The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1930. AFFAIRS IN PALESTINE.

Hokitika Guardian, 3 September 1930, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1930. AFFAIRS IN PALESTINE.

The event of last week in the world of international politics, says an exchange has certainly.been the publication of the report of the Mandates Colnmissioli on the disturbances that occurred last year in Palestine. It may be remembered that the. British Government sot tip a special commission to inquire into these matters last year, and its report, generally speaking, attributed the whole trouble to the not unnatural resentment of the Arab population at the influx of intelligent industrious and successful aliens, who are likev to prove formidable in every sphere of economic and national life. The Jewish Agency, which under the Mandate has an official right- to present the case for the Jews, issued a memorandum criticising the Shaw Commission’s report at great length. It seems to me very largely successful in its attempt to show that the trouble was religious rather than racial or political, and that the British administrators had been too little regardful of evil omens, and had taken wholly inadequate precautions against possible clanger. Moreover the memorandum makes out a verystrong case in favour of the colonisation and cultivation of Palestine by the Jews, who are willing and able to exploit- its natural resources to an extent entirely beyond the powers of the nomadic Arabs. This memorandum was submitted by the. Jewish Agency to the Mandates Commission, and it evidently produced a considerable impression. It seems to be quite indisputable that the British administration was too anxious to conciliate the Arabs and that its consequent neglect of necessary precautions rendered possible the deplorable events of last year. However, the British note to the Mandates Commission, though it is, in a sense, a statement of “the case for the defendant,” supplies satisfactory proof that Britain is still bent on carrying out the Balfour policy in the spirit in which it was originally framed, But there is still the clanger that the administrators may be inclined to go too far in the way of placating the Arabs, and this is rendered probable by recent news from India bearing directly upon the trouble in Palestine. In April last a. Pan-Hindu' Moslem conference was held at Bombay, and resolutions were passed declaring that “the Holy Land of Palestine is under the guard not onlv of the Moslems of Palestine, but of the whole Moslem world” and that Modems cannot permit the country to become a place of settlement for the Jews “to the exclusion and detriment of former inhabitants.” The conference, therefore, demanded “the abrogation of the Balfour declaration and of the British Mandate.” .As a proof that the British authorities have been influenced hv Arab and Moslem protests against the influx of tlm Jews into Palestine, it should be noted that, though he High Commissioner had apnroved the immigration of 3300 Jews for the half year ending September 30th. the British Government suspended the admission of 2400, pending the report of the Sneeinl Commission now in Palestine. The Jews felt this aeufe-

lv, regarding it ns a sign that Britain meant to abandon the Balfour policy

entirely, and on May 22nd. the whole Jewish population of Palestine engaged in “a peaceful general strike.” However, the British Government assured the Jewish Agency that this restriction would he ollly temporary. Though the Jews are bitterly disappointed at the negative attitude of the administration, they are anxious to prove their sincere desire for amicable relations with the Arabs, and several of their organisations have petitioned the Palestine Government to reprieve all Arabs convicted of murdering Jew's during the riots of August last. As a result 18 out of 21 convicted murderers have been released from the death penalty. But it is a curious fact that this reprieve followed on the request of the Bombay Moslem Conference for the release of all Moslem Arabs under sentence in connection with the August riots. Considering all the trouble that arose in India through the Khilafat agitation over the threatened expulsion of the Turk from Constantinople, it is quite possible that the British Government may have taken very serious notice of the Bombay Conference, and its attitude, towards the Moslems of Palestine may he influenced accordingly.