|
Subscribe to the
Emperor's Clothes newsletter at
http://emperor.vwh.net/MailList/index.php Please forward this
text or send
the link
to a friend. Emperor's Clothes
|
More Emperor's Clothes articles on antisemitism and its history, and on the Arab-Israeli dispute. | ||
|
With Internet Explorer, Best Viewed With Medium Text Size |
|||
|
======================================================== In 1948, the Left-wing Nation magazine exposed British support for and instigation of Arab violence aimed at crushing Israel in cradle. This contradicts the oft-repeated allegation that Israel was a creation of British colonialism . . . The British Record on
Partition
Introductory Note
The following is the The Nation magazine's abridged version of their 1948 memorandum to the UN concerning the British role in fomenting war in Palestine. The memorandum, based on British intelligence documents, is significant today because it contradicts so many myths promulgated about the origins of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Just for starters, it shows that, contrary to the claim that Israel was a project of British colonialism, in fact the British backed the Arab side in the Israeli war of independence. Indeed, it shows that while feigning neutrality, British intelligence incited and micro-managed the Arab terror that preceded the all-out invasion by Arab armies in 1948. It shows that, far from being perceived as a Leftist rebellion against colonialism, as we are told today, the Arab attempt to crush Israel in the cradle was seen by the British as a frontline defense against dangerous Bolshevist ideas. The British spread the slander that Holocaust refugees trying to get to Palestine were Soviet agents. It shows that the Arab side had Nazi advisers, including Bosnian Muslims officers from the Handzar Division of the Waffen SS, [1] and that the British knew it. An Emperor's Clothes researcher discovered this text while going through the bound volume of The Nation for 1948. It's a good thing he looked there, because when we checked, we could not find the text of the article in The Nation's digital archives. Today's Nation has a viewpoint exactly opposite to The Nation of 1948, so perhaps it's no accident that the article is absent from online archives. Jared Israel ======================================================== [ www.tenc.net ] Table of Contents
Introductory note
from Freda Kirchwey, President
I. British Pledge
of
III. British
Representatives Present
VI. The British
"Protection" of Jerusalem IX. [There is no Section IX]
X. Stringent
Measures against the Jews
XII. British Smear
Campaign *** The British Record on Partition A Memorandum Submitted to the
Special Session April 1948 Published by Volume 166 New York * Saturday * May 8, 1948 No. 19, Part II ===================== ===================== The pages which follows present in condensed form a memorandum which was submitted by The Nation Associates to the General Assembly of the United Nations on April 30, [1948] covering the British record in Palestine since November 29, 1947. Deletions made in this version merely eliminate the less pertinent parts of certain documents and a section comprising photostat reproductions of documentary texts. Additional copies of this supplement may be obtained from The nation, 20 Versey Street, New York 7, N.Y., at the rate of twenty-five cents apiece. *** The General Assembly of the United Nations, for the third time in twelve months, is meeting to discuss "the future government of Palestine." Discussions are taking place in an atmosphere of violence which may touch off an explosion far beyond the boundaries of the Holy Land. The question which the General Assembly must face, and world opinion as well, is this: was an inherent injustice in the November 29 resolution of the General Assembly responsible for the current explosion? The Nation Associates presents the facts in this memorandum as essential to a wise and just decision. An examination of the facts will show that the present violence in Palestine results from: 1) British sabotage of Partition -- This British sabotage was deliberately undertaken in order to insure British base rights in Palestine in perpetuity, as well as to safeguard British oil and trade and military interests in the Middle East. 2) British Alliance with Arab League -- To achieve these ends, the British have embarked on an alliance with the Arab League, composed of the governments of Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Transjordan, and Yemen. The Arab League, and not the Arab Higher Committee, controls the military and political developments among the Arabs of Palestine. Representatives of the British government were present at the meetings of the Arab League where the revolt was planned and organized and are in continuous connection with it. Within a month after the November 29th resolution, the Arabs were encouraged to believe partition would be substituted by a Federal State, and arms shipments continued to the Arab States despite their known use for Palestine warfare. On April 28 [1948] Foreign Minister Bevin was still refusing to halt them. The facts will show, moreover, that: The British have allowed 10,000 foreign invaders to enter Palestine, offering the feeble excuse that the British armed forces, consisting, at the outset, of over 80,000 men, could not adequately protect the border. Although since December 11, 1947 the British have been promising to return to Transjordan the contingents of the Arab Legion brought to Palestine for police duty they have allowed the members of that force to remain in Palestine and to attack Jewish communities. The only conclusion to be drawn is that the Arab Legion constitutes a major part of the effort to coerce the Jews into accepting less than the Jewish State granted