Palestine – Story of the great British betrayal

A statement by the Arab Higher Committee

(The body representing the Palestine Arabs)

The King-Crane Commission

The Supreme Allied Council decided in the same year to send an international commission of inquiry to investigate the situation on the spot and to ascertain the wishes of the inhabitants. For certain reasons the commission was restricted to the American representatives, who were ’sent’ out under the name of the King-Crane Commission. The Commission first visited Palestine, then the various parts of Syria and the Lebanon during the months of June and July 1919.

All three countries, as stated in the Commission’s report presented to President Wilson and published in 1924, rejected the idea of the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine and that of Jewish immigration into the country, and demanded complete political independence for Syria, including Palestine, invariably referred to in the evidence given before the Committee and the various documents issued at the time as an inseparable part of Syria.

Referring to Zionism, the King-Crane Commission report says:

“It is to be noted also that the feeling against the Zionist programme is not confined to Palestine, but shared very generally by the people throughout Syria, as our conferences clearly showed.”

More than seventy-two per cent – 1350 in all – of all the petitions in the whole of Syria were directed against the Zionist programme. Only two requests – those for a United Syria and for Independence – had a larger support. This general feeling was duly voiced by the General Syrian Congress in its seventh, eighth and tenth resolutions.

“The Peace Conference should not shut its eyes to the fact that the anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria is intense and not lightly to be flouted. No British officer consulted by the Commissioners believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by force of arms.”

“The officers generally thought that a force of not less than 50,000 soldiers would be required even to initiate the programme. That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist programme, on the part of the non-Jewish populations of Palestine and Syria. “Decisions requiring armies to carry out are sometimes necessary, but they are surely not gratuitously to be taken in the interests of a serious injustice. For the initial claim, often submitted by the Zionist representatives, that they have a ’right’ to Palestine, based on an occupation of 2,000 years ago, can hardly be seriously considered.”

The arrival of the King-Crane Commission also contributed in no small measure to allaying the anxiety of the Arabs, and to the strengthening of their hopes for the ultimate realization of their national aspirations, as could be easily imagined.

Imposition of the Mandate

Unfortunately, things took a turn for the worse and far from the path of fair play and justice. Imperialistic ambitions got the better of those high principles of honesty and integrity so loudly trumpeted by the Allies during the war. Indeed, these imperialistic ambitions triumphed over those solemn pledges given to the Arabs, who on the understanding that they will be faithfully and honourably fulfilled joined the war on the side of the Allies.

These pledges, together with the conclusion of the King-Crane Committee, the principle of the right to self-determination and the League of Nations Covenant were all thrown to the wind by Britain, which imposed the Mandate on Palestine, a mandate that was nothing short of the colonization of that Arab country by the force of iron and fire, as well as the policy of the establishment of a Jewish national home and the separation of Palestine from Syria.

Anomalies of the Palestine Mandate

Despite the fact that the texts of the Mandates over Syria, Iraq and the Lebanon contained specific provisions limiting the task of the Mandatory to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance until such time as the mandated territories are able to govern themselves, making it obligatory on the Mandatory to help them attain that aim, the text of the Palestine Mandate contained many anomalies. These anomalies have virtually destroyed the fundamental object of the Mandate both in spirit and in form despite the fact that it is expressly stipulated in the preamble of the Mandate that its main object is to help the inhabitants of the land, by rendering administrative advice and assistance, to govern themselves and manage their own affairs and that the Mandate was assigned in accordance with the provisions of Article XXII of the Covenant of the League of Nations, as can be clearly seen from the following extract.

“Whereas the principal Allied Powers have agreed for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article XXII of the Covenant of the League or Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them…

Unfortunately, the Allies transgressed the stipulations of Article XXII of the League Covenant referred to above, having virtually ignored the wishes of the populations of these countries in general and of the Arabs of Palestine in particular. In that they have separated that country from Syria and imposed upon it the Jewish national home and the mandate against the wishes of the original inhabitants of the country, who strongly opposed and completely rejected them.

Terms of the Mandate

The inclusion of the Balfour Declaration in the Preamble of the Mandate constitutes in itself a second transgression in the faithful application of Article XXII of the League Covenant, in that the great majority of the population of the country were against the Balfour Declaration and the disastrous consequences it was bound to entail. The recognition of the Declaration by the Allied Powers was explained by the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and by the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country. This explanation involves flimsy and completely unjustifiable claims contradictory to all the principles of Right and Logic and of a nature, as already stated, to lead at any moment to the destruction of the international social structure.

The terms of the Mandate were so couched as to correspond with the purport of the Balfour Declaration and with the biased manner in which the Allies chose to interpret the stipulations of Article XXII of the League Covenant, as can be clearly seen from the text of the following articles of the Mandate.

Article I.

The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

Article II.

The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

Article III.

The Mandatory shall, as far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

Article IV.

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognized as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interested of the Jewish population in Palestine, and subject always to the control of the Administration, to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate shall be recognized as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty’s Government to secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

Article VI.

The administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage in cooperation with the Jewish agency referred in Article IV, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

Article VII.

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship who take their permanent residence in Palestine.

Article XI.

The Administration of Palestine shall take all necessary measures to safeguard the interests of the community in connection with the development of the country, and subject to any international obligations accepted by the Mandatory, shall have full power to provide for public ownership or control of any of the national resources of the country or of the public works, services and utilities established or be established therein. It shall introduce a land system appropriate to the needs of the country, having among other things, to the desirability of promoting the close settlement and intensive cultivation of the land.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish Agency mentioned in Article IV to construct or operate upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilized by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.

M.Y.K.

The light – January 16, 1948