I find this in the collection of FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1949, THE NEAR EAST, SOUTH ASIA, AND AFRICA, VOLUME VI
The Chargé in Jordan (Fritzlan) to the Secretary of State
Amman, December 15, 1949—10 a. m.secretpriority421. Legtel 418 December 12.
Yesterday evening I had hour and half talk with Samir Pasha Rifai re results fourth meeting with Israelis held Shuneh Tuesday nite presence King.
Following questions listed for discussion and trend talks as follows according Samir:
1.Territorial settlement including Jordan access Mediterranean.2.Jerusalem.3.Tulkarm triangle (approved for separate discussion after Israeli opposition).4.Israeli road link along west shore Dead Sea connecting potash works.5.Application British treaty Arab Palestine.6.Present and future treaty obligations both parties (this inserted request Israel and aimed Jordan obligations under AL charter).
First question passed over on insistence Israelis (desiring doubtless test extent Jordan concessions before revealing their hand access to sea) but on Samir’s condition it be discussed before meeting ended as it was crucial question.
Be Jerusalem, Israelis demanded change line afford them contiguity of territory with Jew quarter and Wailing Wall in old city and with Mt. Scopus institutions. Samir recognized reasonableness former and King readily assented but Samir stated Jordan could not consider latter but would be willing guarantee free access. This of course predicated on conclusion general agreement which would change line giving Jordan Nablus, St Pauls and Bethlehem roads and territory east and would provide compensation for certain Arab quarters. Such arrangement seemed in general satisfactory to Israelis.
First, free access was never granted even though it was part of the Armistice Agreement signed, see Article VIII.
Second, awarding to Jordan the streets of "St. Paul's", today Shivtei Yisrael, and Bethlehem would have been a debacle and more of a constant security threat than what was during the 19 years of the illegal Jordanian occupation.
Third, the territorial demand of a land access corridor across the Negev illustrates just how crazy some geographical demands can be and how easily America was willing to facilitate such an idea, to Israel's detriment.