by the United Nations. At no time has the British government, in spite of its alleged impotence, requested any help from the United Nations; in fact, as the record shows, the British have continued to deprecate the situation, refused to identify the invaders, and have consistently denied that the Arab states as such are involved. Through their action they have admitted into Palestine Arabs of known Nazi allegiance in command of the invading forces, and have even admitted escaped Nazi prisoners of war, now to be found in command of Arab detachments. From secret British intelligence reports, which are quoted extensively in this record, it is clear that the British know and have always known of every single Arab troop movement in Palestine, and that their relations with the Arabs are such that they could ask Arab leaders to request the invading forces to remain unobtrusive. British sabotage has resulted in turning Jerusalem into an armed camp, has permitted the Arabs to seize the Old City and to hold as hostages some 2000 Jews. The British have failed to take any action to insure that Haifa should remain an open city even though they were fully aware of the desire to local Arabs to achieve this and that the Jews wanted only to be safe from attack. Their prejudice against the Jews has been clearly indicated in their refusal to allow the Jews to arm for defense against Arab attack, and their blowing up of Jewish defense posts; in their turning over to the Arabs - and to certain death - members of the Haganah; in their confiscation of Haganah arms; in their treatment of Jewish defense personnel as criminals. The British have connived at the starving of the Jewish population of Jerusalem by their failure to keep the highways open. They have refused armed escorts to the Jews. Their attitude to the Arab community is quite different. By British admission, the Arab community has been armed by the British. Arab train robberies, which have been frequent, have been met with shooting over the heads of the robbers. Arab desertions from the police, for the purpose of joining the attackers, accompanied by the stealing of arms, have never been prevented, and Arab violators of the peace go unpunished. To this record can be added the detailed facts concerning the fashion in which the British have destroyed central authority, and, under the guise of establishing greater local authority, turned over in largest part to the Arabs the various services of the Palestine government created and maintained chiefly by taxation of the Jewish community. Simultaneously, assets have been dissipated and vital communications disposed of to foreign agencies. The effect of this has been to seal the Jewish community in a limited area, cut off its access to the outside world by land and sea, and surround it by Arabs in order to create such a state of siege as would cause the Jews to send up a white flag. By arrangement with the Arab League, if partition is shelved through any one of several schemes to assure Arab dominance in Palestine, the British are to receive base rights in Haifa, the Negev and Galilee. But the British are not depending on Arab promises alone. They have already taken the necessary steps to assure the permanent rights in Palestine to air bases and land and sea communications. To be able to carry out this program, the Mandatory has required a free hand. That is why it has kept the United Nations Commission out of Palestine and refused it cooperation. The facts contained in this document come for the most part from the confidential reports of British Intelligence. So intent are the British upon destroying partition that they have shown themselves oblivious to the fact that with it they may destroy the authority of the United Nations, and even the peace of the world. Freda Kirchwey, President =============================================== I. British Pledge of
=============================================== On November 13, 1947, Sir Alexander Cadogan, British delegate, told Sub-committee I of the Ad Hoc Committee on Palestine, in reply to a question as to whether the United Kingdom would accept the recommendations of the General Assembly:
On December 11, 1947, Arthur Creech Jones, British Colonial Secretary, told the House of Commons:
A day later, Foreign Minister Bevin told the House of Commons:
British pledge to maintain peace and security A specific promise that the British would maintain law and order in Palestine was made by Colonial Secretary Creech Jones. In the House of Commons on December 11, 1947, he said:
None of these pledges have been fulfilled. Colonial Secretary Gives Preview of British Non-Cooperation Actually, a preview of the form British non-cooperation would take was offered by Creech Jones on December 11, 1947, in the very same speech in which he assured the House of Commons of British compliance with the Assembly's resolution. He then made clear that the primary objective would be an orderly withdrawal of the British from Palestine. Then he set down the following principles:
Bevin Refuses to Assign Port The following day, December 12, 1947, Ernest Bevin, Foreign Secretary, made clear that there would be no consultations with the United Nations Commission, declaring: "that the date for the termination of the Mandate had been fixed." He told the House of Commons:
The security situation was further offered as an excuse for failing to open a port for Jewish immigration, for refusing to permit recruitment of a Jewish militia as provided in the Assembly's resolution. On March 10, 1948, Creech Jones again told the House of Commons:
He said further:
British Declare November 29 Resolution Unworkable That same day, moreover, he told the House of Commons the decision was unworkable and forecast that the Commission would be unable to go to Palestine.
