Charged With Neglect

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1060, 26 August 1930, Page 9

Charged With Neglect

GOVERNMENT IN PALESTINE Report on Disturbances BRITAIN’S REPLY TO COMMISSION British Official Wireless Received 12.25 p.m. RUGBY, Monday. THE disturbances in Palestine in August and September v last year are the subject of comment in the general report of the Permanent Mandates Commission to the Council of the League of Nations, which was published in Geneva this morning. The report contains criticisms of the mandatory Power respecting its policy during- the past five years and these are replied to in a spirited way in a memorandum by the British Government.

The Government, analysing the report, says it is divided into three parts. The first contains a commentary on the nature of the outbreak and on the attitude and conduct of the mandatory Power before the outbreak. The second deals with steps taken by the mandatory Power to restore and maintain order, and the third deals with future policy. As regards the second and third parts, the British Government notes with satisfaction that the measures taken by it to restore and maintain order in Palestine last August appear to have met with the tacit approval of the Mandates Commission. In the first part of the report, however, it is observed that numerous, and in some cases somewhat serious, criticisms are levelled against the mandatory Power in respect of its policy during the past five years. Perhaps the most important criticism is that of the partial inaction of the mandatory Power as regards its obligations to the Palestinian population. both Arab and Jewish, is the fundamental cause of the friction which eventually culminated in the serious disorder of August. RACIAL CO-OPERATION Particular emphasis is laid upon the alleged failure to promote agricultural and educational development and a more extensive programme of public works, and to encourage cooperation between the Jews and Arabs. This is a cause of dissatisfaction on the part of the Arabs with the mandatory regime. It is argued that a more active policy on the part of the British Government in promoting the interests of the Arabs in social and economic spheres and in bringing the two sections of the population—Jewish and Arab —into close association, would have blunted the edge of antagonism. Such argument fails to take account of the paramount importance hitherto attached by the Arab leaders to the political issue, and it ignores the fact that the demands of the Arabs have always been for a particular form of representation which would be plainly incompatible with the execution of the mandate. ARABS HELD OUT The repeated offers of the British Government to associate Arabs and Jew's in the form of a representative Government which would be compatible with their mandatory obligations have always been rejected by the Arab leaders, and the difficulties created for the mandatory Power by this attitude on the part of the Arabs seem to he inadequately appreciated by the Commission, although they were more than once brought to tlie Commission’s notice by accredited representatives. Moreover, the British Government desires to emphasise the fact that the obligation imposed on it by the mandate is of a complex character. The mandatory Power shall be responsible for placing the country under such political administrative and economic conditions as will secure, first, the establishment of a Jewish national home as laid down the the Preamble, secondly, the development of selfgoverning institutions, and also for the safeguarding of the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of

Palestine, irrespective of race or religion. RIGHTS OF ALL Nevertheless, in its report the commission, in summarising the immediate obligation of the Mandatory Power, makes no reference to the important qualification that the Mandatory Power shall also be responsible for “safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.” This, in the opinion of the British Government, is the core of the problem. Surprise is expressed that the findings of the Shaw Commission on the questions of fact sut-p .as the causes and the responsibility for the out-' breaks, have been in some cases ignored, and in others called in question, while the criticism taken from the Jewish memorandum and other sources which reached the Mandatory Power too late for inclusion ill the comment, have been adopted. Referring to US' dissent from the definite conclusion of the Shaw Commission that the outbreaks were not premeditated, the memorandum states that the British Government cannot but feel that the grounds on which the Mandates Commission differs from its conclusion are scarcely adequate. WHERE COMMISSION FAILED The British Government does not find any evidence of the view taken in the report that the Shaw Commission was wrong in holding that the outbreak was not an outbreak against British authority. Whatever may have been the attitude ot the Arab leaders the significant fact remains that during the disturbance no attack was made or attempted on local representatives of British authority. This fact finds no place in the report of the Mandates Commission. Regarding the strength of armed forces, it is not denied that the forces immediately available were inadequate to deal with the sudden and widespread disturbances, but the satisfaction expressed by the Commission in 1925 that the peace and order existing had enabled the mandatory Power to maintain only a very small armed force in the country is recalled, and it is noted that the Commission, when considering the Palestine report only a month before the outbreak, gave no indication that it regarded those forces as inadequate. ARMED FORCE REQUIRED The Commission had all along known the composition of the Palestine police force and the various changes which have taken place in it. If, as stated in the report, it was to be expected that such force would prove to be unreliable when tested, it is to be regretted that the Commission did not warn the mandatory Power of the danger which it was incurring. The memorandum deals at length with the charge that the British Government has failed in its mandatory obligations and particulars are given of the measures taken by the mandatory Power for the development of Palestine's resources in various directions. In view of these the British Government feels it may justly claim that it has not been neglectful of its obligations.