In this connection, I understand from your letter that Knesset approval to withdraw all Israeli settlers from Sinai according to a timetable within the period specified for the implementation of the peace treaty is a prerequisite to any negotiations on a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. In connection with the "Framework for a Settlement in Sinai" to be signed tonight, I would like to reaffirm the position of the Arab Republic of Egypt with respect to the settlements: 1. All Israeli settlers must be withdrawn from Sinai according to a timetable within the period specified for the implementation of the peace treaty. 2. Agreement by the Israeli Government and its constitutional institutions to this basic principle is therefore a prerequisite to starting peace negotiations for concluding a peace treaty. 3. If Israel fails to meet this commitment, the "Framework" shall be void and invalid. Sincerely, His Excellency Jimmy Carter Mohamed Anwar El Sadat Dear Mr. Prime Minister: September 22, 1978 I have received your letter of September 17, 1978, describing how you intend to place the question of the future of Israeli settlements in Sinai before the Knesset for its decision. Enclosed is a copy of President Sadat's letter to me on this subject. I am writing you to reaffirm the position of the Arab Republic of Egypt with respect to Jerusalem: 1. Arab Jerusalem is an integral part of the West Bank. Legal and historical Arab rights in the City must be respected and restored. 2. Arab Jerusalem should be under Arab sovereignty. lestinian inhabitants of Arab Jerusalem are entitled to exercise ate national rights, being part of the Palestinian People in the t Security Council Resolutions, particularly Resolutions 242 and ‣ applied with regard to Jerusalem. All the measures taken by er the status of the City are null and void and should be rescinded. les must have free access to the City and enjoy the free exercise nd the right to visit and transit to the holy places without distincimination. ly places of each faith may be placed under the administration and heir representatives. tial functions in the City should be undivided and a joint municipal mposed of an equal number of Arab and Israeli members can superarrying out of these functions. In this way, the City shall be undivided. Sincerely, (signed) Mohamed Anwar El Sadat rcellency Jimmy Carter sident of the United States ar Mr. President, September 17, 1978 I have the honor to inform you, Mr. President, that on 28 June 1967-Israel's Parliament (the Knesset) promulgated and adopted a law to the effect: "the Government is empowered by a decree to apply the law, the jurisdiction and administration of the State to any part of Eretz Israel (land of IsraelPalestine), as stated in that decree." On the basis of this law, the Government of Israel decreed in July 1967 that Jerusalem is one city indivisible, the Capital of the State of Israel. The President Thurmont, Maryland Sincerely, (signed) Menachem Begin September 22, 1978 Dear Mr. President: I have received your letter of September 17, 1978, setting forth the Egyptian position on Jerusalem. I am transmitting a copy of that letter to Prime Minister Begin for his information. The position of the United States on Jerusalem remains as stated by Ambassador [Arthur J.] Goldberg in the United Nations General Assembly on July 14, 1967, and subsequently by Ambassador [Charles W.] Yost in the United Nations Security Council on July 1, 1969. Sincerely, His Excellency Anwar Al-Sadat President of the Arab Cairo Ibid., pp. 10-11. (signed) Jimmy Carter (For Ambassador Goldberg's statement, ante, see Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. LVII, No. 1466, July 31, 1967, p. 148. For Ambassador Yost's statement, ante, see ibid., Vol. LXI, No. 1570, July 28, 1969. p. 76.) U.N. Security Council Res. 267, adopted unanimously at its 1485th meeting, July 3, 1969, and referred to in President Sadat's letter of September 17, ante, read: The Security Council, Recalling its resolution 252 of 21 May 1968 and the earlier General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967 respectively concerning measures and actions by Israel affecting the status of the City of Jerusalem, Having heard the statements of the parties concerned on the question, Noting that since the adoption of the above-mentioned resolutions Israel has taken further measures tending to change the status of the City of Jeru salem, Reaffirming the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible, 1. Reaffirms its resolution 252 (1968); 2. Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the General Assembly and Security Council resolutions mentioned above; 3. Censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the City of Jerusalem; 4. Confirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions by Israel which purport to alter the status of Jerusalem including expropriation of land and properties thereon are invalid and cannot change that status; 5. Urgently calls once more upon Israel to rescind forthwith all measures taken by it which may tend to change the status of the City of Jerusalem, and in future to refrain from all actions likely to have such an effect; 6. Requests Israel to inform the Security Council without any further delay of its intentions with regard to the implementation of the provisions of this resolution; 7. Determines that, in the event of a negative response or no response from Israel, the Security Council shall reconvene without delay to consider what further action should be taken in this matter; 8. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the implementation of this resolution. U.N. Doc. S/RES/267, July 3, 1969. The U.S., while voting for S/RES/267, had abstained on the separate vote taken on operative paragraph 5, and had abstained earlier on S/RES/252 and on G.A. Resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V), referenced in the first paragraph of S/RES/267. (See further, Ambassador Yost's statement of July 3, 1969, Department of State Bulletin, Vol. LXI, No. 1570, July 28, 1969, pp. 77–78.) President Sadat's offer to "assume the Arab role" to ensure the implementation of the provisions related to the West Bank and Gaza and to safeguard the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and President Carter's acknowledgement of receipt from Prime Minister Begin of information regarding Israeli understanding of the terms "Palestinians," "Palestinian people," and "West Bank" read: Dear Mr. President: September 17, 1978 In connection with the "Framework for Peace in the Middle East", I am writing you this letter to inform you of the position of the Arab Republic of Egypt, with respect to the implementation of the comprehensive settlement. To ensure the implementation of the provisions related to the West Bank and Gaza and in order to safeguard the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, Egypt will be prepared to assume the Arab role emanating from these provisions, following consultations with Jordan and the representatives of the Palestinian people. Sincerely, Mohamed Anwar El Sadat His Excellency President of the United States The White House September 22, 1978 Dear Mr. Prime Minister: I hereby acknowledge that you have informed me as follows: A) In each paragraph of the Agreed Framework Document the expressions "Palestinians" or "Palestinian People" are being and will be construed and understood by you as "Palestinian Arabs." B) In each paragraph in which the expression "West Bank" appears, it is being, and will be, understood by the Government of Israel as Judea and Samaria. Sincerely, (signed) Jimmy Carter His Excellency Menachem Begin Prime Minister of Israel Ibid., p. 11. In order to expedite implementation of the Camp David agreements, the United States committed itself to assist Israel in constructing two military airbases in the Negev to replace the airbases at Eitam and Etzion, which Israel was to evacuate under the peace treaty to be concluded between Egypt and Israel. A confirmation of the commitment, by a letter from Secretary of Defense Harold Brown to Israeli Minister of Defense Ezer Weizman, dated September 28, 1978, read: THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE DEAR MR. MINISTER: SEPTEMBER 28, 1978 The U.S. understands that, in connection with carrying out the agreements reached at Camp David, Israel intends to build two military airbases at appropriate sites in the Negev to replace the airbases at Eitam and Etzion which will be evacuated by Israel in accordance with the peace treaty to be concluded between Egypt and Israel. We also understand the special urgency and priority which Israel attaches to preparing the new bases in light of its conviction that it cannot safely leave the Sinai airbases until the new operational. I suggest that our two governments consult on the scope and costs of the two new airbases as well as on related forms of assistance which the United States might appropriately provide in light of the special problems which may be presented by carrying out such a project on an urgent basis. The President is prepared to seek the necessary congressional approvals for such assistance as may be agreed upon by the U.S. side as a result of such consultations. Draft Convention on a European System for Peaceful Settlement of Disputes In the concluding document of the Belgrade review conference on implementation of the Helsinki Final Act (1975), held October 4, 1977-March 8, 1978, representatives of the participating states agreed that a meeting of experts would be convened at Montreux, Switzerland, on October 31, 1978, "charged with pursuing the examination and elaboration of a generally acceptable method for peaceful settlement of disputes aimed at complementing existing methods." By a note handed to a representative of the Embassy of Switzerland on July 25, 1978, the Department of State responded to the Embassy's request for the Department's views, observations, or proposals regarding a method for the peaceful settlement of disputes, in part: [T]he United States Government shares the Embassy's view that a new method for the peaceful settlement of disputes would represent progress only if it contained obligatory elements. The United States Government believes that the experts could most profitably concentrate on the development of obligatory arbitral procedures for the settlement of specified categories of justiciable disputes. The United States Government is doubtful that useful work could be done at this time on any proposal involving obligatory arbitral or conciliation procedures for the settlement of nonjusticiable disputes or obligatory conciliation procedures for justiciable disputes. Within these broad outlines, the United States Government would prefer that the experts seek agreement on an enumeration of categories of disputes that would be encompassed by obligatory arbitration procedures. In this connection the United States Government could in principle endorse from among the examples listed in the Embassy's note the following: border problems, transportation rights, environmental problems, diplomatic and consular law, treatment of foreigners, interpretation and application of treaties, validity, entry into force and termination of treaties. In connection with such obligatory arbitral procedures, the United States Government considers that any new arbitration machinery should not detract from the existing machinery of the International Court of Justice. In this respect the United States would propose |