On March 2, 1948, Creech Jones, in the Security Council of the United Nations, openly charged the partition plan with prejudice, declaring:
Small wonder that on April 10 the Palestine Commission reported to the General Assembly that: (1) Security has not been maintained and that "unless security is restored in Palestine, implementation of the resolution of the General Assembly will not be possible." (2) That as a consequence of the non-cooperation of the Mandatory power:
================================================= II. The Intention behind British Policy in Palestine ================================================= On December 29, 1947, exactly one month following the United Nations decision on partition with economic union, the Lebanese Envoy in London, reporting to the Foreign Minister of Lebanon on a meeting between himself and Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, quoted Mr. Bevin as telling him the following: "Now that the question has reached this stage, we are determined to withdraw from Palestine so that Arabs and Jews should remain alone to face each other and the hard facts." British Aim: A Federal State In the same report, the Lebanese envoy wrote: "Official circles here believe that if America. . .were to change its position. . .the Arabs and Jews would remain alone face-to-face with the facts. The result would then be the attainment of a solution of the question on the basis of a federal state." United States Minister to Beirut Tells About Federal Plan or Abdullah Conquest On February 11, 1948, the United States Minister in Beirut, Mr. Lowell C. Pinkerton, informed the United States State Department of the plans being discussed in Lebanon for substituting the partition plan with a new scheme either in the form of a federal state or in the form of a Jewish state within a Greater Palestine. In his communication Mr. Pinkerton wrote:
British Knowledge of Abdullah Plan to Occupy Palestine On April 17, a day after the Security Council had adopted a resolution calling for a truce between the Arab Higher Committee and the Jewish Agency, and upon the neighbouring states to refrain from activity which would upset the truce, King Abdullah of Transjordan let it be known that he would send the Arab Legion into Palestine to defend the Arabs allegedly against the Jews. On January 31, The Nation had reported a plan whereby King Abdullah of Transjordan would be permitted to overrun Palestine in exchange for giving up his ambition to establish the Greater Syrian Federation through the annexation of Syria and Lebanon. On February 13 the British Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 61 HQ Palestine confirmed The Nation's story and anticipated the April 17 declaration of Abdullah. British Intelligence reported that Musa Al Ami, head of the Iraqi-supported Arab Office, who had been living abroad for a year, had returned to the Middle East. This is its explanation:
==========================================================
III.
