Mr. Bevin Continues Criticism

Chronicle (Levin), 27 February 1947, Page 5

Mr. Bevin Continues Criticism

Press Assn.

3y Telegraph .

-Copyright

Received Thursday, 10.30 a.m. LONDON, Feb. 26. In the House of Commons today, Mr. Bevin, continued his criticism A American interference in Pales--ine. Alr. Bevin said he was critieised in .he United States for not uccepting tlie Anglo-American Committe's report, but .he llnited States aecepted none of the ■•eport except the point about the ad.lission of 100,000 iniinigrunls. if it •vas only a humanitarian question of idmitting 100,000, he believed the Arabs could be persuaded to agree, and i settlement eonld be found, but' the Jewish Agency talked in tertns'of niil lions. Asked what he meant by a national .lorne, Mr. Bevin repiied that there was ui understanding on the Arabs' part .hat. tlie .Jews who niigrated to Palesdne would liave liberty and freedoni, and be equal eili/.eiis witliin the State. Mr. Bevin said the Arabs luul agreed that the Jews sliould have their own language, universities and religion — everything. If otlier countries who persecuted tlie Jews had given them that there never would have been any probleni. The Jews had rejected Britain's last plan because it proposed a consultation with the Arabs. Tlie British Governinent could not accept the position of adniitting people mto the country witliout even consulting representatives ot the people living there. It was too late to accept the sugges lion repeatedly put by tlie members ot Ihe House of Lords and the House of Coinnions that Britain sliould try to es tablish Palestine as a Dominion. Mr. Bevin, referring to the jilatL to create Jewish and Arab municipalities, said it was soinetinies assuined that ali the Jews in Palestine were on the land. That was not true. Tliey lived in urban areas. The Jews and Arabs, if given a chance and if politicul dillieul ties were removed could develop a Ktaic of which they could be proud. Britain had ainied at independence, and if it had not been Palestine they were dealing with the (loverneniont 's policy would have succeeded. Mr. Bevin said that partition would mean that they would have ten times the present row in trying to fix frontiers. Britain had carried out the original basis of the mandate but was unable to meet the immigration demands under the mandate, accentuated by German persecution. The moral consciences of international organisations failed to gxapple with the whole problem of displaced persons. He pleaded with Ajperica to take thousands but nobody wanted them. "One great statesman in the British Commonwealth — I will not mention names — lectured me on the subject," Mr. Bevin added. "I said 'how many will you take? I will get a ship and send them tomorrow,' but he would not take one." Mr. Bevin said he was inquiring whetker United Nations couhl expedite the hearing of Ihe PyJesline problem. "I would prefer even novv rather that it sliould go to United Nations than that Britain sliould be, allowed to (leal with the problem on the hurnanitarian basis, create an independent stale in Pale'stine and end this c.entury-old eonfliet. ' ' Afr. Stanlev said that the Opposition did not objeet to the referring of tlie problem to United Nations but thouglit that it should have beeri done last October. Apparently Britain was not to ex press to United Nations any clioice of possible c'ourses after United Nations discussed the matter. He added that Britain, failing a United Nation agree ment upon a policy acceptabie to her, sliould surrendel- ihe mandate and leave it to United Nations to appoint a suctiessor and frame a policy. Huch a de risiori by Britain niight considerably iffect the deliberations.