|
1. In view of the dissolution of the
League of Nations and of the statement of the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs in the House of Commons on the
13th November, 1945, we assume that the British Government
will in the near future prepare a draft Trusteeship
Agreement for eventual submission to the United Nations, and
that this Agreement will include the terms under which
Palestine will be administered. We do not propose to refer
to the existing
Mandate in detail; it is set out in
Appendix VI.
2. Our views on future immigration policy
are contained in
Recommendation No. 6 and in the Comments thereunder, and
we have nothing to add to them.
3. With regard to the future government
of Palestine, we have reviewed the question of a solution by
partition.
The Peel Commission stated (Chapter XX,
paragraph 19): "Manifestly the problem cannot be solved by
giving either the Arabs or the Jews all they want. The
answer to the question 'which of them in the end will govern
Palestine ?' must surely be 'Neither."' That is the view
which we also have formed. They recommended the termination
of the
Mandate, the partition of the country between the Arabs
and the Jews (excepting the Holy Places) and the setting up
of two independent States in treaty relations with Great
Britain. These recommendations were rejected by the Arabs
and they did not meet with the complete approval of the
Jews. They were adopted in the first instance by the
Government of Great Britain, but subsequently a technical
Commission was sent to Palestine to ascertain facts and to
consider in detail the practical possibilities of a scheme
of partition. As a result of the Partition Commission's
Report, His Majesty's Government announced their conclusion
that the examination by the Commission had shown that the
political, administrative and financial difficulties
involved in the proposal to create independent Arab and
Jewish States inside Palestine were so great that the
solution of the problem was impracticable. The proposal
accordingly fell to the ground, and His Majesty's Government
continued their responsibility for the government of the
whole of Palestine.
We have considered the matter anew and we
have heard the views of various witnesses of great
experience. Partition has an appeal at first sight as giving
a prospect of early independence and self-government to Jews
and Arabs, but in our view no partition would have any
chance unless it was basically acceptable to Jews and Arabs,
and there is no sign of that today. We are accordingly
unable to recommend partition as the solution.
4. Palestine is a country unlike any
other. It is not merely a place in which Arabs and Jews
live. Millions of people throughout the world take a fervent
interest in Palestine and in its Holy Places and are deeply
grieved by the thought that it has been the seat of trouble
for so long and by the fear that it may well become the
cockpit of another war. Lord Milner in 1923, having declared
himself a strong supporter of pro-Arab policy, said:
"Palestine can never be regarded as a
country on the same footing as the other Arab countries. You
cannot ignore all history and tradition in the matter. You
cannot ignore the fact that this is the cradle of two of the
great religions of the world. It is a sacred land to the
Arabs, but it is also a sacred land to the Jews and the
Christian; and the future of Palestine cannot possibly be
left to be determined by the temporary impressions and
feelings of the Arab majority in the country of the present
day."
The Peel Commission having cited those
words wrote (Chapter II, paragraph 51): "The case stated by
Lord Milner against an Arab control of Palestine applies
equally to a Jewish control." That expresses our view
absolutely.
Efforts have been made from time to time
to encourage both Arabs and Jews to take part in the
Government of the country but these efforts have failed
through mutual antagonism; perhaps they might have been
pursued further. It is not the case of a backward people
going through a period of tutelage; the issue lies between
Jews and Arabs.
We believe this can only be met by
acceptance of the principle that there shall be no
domination of the one by the other, that Palestine shall be
neither an Arab nor a Jewish State. The setting up of
self-governing institutions is dependent on the will to work
together on the part of Jews and Arabs. There has been
little sign of that in recent years and yet we hope a change
may take place if; and when the fear of dominance is
removed. We do not think that any Rood purpose would be
served by our going into further detail, once the will to
work together appears, representatives of both-sides will be
of help in framing a constitution; until that happens no
step can be taken.
Meantime Palestine must remain under some
form of Mandate or Trusteeship. We have suggested elsewhere
in our Report that much can be done to encourage general
advancement by the improvement of educational facilities and
measures directed to narrowing the social and economic
disparities. We feel, too, that it should be possible to
draw the communities closer together, and foster a popular
interest in self-government at the local level. Especially
in the country districts, a spirit of good neighborliness
exists among the common people, Arabs and Jews, despite the
general state of political tension in the country. Practical
cooperation is evident in day-to-day affairs. We suggest
that local administrative areas might be formed, some purely
Arab or Jewish in composition, but some of mixed population
where a corporate sense of civic responsibility can be
encouraged and a new beginning made in the development of
self-government.
5. Land questions have been the cause of
much friction and dispute between Jews and Arabs. V7e are
opposed to legislation and practices which discriminate
against either, and for the reasons already given we
recommend the rescission and replacement of the Land
Transfers Regulations of 1940 and the prohibition of
restrictions limiting employment on certain lands to members
of one race, community or creed.
We are aware of the criticisms of the
existing Land Ordinances and we do not wish it to be thought
that we consider that they afford adequate protection to the
Arab small-owners and tenants. In our opinion it should be
possible to devise Ordinances furnishing proper protection
to such Arabs no matter in what part of Palestine they may
reside.
6. We have already stated that the
100,000 certificates for Palestine, the immediate
authorization of which we recommend, will provide for only a
comparatively small proportion of the total number of Jewish
refugees in Europe. The general problem of refugees must, we
feel, be dealt with by the United Nations. In our considered
opinion it is a matter for regret that this distressing
problem has not been dealt with before this time. True the
great Powers have had many problems facing them and they
have dealt with many displaced persons, but the fact remains
that Jews and others have remained in camps or centers for
very many months.
We observe that at a recent meeting of
the General Assembly of the United Nations the problem of
displaced persons and refugees of all categories was
recognized to be one of immediate urgency, and it was
referred to the Economic and Social Council which has since
established a special Committee for its consideration.
Without presuming to advise that Committee, and with no
desire to go beyond our Terms of Reference, we cannot but
observe that international bodies already established for
dealing with refugee problems have been unable, through
insufficiency of financial resources or other reasons, to
fulfill the hopes placed in them at the time of their
formation. The world looks forward, we believe, to the birth
of a truly effective agency of international collaboration
in the humanitarian task of migration and resettlement.
We make Grateful acknowledgement of our
deep indebtedness to the civil and military officers of our
two Governments. They have given us willing and able
assistance throughout our long journeyings and made it
possible for us to complete the report within the period
allotted.
Our staff listed in the Appendix has
worked admirably and efficiently under pressure and often in
difficult circumstances.
Finally, we desire to tender our sincere
thanks to our efficient Secretaries, H. G. Vincent, L. L.
Rood, H. Beeley, and E. M. Wilson.
Signed at Lausanne, Switzerland, on April
20, 1946.
JOSEPH C. HUTCHESON, American Chairman
JOHN E. SINGLETON, British Chairman.
FRANK AYDELOTTE (US)
FRANK W. BUXTON (US)
W. F. CRICK (UK)
R. H. S. CROSSMAN (UK)
BARTLEY C. CRUM (US)
FREDERICK LEGGETT (UK)
R. E. MANNINGHAM-BULLER (UK)
JAMES G. McDonald (US)
MORRISON (UK)
WILLIAM PHILIPS (US)
|
LESLIE L. ROOD,
American Secretary.
|
H. G. VINCENT,
British Secretary.
|
|
EVAN M. WILSON,
American Secretary.
|
H. BEELEY, |
|