British Representatives Present ========================================================== The Arab revolt was openly projected in the fall of 1947 at the very time when the United Nations were meeting in the regular Assembly session and discussing the Palestine issue. The decision to launch the revolt was made at a meeting of the Council of the Arab League in Sofar, Lebanon. This meeting was attended not only by the heads of the Arab governments constituting the League, the Mufti and Fawzi Qauqji, later of the Arab liberation army in Palestine, but by Brigadier P. A. Clayton, the British representative in Egypt, and a number of his associates from Cairo and Jerusalem. It was at this meeting that the formation of a so-called volunteer force for the liberation of Palestine was decided upon, as against the use of regular troops of the Arab governments. The decision to substitute so-called volunteer forces for the regular armies was adopted under the influence of Brigadier Clayton and his associates. The Arab League was in fact first projected in 1943 by Brigadier Clayton who was able to convince Anthony Eden, then Foreign Minister of England, of its usefulness. The League was formed in 1945 and Brigadier Clayton continues to be the only non-Moslem who regularly attends the meetings of the Arab League. The participation of British representatives in Arab League meetings was confirmed by Richard H. S. Crossman, British MP in the House of Commons on December 11, 1947. He said:
Arabs careful not to attack the British On March 6, 1948, E. D. Horn, acting for the Chief Secretary of Palestine, addressed a communication to the District Commissioner of Jerusalem, copies of which were dispatched to all district commissioners, asking them to request Arab leaders to see to it that the foreign soldiers in Palestine remained as unobtrusive as possible. In this communication, numbered C.S 749 and marked "top secret", Mr. Horn wrote:
British condone invaders British Intelligence in Palestine is authority for the statement that the Arabs have careful instructions not to fight the British. Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 61 of February 13, 1948, issues by HQ British Troops in Palestine, reported that the Arab irregulars are "anxious to avoid being involved with the British troops, in fact, they have orders to surrender rather than fight their way out if challenged by British troops." The Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 62, HQ Palestine, dated February 27, 1948, further says:
In proof of this careful Arab attitude, the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 63, dated March 12, by the HQ British Troops in Palestine, reported the following:
============================================== IV. British know every Arab invasion plan ============================================== On April 10 the Palestine Commission of the United Nations, in its report to the General Assembly, stated that violence in Palestine as of April 3 has resulted in 6,187 killed and wounded, including 121 British dead, 369 wounded; 959 Arabs dead, 2,118 wounded; 875 Jews dead, 1,858 wounded. The casualties were inflicted in the course of Arab attacks and Jewish reprisals. Responsibility for the violence rests in chief part on some 10,000 Arab invaders who have entered Palestine as members of the Arab Army of Liberation formed by the Arab League and representing incursions from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Transjordan, and upon members of the Transjordan Arab Legion, units of which are stationed in Palestine. The British government, which maintains a number of liaison officers with the Palestine Commission, has reported to that Commission only six incursions involving small numbers. And it has offered as the excuse for not stopping these incursions the length of the frontier, the difficult nature of the terrain, and therefore the impossibility of one hundred percent frontier control. Secret British Reports Give Full Data The fact is, however, that the British are fully aware of every incursion of foreign invaders and their exact deployment. This is indicated in the reports of British Military Intelligence in Palestine and the Middle East. A few typical excerpts from these reports indicate as early as last January the full knowledge of British Military Intelligence, and therefore of the Palestinian administration, the British Colonial Office, and the British Foreign Office. A report on Arab infiltration was offered on January 30, 1948, in the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 60 issued by HQ Palestine:
On February 13, 1948, the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 61 issued by HQ British Troops in Palestine, reported:
British Intelligence Reports Detailed Invasion Plan On March 5, in a secret report entitled "Intelligence Summary No. 68 by the Sixth Airborne Division, a detailed record of the Arab invasion was presented:
British Reveal Qauqji's Entry into Palestine On March 12, Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 63 issued by HQ British Troops in Palestine, supplemented his report with the following:
German Officers and Yugoslav Moslems Join Liberation Army On January 19, C. T. Evans, the District Commissioner for the Galilee District, wrote to the Chief Secretary of Palestine, Sir Henry Guerney, that the training of the Arab Liberation army is by European volunteers and that, in fact, one of the incursions was led by a German officer. In this connection, Mr. Evans wrote:
On March 12, in the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 63, issued by HQ British Troops in Palestine, the British revealed the presence in Palestine of non-Arab volunteers as members of the Arab Liberation army, including German officers and Yugoslav Moslems. The report declares:
British Know Every Detail of Invaders' Deployment On March 19, British Intelligence put out a document on the Arab Liberation army detailing its location in every area of Palestine, its numbers and its command as follows: - ARAB LIBERATION ARMY - Information as at 19.3.48 General: - GOC Gen. Ismail Safwat Pasha, formerly Deputy Chief of Staff to the Iraqi Army, HQ DAMASCUS Command in Palestine: -
Detail - North Pal:
East Pal:
West Pal:
South Pal: HQ of the district is at Mughazi camp 091092. Julis area.
