IN PALESTINE

Hokitika Guardian, 15 February 1939, Page 5

IN PALESTINE

THE CONFERENCE

JEWISH CASE STATED.

(Per British Wireless.) RUGBY, February 13. ‘ The Palestine conferences were continued to-day. Ragheb Nashashibi was sufficiently recovered from his indisposition to attend, The morning session was devoted to a continuation of the. discussion of the Arab case between the Arab delegates and the British representatives, the Secretary of Stjite for the Colonies (Mr Malcolm MacDonald), Mr R. A. Butler, and the Marquess o£ Dufferin and Ava. Muri Pasha made a long statement on the McMahon correspondence. To-morrow, Amir Faishal and Prince Seif A 1 Hussein will make statements, and this will be followed by a statement by Mr Butler on behalf of Britain. .

The afternoon meeting with the Jewish delegation was occupied with a discussion on Dr Weizmann’s statement on behalf of the Jewish Agency. Rabbi Mr Shertok, and Dr Weizmann took part. In his statement of the Jewish case, Dr Weizmann said that the root of the Jewish problem lay the hopelessness of the Jewish, people. Everywhere a minority, and in many of these, they had preserved their identity because of their attachment to Palestine and of their hope of a return to Zion.

The claim to Palestine had never been abandoned. The Jewish community there had never ceased to exist. In every age group, Jews had worked their way to Palestine; and for the last 60 years active resettlement had been going on. The Balfour Declaration recognised these historic facts, and in the preamble to the Mandate international recognition was given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine, and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.

It was essential that there should be one place in. the world where Jews should not be a fraction, an appendix, or an adjunct to something else—where they should be themselves masters of their own 'destinies. Dr Weizmann criticised the abandonment of the project for a Jewish State, envisaged in the Peel Report, while mentioning the objections of Jews to many features of the scheme. He argued that the Arabs had emerged from the Wat* with four' kingdoms. In so far as the Balfour Declaration had contributed to a victory for the Allies it had also contributed to the liberation of the Arabs.

‘He ’thought )iit not to compare what the Arabs had made of the extraordinary opportunities which had come to them with very little trouble, and what the Jews had made of the chances, vouchsafed to them. The Arab claim that, Palestine was an Arab country 'and (should have an ■Arab national government was not capable of realisation. The Jews already formed one-third of the population, and were responsible for twothirds or more of the economic and cultural activity of Palestine. The Arabs professed to fear Jewish domination, but the 1 jTews did not want to dominate the Arabs. However, they would not allow themselves to be dominated bv them.

He believed sincerely that Jews and Arabs could find a meeting ground beneficial to both,‘but this could only be on the basis of the Mandate implemented in the spirit and the letter, including the largest total Jewish immigration in accordance with economic capacity, and the principle of an active policy of development and effective safeguards against minority status. (