BRITISH POLICY ON PALESTINE

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25705, 18 January 1949, Page 7

BRITISH POLICY ON PALESTINE

“Some Ministers Not Enthusiastic”

CRITICISMS OF MR BEVIN (N.Z. Press Associatiqn—-Copyright) (Rec. 9 p.m.) LONDON, January 17. “Critics within the British Labour Party itself are starting to demand that Mr Ernest Bevin should resign as Foreign Secretary over the Palestine issue,” says the political correspondent of the “Daily Express." “Although there is no split in the Cabinet, it is believed that some Ministers are not at all enthusiastic about Mr Revin’s Palestine policy.” The political correspondent of the “Daily Telegraph” says: “There is a well-founded belief that the Chancellor qf the Exchequer (Sir Stafford Cripps) has insisted on an all-out effort to concert British policy with that of the United States to restore peace to the Middle East. “Mr Beyin’s most probable line of defence appears to be that the Israeli Government is allowing itself tp be used as an agent of Soviet policy. He will be required to substantiate this and also to show that his own policy is not playing into the hands of those elements in Israel most sympathetic to Russia.”

“Parliament will reassemble at Westminster to-morrow, and the sub-, ject uppermost in the minds of members will be Palestine,” gays the special correspondent of the New Zealand Press Association. ‘‘The Foreign Secretary, it is generally expected, will be under fire from all sides of the House and a demand will be made for either the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary to state in the plainest language what are the primary objectives of British pqlicy in the Middle East, “Criticism is expected to come from within the Labour Party, notably perhaps from Mr R. H. S- Crossman, who has recently been visiting PalestineHe has said that he is appalled by the gulf which divides even the best in Tel Aviv and in Whitehall.

“A good deal of criticism of Mr Bevin and the ‘Bevin policy’ was •aired in British newspapers last week. It came from all quarters, includng the Communist ‘Daily Worker which has an implacable hatred for th§ Foreign Secretary and has reported that a ‘Bevin must go’ demand is growing. A s emphasised in official circles the Government’s policy Mr Beyin has been pursuing, ana that therefore it is the ment’s responsibility. For this reason if for no other, it is most unlikely that the Foreign Secretary’s critics will have the satisfaction of seeing him resign over Palestine "It is likely that Mr R. A. Eden may add to h;s recent criticisms of Government policy as a last contribution to the Parliamentary debate before he leaves on his trip to Canada. New Zealand, and Australia 'on January 20."

Command of Indian Army General Sir Francis Bucher, the British Com-mander-in-chief of the Indian Army, to-day handed over office to General K. M. Cariappa, says Reuter’s correspondent in New Delhi. General Bucher will continue for a short period with the Indian Army as an officer on special duty. He will write a report on the Indian Arihy.—London, January 16.