The Daily News WEDNESDÀY FEBRUARY 1931. THE PALESTINE MANDATE.

Taranaki Daily News, 18 February 1931, Page 6

The Daily News WEDNESDÀY FEBRUARY 1931. THE PALESTINE MANDATE.

Every country holding a League of Nations mandate over ex-enemy territory is bound in honour to administer that territory fairly, ju&tly, and, in-so-far as is possible, With a policy consistent With the obligations set forth in the terms of tfie mandate. Particularly is this the case in regard to territory placed under the administration Of Britain or any unit of the British Empire. New Zealand has not been free from criticism by Socialists and others regarding the administration of Western Samoa, but not to the same extent as Britain as the holder of the mandate over Palestine, where the conflicting interests of Jews and Arabs have been the cause of considerable trouble as well as controversy. The British Prime Minister does not appear to have been in any hurry to make an official reply to the pi'otests of the president of the Jewish Agency, but has at last promulgated what is described as a full statement of the policy of the Government in Palestine. He starts with the assertion that the White Paper of 1930, which was placed in the foreground of his speech in the House of Commons in April of last year, endorsed the White Paper of 1929, both these official records being accepted by the Jewish Agency, while in his speech he emphasised the intention of the Government to administer Palestine ’“in accordance Wilk the terms of the mandate as approved by the Council of' the League of Nations.” While admitting that in carrying out the terms of a mamdate the mandatory Power cannot ignore the existence of differing interests and viewpoints, All’- MacDonald contends that such differences are not iii themselves irreconcilable, but tht'y can only be reconciled if there be a proper realisation that the full solution of the problems, depends, so far as Palestine is concerned, oii an understanding between the Jews and the Arabs. Such a contention js so obviously sound that it amounts to an axiom, yet it is manifestly almost impossible to imagine a state of affairs wherein the necessary understanding can be brought* about so as to create

that' harmony which can aljne enable a satisfactory administration to exist. It was unfortunate in the first instance that the Jews were upheld in some quarters in their hopes of having Jerusalem and the greater part of Palestine under control on their behalf, but though in theory their Claim was natural the claims of the Arabs for full recognition could not be ignored. Without protection from these Arabs the Jews, would certainly have been in a sorry plight, and, knowing this, their policy should have been framed witlx the intent to avoid all occasion for open hostility, relying upon the mandatory for justice to all. They were fully cognisant of the warlike character of the Arabs and of theii* own impotence to defend themselves, so that they were morally bound to act with extraordinary discretion if they desired their influence to expand with, a view to their ultimate control of what was onee their own country. According to Mr. MacDonald the Jewish Agency has all along given willing co-operation in carrying out the policy in the mandate, while the constructive work done by the Jewish people in Palestine has had beneficial effects on the development and well-being of the country as a whole. Testimony of this kind is very satisfactory, but there have been clashes of interest between the two races, and they demonstrate all too clearly how difficult the task of governing the country must be to Britain as the holder of the mandate. One of the gt'ave problems Britain has had to encounter is that of Arab settlement. It is stated that while the Government feels under an obligation to facilitate the settlement of landless Arabs displaced owing to their holdings passing into Jewish hands, yet the recognition of such an obligation in no way detracts from the larger, purposes of development, which the Government regards as the most effectual means of furthering the establishment of a national home for the Jews. It might be thought that a problem of that kind was particularly ehsy to solve. It is, however, surrounded by numerous difficulties, and even if the extreme course were taken of dividing the country into two separate areas, one for the Jews, and the other for the Arabs, there would still remain the danger of clashes between these two races. Whatever may be the result of the inquiry as to what State and other lands are or can be made available for close settlement by the Jeivs, there appears to be little, if any, possibility of avoiding friction' As matters stand at present any permanent settlement of outstanding troubles seems unlikely. Inevitably the holder of the Palestine mandate must by force or persuasion endeavour to administer the country justly and firmly- It is by no meails an enviable task, nevertheless it must be carried out without x fear or favour.