=============================================== V. Arab Legion cannot Move without British Signal =============================================== On December 12, 1947, Foreign Minister Bevin told the House of Commons that the units of the Transjordan Arab Legion would be withdrawn from Palestine. He said:
British Promise to Withdraw Arab Legion from Palestine But on April 16, these units numbering some thousands were still in Palestine, encamped near the units of Arab invading forces, still engaged in a series of unprovoked aggressions on peaceful Jewish residents and passersby. On that date Sir Alexander Cadogan told the Security Council: "We have already announced that the units of the Arab League in Palestine will be withdrawn before the Mandate comes to an end." The following day, however, on April 17, King Abdullah of Transjordan announced that he would send his Arab Legion into Palestine to help the Arabs, and was seconded by his Foreign Minister, a threat which has since been repeated. On April 26, King Abdullah announced that on May 1st he would march into Palestine in personal command of the armies of Transjordan, Syria and Lebanon. Could King Abdullah carry out his threat without British knowledge and consent? The facts show that Transjordan is a military appendage of the British and could not act without their knowledge and consent. The Arab Legion, regarded as the finest military force in the Middle East, is under the command of a Britisher, Brigadier J.B. Glubb. The Legion is organized, trained, officered, and paid for by the British government at a cost of more than $7,500,000 annually. Nonetheless, Foreign Minister Bevin told the House of Commons on April 28:
Do the British Control the Arab Legion? The first partition of Palestine took place in 1922 when the British separated Transjordan from it. In January 1946, Great Britain, without the consent of the United Nations, announced the independence of Transjordan which, since 1922, had been governed under the Palestine Mandate. On March 22, 1946, the British Government announced the conclusion of a Treaty of Alliance with Transjordan, which recognized Transjordan as an independent Kingdom, and the Emir Abdullah as its sovereign. In an annex to the Treaty, provision was made for British bases in Transjordan and the training of the armed forces of that country by British military personnel. On March 15, 1948 a new Treaty of Alliance was signed between Transjordan and Great Britain. Under the new Treaty, Britain continues its annual grant for the maintenance of Transjordan's armed forces. Brigadier John Bagot Glubb, commander of the Transjordan Arab Legion, retains his post under King Abdullah. The British are responsible as well for equipping the Legion, and supply, in addition to Brigadier Glubb, more than 40 British senior officers. Provisions of 1948 Treaty with Transjordan Under the March Treaty, the British receive the right to maintain units of the R.A.F. in Transjordan. The British finance the maintenance and development of airfields, ports, roads and other lines of communication. The British undertake to train Transjordan Forces in the United Kingdom or in any British colony. In Transjordan joint training operations are to be maintained with the British providing training personnel. The British undertake to provide arms, ammunition, equipment, aircraft and other war materials; all Transjordan war materials to be standardized with that of the British. The British receive port rights. To carry out the military alliance a permanent Joint Defense Board has been set up. ================================================= VI. The British "Protection" of Jerusalem ================================================= On December 11, 1947 Arthur Creech-Jones, Secretary of State for the Colonies, told the House of Commons:
But not even the special position of Jerusalem has deterred the British from sacrificing it to its own plans for an Arab alliance. To be sure, soon after the passage of the November 29 resolution, the British government did cooperate with the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations in drawing up a draft statute for Jerusalem establishing it as an international city under international trusteeship. But when the Arab Higher Committee objected to its efforts on the score that it was implementing one of the November 29 General Assembly resolutions, the line of cooperation was dropped and supplanted by the line of capitulation. Under the guise of spurious neutrality it made possible a series of events initiated by the Arabs which have splattered the sanctity of the Holy City with blood. Thus, thanks to British neutrality: 1. Ben Yahuda Street, the chief's commercial center of Jewish Jerusalem, was bombed. 