Sections
About
Back
Document

Statement by the Council of the Arab League on the Anglo-American Committee's Report on Palestine

Statement by the Council of the Arab League

on the Anglo-American Committee's Report on Palestine

Bludan, 12 June 1946

I. It appeared, after the appointment of the Committee, that a certain number of its members were partial to the Zionists, since they had in fact been inveterate Zionist propagandists before their appointment to the Committee.

2. It has been discovered that the Committee, or at least some of its members, had come in order to sanction a policy which had been designed in advance, such as its approval of the immigration of a hundred thousand (Jews) this year neither more nor less this being the figure which had been suggested by Mr. Truman, President of the United States. This has been particularly demonstrated by the lack of (any) logical connection between the facts which the Committee stated (in its report) and the recommendations which it made (therein).

3. It has become clear that the Committee, due to its hasty study, has not (been able to) get to the root of some of the basic points about the prevailing position in Palestine; nor has it paid due regard to these (points), (in the same way) as it has not paid due consideration to the emergence of Arab nationalism and its right to life and prosperity. Likewise, it has not duly recognized the right of the Arab League to organize regional relations and interests. For, else, how could (the Committee) make such recommendations in respect to Palestine when it was well aware that these (recommendations) were incompatible with the interest of every State Member of the Arab League.

4. It has become clear that the Committee has not been realistic in its recommendations; instead, it was swept (along) by emotional currents before studying the economic, military and administrative problems arising out of these recommendations. It has based its recommendations on economic projects which are founded on an un-realizable Arab-Zionist cooperation, and has also recommended immigration before investigating its feasibility or its (possible) effect on the life of the Arabs and their natural and legitimate rights.

5. It is a fact that the Committee repeatedly contradicts itself, particularly in respect to principles and fundamentals. For, else, how could the Committee claim that it had adhered to the principles of modern democracy and those of the United Nations Charter, while at the same time purporting to impose by force a certain policy on a people who have the right, in an age in which Nazism and Fascism have been defeated, to enjoy democratic life and to determine by themselves their own political future.

COMMENTS ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation No. 1:

It is a matter for surprise and bewilderment that the first part of the first recommendation (of the Committee) should state that, according to the information ascertained by the Committee, no fundamental assistance is expected from any country other than Palestine for finding a home for the Jews who desire to leave Europe. For (after all) there are in the various countries of the world, particularly in the British Empire and the United States, vast areas and ample facilities for giving shelter to any Jew who is desirous of leaving his present place of residence. The refusal of these countries to facilitate the sheltering of these Jews and to carry out what they call a human duty, together with their feigned interest in (these Jews), at a time when they could (give them shelter), only means sacrificing Palestine on the altar of Zionist poli-tical greeds. This is contrary to right and equity and to the claims made by the two States (Britain and the United States) to feel sympathy towards the victims of Nazism and Fascism.

Recommendation No. 2:

One of the strange contradictions of the Committee is (the fact) that, while proposing that immigration permits should be granted to one hundred thousand Jews, it expressly admits that this would be a heavy burden on Palestine, as the den-sity of population in Palestine is very high-336 per (square) mile, except for the barren desert of Beersheba; moreover experts have proved that this ratio, without Jewish immigration, will be higher in fourteen years, and will reach approximately 450 per (square) mile. Remembering that the largest part of the territory of Palestine is mountainous and desert, and that it is poor in industry and in raw materials, it becomes obvious that it will be impossible for Palestine to sustain any more Jewish immigration.

Recommendation No. 3:

The recommendation of the Committee regarding the making of a declaration that Palestine should be neither an Arab nor a Jewish state, that neither the Arabs should dominate the Jews nor the Jews the Arabs, that every constitutional system which may give the majority a ruling power should be suspended, and also (the Committee's) assertion that Palestine is not and can never be a land the possession of which can be claimed by any one people, is highly deprecated. For there is in (all) this an unjust equation in rights and status between the Arabs-whose right in Palestine the Committee admits as being based on prescription which goes back to more than one thousand years ago and which is still an established fact-and the Jews, whose on-ly basis (for claiming Palestine) is a feeble historical connection that has been prac-tically cut off for two thousand years.

These recommendations and statements are also in opposition to everything recognized by mankind and on which the rights and constitutions of states have been established. The bias (of these statements and recommendations) against the Arabs is clearly manifest as it purports to deprive the Arabs of Palestine, the legitimate owners of the country, of a natural right which their brethren in the other Arab countries have obtained.

Recommendation No. 4:

The recommendation of the Committee regarding the continuation of the existing government in Palestine until Arab-Jewish antagonism has vanished, destroys the foundations on which the Mandate system was based. For the Jews are prompted by the idea of obtaining a (Jewish) majority and a Jewish state; the continuation of immigration in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee will not diminish their intransigence. And the Arabs (for their part) are prompted by the idea of (having) to defend themselves and their existence, and will not concede the realization of the wicked Jewish dream.

Recommendation No. 5:

The standard of the Arabs of Palestine with regard to living, culture, economy, industry and agriculture is higher than that of the Arabs in Egypt, Syria and Leba-non, In all these countries there are Jewish communities having a high standard of living, yet no friction has ever taken place between these (communities) and the Arab citizens of these (countries) because of differences in the standard of living. The real basis of the conflict is the imposition by fire and sword, of some Jewish groups of diverse culture and origin, on an Arab country. It should be remembered that the Mandate system has been one of the main reasons for any deficiencies that may be seen in the Arab standard, compared with that of Western Jewish newcomers. For the Mandatory Power has allocated but a very small part, not exceeding 5% of its budget, for education and a similar percentage for health, and a far smaller (amount) for social services. (This it does) while spending about 30% on public security alone and a similar (amount) on a host of foreign employees, interpreters and (various) establishments.

Recommendation No. 6:

In its proposals that the Mandatory Administration should continue to facilitate Jewish immigration in accordance with the principles of the Mandate providing that the rights of the other inhabitants should be respected and protected, the Committee has ignored (the fact) that this condition cannot be fulfilled while immigration is still continued. For harm has already been done as a result of the change in the position of the Arabs, following the report of (the Committee), from a percentage of 87% in 1922 to 69% in 1944. Moreover, the percentage has, due to continuous Jewish immi-gration, decreased after that year (1944) to what might probably be 65%. (The Committee) has also ignored (the fact) that when the British Government decided in its 1939 White Paper to stop immigration it was only prompted by the firm con-viction, itself based on lengthy studies, that Jewish immigration had prejudiced the status and the rights of the Arabs.

Recommendation No. 7:

In its proposal regarding the repeal of the land law of 1940 and its replacement by laws based on freedom of the sale of land, of its rent and its exploitation, regardless of race, sect or belief, together with its recommendation for the protection of small farmers, the Committee has ignored (the fact) that the attempts of the British Govern-ment to protect this class had all failed.

(The Committee has also ignored the fact) that when the (British Government) decided in 1940 to impose restrictions, inadequate though these were, it had been prompted by the firm conviction, itself based on lengthy studies, that the present and future of the Arabs had been jeopardized as a result of continuing to allow Arab land to be transferred to the Jews, and that the duty of the British Government was to stop that danger at the point it had reached

Recommendation No. 8 to No. 10:

…

 

Source: Muhammad Khalil. The Arab States and the Arab League: A Documentary Record. Vol II Beirut: Khayat's, 1962, p 515-18.