PALESTINE DISPUTE

Hokitika Guardian, 28 August 1930, Page 5

PALESTINE DISPUTE

j BRITAIN v. LEAGUE,

(United Press Aesociation—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright),

- ! , LONDON, August 26. The report of Commission :■ !on the view, pf Palestine disorders expresses the opinion that they can not be regarded as a sudden explosion of ■ popular passion although the Arab attack was directed against the Jews, and caused resentment. The trouble was really due to political disappointments, which are attributed to the parties of the mandate, and primarily Britain. The report criticises the madequence of the Intelligence, service and; also of the armed forces, and concludes! that the execution of the mandate has not given satisfaction either to the impatient advocates of a Jewish national home, or the Arab extremists, 1 who were alarmed at the influx of nonArab immigrants. A long British reply 'to the criticisms expresses gratifications that the Government has been , acquitted of a failure of its obliga- , tions or immediate duties in relation to, the regime of government, but expresses the opinion that Commissions ■ finding are inconsistent with the previous.yearly approvals of Britain’s ad- ; ministration. It points ■ out that the , Arab' ela'ims were always incompatible with the execution of the mandate . and the Arabs always rejected Brita-in-b offer to associate Arabs and Jews ■in ft representative Government. It was most surprising thftt the commission does not mention Britain's obligoItioh to safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants, which '.was the crux df the whole problem, 'The • eoriimission had accepted exparte state'nient while ignoring the judgments of the Shaw Commission notably, and [that the outbreak was not premeditated. The British memorandum dis- ■ sents from the view that the outbreak ' was against the mandate and rep* a was against the British authority. It says it was against the mandate and 1 the action of the league, and that Brit’ish,authority was only implicated as f the mechanism for the Mandate Commission, which in opinion of Britain, failed in important respects to carry out the mandate, and appears to have accepted the more extreme Jewish contentions, Further it is not within mandatory powers, but is Jewish agency’s task,, to establish a Jewish National home.