Palestine Included in Arab Independent State Promise?

Northern Advocate, 23 March 1939, Page 7

Palestine Included in Arab Independent State Promise?

-COMMITTEE UNDECIDED

(Received 11 a.m.)

LONDON, March 23,

■JpHE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE SET UP BY THE BRITISH AND

ARAB DELEGATIONS TO THE PALESTINE CONFERENCE TO CONSIDER THE McMAHON CORRESPONDENCE WAS PUBLISHED TODAY AS A WHITE PAPER.

The committee cites the contention of the two sides regarding the meaning of the correspondence. It then says: “Both the Arab and the British representatives have tried—as they hope with success—to understand the point of view of the other. But they have not been able to reach an agreement upon the interpretation of the correspondence.

“The British representatives, however, informed the Arabs that the

which its exclusion was expressed

Arab contentions, as explained to the committee, regarding the interpretation of the correspondence, especially their contentions relating to the meaning of the phrase ‘the portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, land and homes, and Aleppo,’ have greater force than appeared hitherto.

was not so specific and unmistakable as it was thought to be at the time.”

Opinion of Committee.

The committee also considered other documents and events to see what light they had on the meaning or intention of the correspondence and, making clear that it is beyond the committee’s scope to pronounce on the proper interpretation of these various statements, it concludes its report as follows;—

British Contention

“Furthermore, the British representatives informed the Arabs that they agreed that Palestine was included in the area claimed by the Sharif of Mecca in his letter of July 14, 1915, and that, unless Palestine was excluded from that area later in the correspondence, it must be regarded as having been included in the area which Britain was to recognise, and to. support the independence of the Arabs. “They maintain that on the proper construction of the correspondence Palestine was, in fact, excluded. However, they agree that the language in

The opinion of the committee on these statements is that Britain is not free to dispose of Palestine without regard for the wishes and interests of the inhabitants of Palestine, and these statements must all be taken into account in' any attempt to establish the responsibilities which, upon any interpretation of the correspondence, Britain has incurred, towards those inhabitants as a result of the correspondence.”