UNREST IN PALESTINE

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 October 1936, Page 10

UNREST IN PALESTINE

..ANTIPATHY TO ZIONISM Arthur Merton writes in the Londoi “Daily Telegraph”: — Even if the political crisis in Pales tine were to cease to-morrow, matters: have gone so far that it would take fully another year completely to es tablish public security. That is the conclusion I have reach ed after a 1,000-mile motor tour north □if a line drawn through Jaffa, Hebron and Jericho, the area most affected by the present agitation. This toui brought me into close contact with the daily life of the people and gave me an instructive insight into the amazing state of affairs that has reigned during the past four months in the Holy Land. Criticism of the policy followed is universal. Symptoms of agitation were already manifest some months before it came to a head last April. With nineteen years’’experience at its back the administration, it is held, should never have allowed a state of things to develop which a division of the British Army is scarcely adequate Lo handle. On the other hand, the efficiency of the provincial executive is widely recognised. Its members, of marked capacity, compare most favourably with their colleagues of the AngloSudan. Rarely, however, is account taken of their views, though they are car more in touch with realities than the Secretariat planted on its Olympian heights. The great weakness of the central political administration is, indeed, its lack of contact with Arab psychology tnd Arab reactions. The Arab community has ever been lominated by the rivalry of two inluential families, the Hussein is and he Nashahibis. The Husseinis gain’d a great political advantage when hey acquired the Muftiship. About .he same time the Government be;an to support the Nashashibi famly. whose head, Ragheb Bey, was for ong Mayor of Jerusalem. Through lim they maintained close contact vith Arab feeling and an effective jounterpoise to the. activities of the ilufti, who for years has been a disurbing factor in the situation. Suddenly the administration Iropped Ragheb Bey. This led to his lefeat at the last municipal elections. 1 rapprochement between the two amilies followed. The formation of he Higher Arab Committee and the übsequent hardening in the Arab atitude were the result. The situation hows the need for 4'bureau directly ependent from the High Commissionr, with an influential Arab of experince attached, who will have his fingr on the Arab pulse and prevent the i{stakes which have conduced to the resent parlous position. The controversy now raging is not j much one of Moslem versus Jew s of Arab versus Zionist. The Arabs of Palestine comprise hristians as ■well as Moslems. Both lements are as antagonistic to the ionists—that is, the colonists who ive come in under the terms of the al four Declaration —as they are wellIsposed -towards the pre-war Jewish ittlers. Anyone studying the question must j . struck by the amicable relations cisting between .most of the colonies (ministered by the PICA (the Palesne Jewish Colonisation Association, hich before the war took over the ittlements founded by Baron Edund de Rothschild) and Hie Arab immunities in their vicinity. If the ist-war colonies established by the iwish National Fund had only been in on the same lines and, like the CA settlements, gave employment Arab labour instead of excluding I but Jewish workers, fertile terrain >uld not have been created for the opaganda of leaders who, for self-

interested motives, promoted the agitation. The good that Jewish colonisation has done is undeniable. Palestine under the Turk had been a poor country. Its inhabitants had never been capable of any development work. It needed the infusion of fresh vigorous blood, like that of the Jew, to give the necessary impetus. DEVELOPMENT WAS INEVITABLE The Arabs protest that they never wanted all this development. They would have been content, they say, to carry on as they have done hitherto. Obviously, however, they could not have withstood the pressure of development in adjacent countries. If it had not been Jewish it would certainly have been other foreign capitalists who would have brought the country into line with modern progress. Thanks to Jewist enterprise the country is making enormous strides not only in agriculture but also in industry. There can now be no turning back. Jewish enterprise must continue to play its part in the development of Palestine. The Arab contention that further economic future of the country is a fallacy. Large tracts still await development and can provide occupation for considerable additions to the present population. It should be pointed out that, in calculating the area available for settlers, grazing lands are always excluded. On the other hand, in dealing with the population figures, no deduction seems ever to be made in respect of the element occupied in pastoral activities. Yet this element is no inconsiderable portion of the total population. Further inquiry reveals the falsity of the land-sale outcry. Many who clamour for the prohibition of landsales to Jews have already disposed of most of their holdings to Jewish purchasers. Others are in daily negotiation behind the scenes for the similar disposal of their land. Of the fund specially set aside to assist the large number of Arabs who, it was alleged, had been dispossessed, it has been found necessary to utilise only a fraction.

