open international and regional confrontation.