October 26, 1947
Updated August 8, 2025
After the end of World War II, there was increased urgency to resolve Jewish-Arab communal violence in Palestine. For decades already, several hundred thousand Jews had built villages and created institutions to serve Jewish/Zionist aspirations to establish a state on sites of their ancient homeland. A geographic and demographic nucleus for a Jewish state was in the making by the time it was learned that 6 million Jews had perished in the Holocaust under Nazi brutality. Massive Jewish deaths catalyzed emotional interest to support a Jewish state. Before the advent of Nazi Germany, Arab leaders in the Middle East greatly opposed Jews establishing a state of their own in Palestine. That dislike was born out of a belief that Jews did not deserve to have a state in the heart of the Arab/Muslim world. With the war’s conclusion, Arab leaders were more vexed by the prospects of a Jewish state emerging because of rising sentiment to assist displaced European Jews. The Arab League and Saudi King Abdul Aziz in 1947 voiced their respective strong opposition against a Jewish state. Abdul Aziz was fully aware that the U.S. was interested in having access to Middle Eastern oil, telling President Harry Truman directly that U.S. support for Zionism would be detrimental to United States interests in Arab countries. Multiple voices from the U.S. State Department, like the Saudi king, vehemently opposed the support of a Jewish state, best articulated by Loy Henderson, George Kennan and George Marshall. Dramatically, with force, they advised Truman against supporting Zionism, noting that doing so would “lead to a death-blow to American interests in the Arab countries.”
While United States interests in the Arab world were significant, they also had to consider other interests, such as Jewish political support domestically and the policy of containment against Communism. Recognizing that the United States was increasingly supporting Zionist efforts, the Saudis and other Arab and Muslim world leaders lobbied Truman, while also explicitly threatening a future Jewish state. Abdul Aziz said that if the Jews “succeed in gaining support for the establishment of a small state by their oppressive and tyrannous means and their money, such a state must perish in a short time.” These threats came to fruition only a few months later when five Arab countries, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan, declared war on the newly founded State of Israel. Despite these threats from the Saudis, the United States supported Zionism, ultimately voting for partition at the U.N. General Assembly in November 1947 and recognizing the Jewish state shortly after its founding in May 1948. As it turned out, Saudi Arabia and other oil states did not embrace Communism or distance themselves from having positive relations with the U.S., despite Washington’s growing embrace of Israel.
— Maya Rezak and Ken Stein, July 16, 2025
Source: Foreign Relations of the United States — The Near East and Africa, Vol. 5, 1947, pp. 1212-1213
At this critical moment, during which relations between the United States and the Arabs are clouded with doubt and suspicion, it is my duty as a close friend whose country is united to the people of the United States by several strong mutual political and economic ties to implore you before this last opportunity is missed to revise as quickly as is possible this dangerous situation which has resulted from the support your government has lent to Zionism against the interests of the Arab peoples which may lead to the partition of Palestine into two states.
The decision of the Government of the United States to support the claims of the Zionist in Palestine is an unfriendly act directed against the Arabs and, at the same time, is inconsistent with the assurances given us by the late President Roosevelt. This decision is also inconsistent with the interests of the United States in these Arab countries. It is most difficult to believe that the Government of the United States can persist in its unfriendly decision.
Without doubt, the results of this decision will lead to a death-blow to American interests in the Arab countries and will disillusion the Arab’s confidence in the friendship, justice and fairness of the United States.
The Arabs have definitely decided to oppose the establishment of a Jewish state in any part of the Arab world. The dispute between the Arab and Jew will be violent and long-standing and without doubt will lead to more shedding of blood. Even if it is supposed that the Jews will succeed in gaining support for the establishment of a small state by their oppressive and tyrannous means and their money, such a state must perish in a short time. The Arab will isolate such a state from the world and will lay siege to it until it dies by famine. Trade and possible prosperity of the state will be prevented; its end will be the same as that of those crusader states which were forced to relinquish coveted objects in Palestine.
Such a policy of the United States is in disagreement with its long-held reputation as a defender of friendly nations against fearfulness and aggression. This former policy of honor was seen in the support given Syria and Lebanon by the United States in expelling the tyrannous French; this same policy was followed in supporting Turkey and Greece against the aggression of their neighbors to the north.
The Arabs of Palestine had anticipated that this same policy of support in obtaining their right to decide their own destiny would be continued by the United States.
The policy followed by the United States at the present is in disagreement with its announced policy of considering matters of immigration as an internal affair of foreign states. As the Government of the United States does not permit foreign powers to dictate policy of immigration into any of the United States, why then should the Arab permit foreign states to dictate conditions of immigration into their states? Should this policy be implemented, there will be no limit to Jewish aggression, which will be continued until they become a majority in both Palestine and Transjordan.
As this decision is still in the hands of the United States, we hope deeply that the United States will reconsider its stand before the opportunity slips away and it becomes impossible to maintain peace and security in the Near East. It will be cause for bloodshed and will create difficulties which will be prejudicial to the interests of the United States in the Arab countries.
