SELF-GOVERNMENT IN PALESTINE
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. The most suitable length is that of one of our " News of the Week " paragraphs. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym.—Ed. THE SrEcTaTon.] [To the Editor of TOE SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—It seems to have been completely ignored by those who attack the policy of the Government in regard to the creation of a Legislative Council in Palestine that its action is dictated by a plain obligation imposed by the mandate itself and by the Covenant of the League of Nations. It is quite erroneous to argue the matter as if the mandate provided primarily for the creation of a Jewish National Home, and secondarily, for the development of self-governing institutions. In that case no doubt the fact that the Arabs as members of the Council may show hostility to Jewish immigration might be a relevant point to consider in deciding whether or not to set up a Coun- cil, even one without power to hamper the work of immigration.
But the position is quite different. The terms of the man- date have a double purpose. They represent an effort to carry out the declaration of 1917 regarding the Jewish Home and the principle of Article 22 of the League Covenant, which contemplates the rendering of assistance to former Turkish territories until they can stand alone. Hence the mandate places on a footing of equality the establishment of the National Home and the development of self-governing institutions, and the mandatory cannot honourably prefer one purpose to the other, but must take the necessary steps to render both pos- sible. No doubt this is hard, but that is no reason for shirking a plain duty.
As to the meaning of the mandate there can be no question, because the double obligation was elaborately provided for in the Order in Council issued in 1922 immediately after the final adjustment of the terms of the mandate. That Order rests on the responsibility of Mr. Churchill, as Secretary of State for the Colonies, and of Sir Herbert Samuel, whose unrivalled authority as High Commissioner renders his participation in the policy decisive. At a time when Arab opinion was even more bitterly opposed to Jewish immigration than it now is, it was felt by these two statesmen essential to honour the obliga- tion of developing self-governing institutions by setting up a Legislative Council, with eight elected Arabs as against two elected Jews as members. It was only the folly of the Arabs which prevented the scheme taking effect.
The refusal of the Arabs to work the constitution doubtless entitled the British Government to postpone action until it could be assured of co-operation. The High Commissioner now advocates the creation of a Council which the Arabs desire and to which they are clearly entitled. The powers of the Council are so effectively limited that it cannot in the slightest degree hamper the carrying out of the work of immi- gration. On it there will be only 11 Arabs out of 28 members, of whom 7 will be Jews, though the Jewish population: is only 320,000 as against 825,000 Moslems. It is an anomaly of the most remarkable kind that Palestine should so long have been legislated for by the High Commissioner alone. It is instruc- tive to contrast the cate of Trans-Jordan, which has a legisla- ture of 16 elected members as against six official members, while the promise of the gradual development of self-governing institutions to India has resulted in the grant of responsible government to the provinces.
Mr. Churchill, who seems to have forgotten what he did in 1922, seeks to exploit the just indignation felt at the treatment of Jews in Germany to prevent the carrying out of a clear obligation to the Arabs of Palestine, and to be prepared to press Mr. Thomas to refuse to accept the advice of the man on the spot, who has the full burden of a delicate and difficult task. But it is immoral to do wrong to Arabs because Ger- many does wrong to the Jews, and the proper outlet for the natural sympathy felt with the Jews is the action already taken by the British Government in facilitating an enormous increase in the rate of Jewish immigration, even at the risk of increasing the danger of undermining the economic position of the Arabs. The High Commissioner has shown the utmost readiness to fulfil the mandate to establish a Jewish Home ; he cannot in common justice be forbidden to promote, even on a most modest scale, the development of self-governing
Previous page
