What the Allied Powers Did for 14,000,000 Arabs and What They Propose To Do for 17,000,000 Jews
- Title:
- What the Allied Powers Did for 14,000,000 Arabs and What They Propose To Do for 17,000,000 Jews
- Alternate Title:
- What the Allied Powers Did for 14,000,000 Arabs and What They Propose To Do for 17,000,000 Jews
- Collection:
- Persuasive Maps: PJ Mode Collection
- Creator:
- Pro-Palestinian Herald
- Date:
- 1937
- Date 2:
- 2024-04-25
- ID Number:
- 2290.03
- File Name:
- PJM_2290_03.jpg
- Style/Period:
- 1920 - 1939
- Subject:
- Between the Wars
Imperialism
Other War & Peace
Politics & Government - Measurement:
- 30 x 22 page (centimeters, height x width)
- Notes:
- This is one of three polemic maps in a publication opposing the 1937 recommendation of a British Royal Commission that Palestine be partitioned into an Arab State and a Jewish State - the first formal proposal of a “two-state solution.” These maps (ID ##2290.02-.04) are intended to support Zionist arguments that the Commission’s proposals were inconsistent with the Israel of biblical times, unfair, and contrary to the British Mandate.
Following World War I and the dissolution of the former Ottoman Empire, Britain was given a Mandate by the League of Nations to administer Palestine. See generally Bunton 2013. Over time, as the Jewish population increased by immigration and new Jewish settlements were created, tensions and violence between the two populations grew. This came to a head in 1936, with a six-month Arab strike and revolt that included attacks on Jewish and British positions. In response, Britain established the Palestine Royal Commission, under the leadership of Lord Robert Peel. “Though tasked with finding a way to fit two national movements into a single territory, the commission instead concluded that they were irreconcilable, a Gordian knot that could be cut only by the sword.” Ibid. 38.
The Peel Commission’s Report was published in July 1937. It concluded - in language hauntingly current - “An irrepressible conflict has arisen between two national communities within the narrow bounds of one small country. There is no common ground between them. Their national aspirations are incompatible. The Arabs desire to revive the traditions of the Arab golden age. The Jews desire to show what they can achieve when restored to the land in which the Jewish nation was born. Neither of the two national ideals permits of combination in the service of a single State.”
The Commission recommended the establishment of a Jewish State in western and northern Palestine, the agricultural areas where most Zionist settlements had been established. A narrow corridor from Jerusalem and Bethlehem to Jaffa would remain under the British Mandate, and the balance of Palestine - about 80 percent - would be united with the adjoining Arab Emirate of Transjordan. Because the population of the area of the proposed Jewish State was almost half Arab, more than 200,000 of them would be transferred to other locations, so the partition would be “clean and final.” Ibid. 39.
These maps reflect opposition to partition by a Christian, pro-Zionist organization, “The Pro-Palestine Herald - A Publication Dedicated to Gentile-Jewish Cooperation - The Voice of Christian America in Behalf of the Jewish National Home.” On the other hand, two of the founders of modern Israel, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben Gurion, persuaded the 20th Zionist Conference in August 1937 to endorse the principle of partition while rejecting the specific division proposed by Peel.
In the end, as was to be the case a decade later, diplomatic positions were beside the point. The Peel Commission recommendations triggered “the eruption of one of the most significant anti-colonial revolts ever confronted by the British Empire.” Thousands of Palestinian peasants attacked farms, often at night, while assaults on British police stations, railways and other facilities “completely disrupted the government’s capacity to provide services.” By 1939, Britain had crushed the revolt through “a brutal policy of destruction and collective punishment.” Bunton 41-42. As war with Germany loomed, any notion of partition disappeared.
It’s interesting to note that two of the articles critical of the Peel Report in this publication were authored by distinguished British statesmen, Lloyd George (‘Palestine Pledge Broken by Great Britain”) and Winston Churchill (“Why I Am Against Partition”).
The Collection includes a number of maps related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Search > "israel* AND palest*".
For further information on the Collector’s Notes and a Feedback/Contact Link, see https://persuasivemaps.library.cornell.edu/content/about-collection-personal-statement and https://persuasivemaps.library.cornell.edu/content/feedback-and-contact - Source:
- Pro-Palestine Herald Publishing Company. The Pro-Palestine Herald, Anti-Partition Issue, Fall 1937, p.21.
- Format:
- Image
- Rights:
- For important information about copyright and use, see http://persuasivemaps.library.cornell.edu/copyright.