JEWS AND ARABS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24236, 1 March 1940, Page 8

JEWS AND ARABS

TRANSFER OF LAND PROBLEM IN PALESTINE REGULATIONS ANNOUNCED (British Official Wireless) (United Press Association) (By Electric TelF<n - a;:)h--Copyright) RUGBY, Feb. 28. The steps taken by the Government to prevent the creation of a “ landless Arab ” problem in Palestine were announced to-day by the publication of land transfer regulations in the form of a White Paper. The regulations provide for the delimitation of zones in which land sales by Arabs to Jews should, for the present at least, be restricted, prohibited, or remain free. Land sales are not to be stopped entirely, and the High Commissioner has power to modify the boundaries or proposed areas if it is considered necessary. In an explanatory memorandum accompanying the regulations sent to the League of Nations for circulation among members the British Government points out that the mandatory is charged with the* duty of facilitating immigration and encouraging close settlement by Jews on the land. The obligation is qualified by the requirement that the administration should ensure that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced. The memorandum continues that it would be dangerous to ignore any longer the clear warnings from a series of important commissions as to the serious and growing congestion of Arab population in certain areas, and states that if land sales are restricted there is likely to arise a “ landless Arab ” problem of such dimensions that it would be extremely difficult to find a solution to it. In a letter to the League secretary the British Government states that authorisation of the regulations without previous discussion by the League Council is in no way inconsistent with the provisions of the mandate. Government’s Obligations Replying in the House of Commons to criticism of the method adopted, the Secretary for the Colonies, Mr Malcolm MacDonald, said two courses were open to the British Government, the first being to publish draft regulations suspending them till the League Council had time to consider them, This the Government would have preferred, but practical considerations made it undesirable to do so. The alternative adopted, he contended, in no way ignored the League Council, and if any member desired a meeting to discuss the regulations or had any views to express the Government was bound to give them its most serious attention. The Government realised that every party was divided on this matter, and any course adopted would be attended by disadvantages. The Government had decided that the course followed had the least disadvantages and recognised the Government’s obligations to the League and other bodies. Sir Archibald Sinclair (Lib.), stating that in the opinion of an important authority the Government’s action was contrary to the terms of the mandate, asked whether it would not have been better to postpone the issue even for two more months until the League Council had had an opportunity of considering the regulations. Major Cazalet (Con.) asked whether it was necessary to introduce a measure which “ will exasperate Jewish opinion, not only throughout Palestine, but the whole world, when for the first time in six years there is peace in Palestine.” Mr MacDonald, answering Sir Archibald Sinclair, said the question raised by him had been considered by the Government before deciding on the action taken, and replying to Major Cazalet, he said: “ I know the whole House will recognise the way ih which both communities in Palestine have co-operated with the Government, and the House will pay tribute to the way the communities have worked together in Palestine. I would say, however, it is because failure to introduce measures of control of land transfer in Palestine any longer might prejudice that peace that we decided to follow this procedure.” Mr C. R. Attlee (Lab.) stated that he proposed to introduce a motion on the subject for debate.