2. A band of the Mufti's henchmen, calling itself the Arab National Guard, could seize and hold with impunity the Old City of Jerusalem, where the ancient shrines of all the religions are to be found; and keep 2,000 Jews as hostages. The British have even concluded an agreement with this band permitting passage to distribute food and other supplies. 3. Thus the Arabs could bomb the offices of the Jewish Agency on March 11, killing 13 and wounding forty-five. 4. The Arabs could on April 13, within full sight of a British army post, attack a Hadassah medical convoy flying a medical symbol in the course of which 76 persons were killed and 20 wounded. The casualties included the Director of the Hadassah Hospital, Dr. H. Yassky, doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel, as well as academic staff including scientists attached to the Hebrew University of Mt. Scopus. This attack took place within two hundred yards of a British Army Post. Iraqi soldiers were among the Arab gangs which attacked the convoy. The attack lasted for six hours before the eyes of the British Military, who not only failed to halt the attack, but prevented the Haganah from coming to the rescue. The April 13 attack was the climax of a series begun on December 30, 1947. Continuous complaints and a request for protection of the road, which leads to the Hadassah Hospital and the Hebrew University, had been made by the Jewish Community Council of Jerusalem and by Hadassah itself. The area requiring protection was half a mile in length on the Scopus Road. Between March 26 and April 6 no incidents occurred. On December 27 the Arab Higher Committee, and on January 13 the Palestine Arab Medical Association issued memoranda asking the Arabs to refrain from attacking hospitals, ambulances, doctors, nurses. None the less, these attacks were accelerated. On March 17 Abdel Kadi el-Husseini, then the Arab Military Commander in Jerusalem area (subsequently killed by the Haganah) publicly announced that he would occupy or even demolish the Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center. Despite the full evidence concerning this, no effective action was taken by the British. On April 13 British soldiers watched the Arab onslaught, and instructed the Haganah not to send reinforcements. When Jewish reinforcements finally reached the scene, they were blocked by the British. When British troops ultimately intervened they fired mortar shells not only at the Arabs, but at Jews trying to defend themselves from the Arabs. When Jaques de Reynier, representative of the International Red Cross, attempted to arrange a truce, it took the British five and one half hours to bring M. de Reynier to the scene of the attack, which is not more than a 10 minute ride from the heart of Jerusalem. Not even the events of April 13 caused the British to safeguard the road, with the result that on April 24 the Hadassah Hospital had been, for a week, without food replenishments. When on April 25, the Haganah attempted to insure safe passage on the road and captured a key Arab attacking post, Sheikh Jarrah village, the British in force encircled the Haganah and compelled their evacuation. 5. Though the Mufti's Organization, the Arab Higher Committee, with its headquarters in Jerusalem is directing the whole operation, not one of its leaders has been arrested. On the contrary, the British have refused permission to the Jewish population to organize their own defense. They have blown up Jewish defense posts. They have advised the Jews to evacuate the commercial section of Jerusalem. The British authorities are conniving at the starving of the Jewish population of Jerusalem. They have failed to protect the highways and refused to allow armed escorts and self-arming by the Jews. British Attack the Jews When the Jewish Agency told the UN Palestine Commission that the Jews of Jerusalem were starving because of Arab road blocks on the road from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem, and that the British Government had neither offered to escort food convoys nor stipulated conditions under which escort might be provided, J. Fletcher Cooke, British Liaison with the UN Commission, replied on April 12, 1948 with an attack on the Jews. He said:
He then proceeded to place the blame on the Jews.