The Zionist demand that immigration should continue at its present rate is likewise inacceptable. 'The rate has gradually been speeded up until in 1935 Jewish immigrants exceeded 60,000. This represents roughly an increase of-20 per cent, in the Jewish population, which from 175,000 in 1931 rose to an estimated 375,000 in 1935. At this rate Palestine would soon have a Jewish majority. This would react on the position of the Arabs and so would be contrary to the spirit of the Mandate.

Both Zionists and Arabs are actuated by fear. The Zionists want rapid and continuous immigration because they fear at any moment an even 1 more serious Arab onslaught than occurred in 1929. The Arabs threaten the Jews because they fear their presence will cause them to become a minority. Towards the widespread conviction among the Arabs that Jewish immigration spells Jewish domination the statements of leading Zionists and of the representatives in Palestine of the Zionist Executive at the outset of the British Occupation have greatly contributed.

Amongst impressions of my first visit in 1918 there stands out the memory of the activities of the Zionists; they openly proclaimed the intention of Zionism to dominate the country. They browbeat officials who were not prepared to grant their exaggerated requests. Leaders from Europe tried to counteract the unfortunate impression they made, but it was too late. Their provocative attitude had crystallised the uneasiness which the Bal-

four Declarations, so inadequately explained to the Arabs, had created in their minds. Deliberate misleading by Arab leaders, provacative Zionist

. tactics and vacillation in British policy have combined to produce the ani tagonism and distrust prevailing to- . day among the Arab masses. ARAB SUSPICIONS The fears of the Jews would disappear if the fears of the Arabs were dissipated. Every effort should therefore be concentrated on removing the mistaken apprehensions of the latter. Immigration will, of course, have to continue, but under far stricter conditions, both as regards numbers and categories. Much greater account will also have to be taken of capitalist, and particullarly illegal, immigrants. A definite ratio will also have to be established between Arab and Jew- ( ish population, so as to maintain the Arab majority position. As regards land sales, some satisfaction would be brought by the enactment of a measure to safeguard homesteads on the lines of the Egyptian law, which preserves to every land-owner an area of five feddans that cannot in any circumstances be alienated, and if future sales could be made conditional on Arab labour being employed, as on the PICA lands and in the industrial concessions on the Dead Sea, a just grievance of the Arabs would be removed. Arab and Jew will clearly have to lie henceforward side by side in Palestine. The interests of both are consequently irrevocably linked with the welfare of that country. In the opinion of many qualified to judge, the sole solution of the problem lies, therefore, in the situation being dealt with entirely from the point of view of what is best for Palestine as a whole, irrespective of promises made or rights accrued. It should not be difficult for British statesmanship lo devise some formula, for guaranteeing, in a manner removing its apprehensions, the majority position of the Arab community, while providing further scope for Jewish enterprise. If it be true that the Jews do not aim at making Palestine a Jewish State, then they could have no objection to contributing towards a consummation for which, as for the National Home, the Mandate makes explicit provision. Thus could be introduced that spirit of co-operation between the two communities which is so essential to the welfare of each, and thus would be paved the way for , collaboration in the Legislative Council, at which both look askance at ( present. But it is of the very essence of success that whatever policy is formulat- 1 ed be adhered to, and that no pressure ’ from without be allowed to deflect the administration from its faithful exe- 1 cution. It is basically because of the < vacillation in policy that a “situation” 1 exists to-day in Palestine. i