PALESTINE MANDATE

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 284, 27 August 1930, Page 11

PALESTINE MANDATE

Last Year’s Disorders COMMISSION’S REPORT British Reply to Criticisms British Wireless. Rugby, August 25. The disturbances in Palestine in August and September of last year are the subject of comments in the general report of the Permanent Mandates Commission to the Council of tiie League of Nations, which was published in Geneva this morning. The report contains criticisms of the Mandatory Power respecting its policy during the past five years, and these are dealt with in a memorandum by the British Government, which has been published simultaneously with the report.

The latter document, analysing the report, says that it is divided into three parts. The first contains a commentary on the nature of the outbreak and on the attitude and conduct of the Mandatory Power before the outbreak. The second deals with the steps taken by the Mandatory Power to restore and maintain order. The third deals with future policy. Measures to Restore Order. As regards the second and third parts the British Government notes with satisfaction that the measures taken by it to restore and maintain order in Palestine last August appear to have met with the tacit, approval of the Mandates Commission. The Government is also glad to note that the Commission considers that the statement of its accredited representative regarding the suspension of certain immigration permits should dispel the fears which have been expressed in Jewish circles as to the Mandatory Power’s inclination to discharge in full its obligations to encourage Jewish immigration and to ensure the establishment of a Jewish National Home under the conditions stipulated in the mandate. It is also noted that the Commission appeared disposed to acquit the British Government of any charge of failure in its obligations or its immediate duties in regard to the establishment of a regime of self-government in Palestine.

In the first part of the report, however, it is observed that numerous and, in some cases, somewhat serious criticisms are levelled against the Mandatory Power in respect of its policy during the past five years. It is argued that a more active policy on the part of the British Government in promoting the interests of the Arabs in the social and economic spheres and in bringing the two sections of the population, Jewish and Arab, into close association would have blunted the edge of antagonism. Such argument fails to take account of the paramount Importance hitherto attached by the Arab leaders to the political issue, and it ignores the fact that the demands of the Arabs have always been for a particular form of representation which would be incompatible with the execution of the mandate. Repeated offers of the British Government to associate Arabs and Jews in a form of representative Government which would be compatible with its mandatory obligations have always been rejected by the Arab leaders. Difficulties Faced. The difficulties created for the Mandatory Power by this attitude on the part of the Arabs seem to be inadequately appreciated by the Commission. Moreover, the British Government desires to emphasise the fact that the obligation imposed on it by a mandate of complex character that the mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under, such political administrative and economic conditions as will secure. (1) The establishment of a Jewish national home as laid down in the preamble; and (2) the development of self-governing institutions and also for the. , s . ate^ ua p d the civil and religious rights of all. the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race or religion.;’ • . p Nevertheless, m its report the Lorn mission, in summarising the immediate obligation of the mandatory, makes no reference to the important <l“ allfica ‘; 1 ,?“ that the mandatory shall also be responsible for “safeguarding the. civil and religious rights of ail the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race or reK This, in the opinion of the British Government, is the core of the problem. Although the difficult nature of the task is elsewhere to some extent recognised, the bearing of this particular obligation upon the problem of devising measures which would admit of an increasing development of the two races side . by side is largely ignored. Surprise is expressed that the findings of the Shaw Commission on a question of fact, such as the and responsibility for the outbreaks, have been in some cases ignored and in otjierb called in question, while criticisms taken from a Jewish memorandum and , other sources, which reached the .Mandatory Power too late for inclusion in the comment. have been adopted. British Authority Not Attacked. “Whatever may have been, the attitude of Arab leaders, the significant fact remains that during the disturbance no attack was made or attempted on local representatives of British . authority. This fact, which speaks for itself, and which was directly brought to its notice bv the accredited representative, finds no place in the report of the Permanent Mandates Commission.” . . Regarding the conclusions in the report as to the inadequacy of the armed forces at the disposal of the local administration, it is not denied that the forces immediately available were inadequate to deal with sudden and widespread disturbances, but the satisfaction expressed by the Commission in 1925 that the peace and order existing had enabled the Mandatory Power to maintain only a very small armed force in the country is recalled, and it is noted that the Commission, when considering the Palestine report only a month before the outbreak, gave no indication that it regarded those forces as inadequate. The Commission has all along known the composition of the Palestine police force, and the various changes which have taken place in it. If, as stated in the report, it was to be expected that such a force would prove to be unreliable when tested, it is to be regretted that the Commission did not warn the Mandatory Power of the danger which it was incurring. “To maintain order in a territory by a police force from which the inhabitants of that territory are excluded, is a policy which the British Government, in the light of long and varied experience, is unable to view with favour, and is open to objection on political, administrative’ and financial grounds. The Government fools that it was justified in adopting m the case of Palestine a system which hasbeen attended with success in many other territories, and which it still has reason to hope will prove successful in PalesThe memorandum deals at length with the charge that the British Government has failed in its mandatory obligation vis-a-vis the Arabs, by neglect of agriculture and other development, and particulars are given of the measures taken by the Mandatory Power for the development of Palestine's resources in various directions In view of these the British Government fools that it may justly be claimed that it has not been neglectful of it# obligation*.