He then charged the Jews with being responsible for the failure of their food convoys to get through because of "the employment by Jews of long slow columns of armored and unarmoured vehicles." The British representative also disclosed an attempt to get Arab permission for Jewish food convoys, "provided nothing but food was carried; that Jewish accompanying personnel were reduced to a minimum and that convoys were subject to search at some selected point." Mr. Fletcher Cooke was greatly surprised that Jewish Agency officials refused this offer of capitulation to the Arabs. British Draft Capitulation Under Truce Guise Last month the British were agents for another proposal for capitulation by the Jews. Mr. R. Graves, nominated by the Palestine government as the Chairman of the Municipal Commission of Jerusalem, drafted a peace project for Jerusalem, later amended by Sir Henry Gurney, the Chief Secretary of Palestine. This peace project proposed that "all armed men should leave the portion of the Old City occupied by Orthodox Jews whose safety would be guaranteed by the Arabs if this were done. And the old Montefiore quarter should be similarly evacuated by all armed men and placed under the protection of British forces and the municipality." Other provisions of the plan were:
On March 9 Mr. Graves told the Chief Secretary, Sir Henry Gurney:
The Breakdown of the Jerusalem Water Supply On April 8, 1948 an Arab mine blew up the main water pipeline to Jerusalem at Ras-el-Ain. For seven hours water flooded the fields. The line was finally repaired by the Haganah and British army engineers. The British authorities claimed that the destruction of the pipeline was accidental and that the Arabs did not know that the pipeline passed under the road at the point where the mining operation took place. But the revelations of British Intelligence on March 12 contradicts the British assertion. Until the end of World War I Jerusalem was dependent upon wells and cisterns. After World War I, Jerusalem began to bring its water from two nearby sources, Solomon's Pools, south of Bethlehem, and the spring of Ein Farah, six miles from Jerusalem. In 1937, to meet the needs of a growing population, the Palestine government built a pipeline bringing water from the coastal plain, Ras-el-Ain, forty miles from Jerusalem, which was pumped through the hills to Jerusalem and supplies Jerusalem with 1,500,000 cubic meters of water annually. The pipeline runs entirely through Arab territory. Part of the area through which the pipeline runs was captured by the Jews, but a 20-mile section from Ras-el-Ain to Bab el Wad remains under Arab control, exposing the pipeline to continuous danger of being cut. The chief victim of an interruption of the water supply would be the Jewish community of Jerusalem. Most of the Arabs in Jerusalem have cisterns and wells. But the fact of the matter is that the threat to the Jerusalem water supply has been so serious and constant that as far back as January 1948 negotiations were begun by the chairman of the Municipal Commission, Mr. R.N. Graves, in an effort to safeguard the water supply station. Ultimately the station at Ras-el-Ain was abandoned to Iraqi armed troops which took over the military camp there. And Mr. Graves withdrew his demands for protection when the Lydda District Commissioner and the military commander of the South Palestine District explained that security forces were not inclined to drive them out by force and the Haganah probably could not do so. Today, the sole deterrent to another attack on the pipeline is the supposed desire of the Arabs to maintain the water supply for their own use. ========================================================= VII. Mufti Turned down Request that Haifa be Declared an Open City ========================================================= On April 22, the city of Haifa was captured by the Haganah and the Arabs sued for peace. That same afternoon the representative of Syria, Faris el-Khouri, complained to the Political Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations at Lake Success concerning what he called the massacre of Arabs. But the fact is that it was the Mufti, Chairman of the Arab Higher Committee, who prevented Haifa from being declared an open city. And it is the British Intelligence in Palestine which is the authority for that statement. Nor did the British make any attempt to assure this even though as far back as December, Creech Jones, in the House of Commons, anticipated disturbances in that city. In its Fortnightly Newsletter No. 61, dated February 13, 1948, the British Intelligence reported the Arab effort to make Haifa an open city.
On April 24, Sir Alexander Cadogan told the Security Council that the Syrian charges were without justification and that in fact only about 100 Arabs had been killed. From Jerusalem, Sir Allen Cunningham, British High Commissioner, informed the British Foreign Office that the attacks had been started by the Arabs and that the charges of massacre were untrue. The exoneration of the Haganah by the British represented the first such action in recent disturbances in Palestine. The fact is that Haifa had been one of the areas in Palestine where the most friendly relations existed between Jews and Arabs, not only during the recent conflict, but as a matter of record even during the 1936 – 1939 disturbances. The most recent disturbances in Haif are due to the incursion of foreign Arabs. These foreign Arabs conducted a continuous warfare, attacking the Jewish residential area and Jewish traffic, inviting Jewish retaliation. The Commander of the Haifa Legion, until he was killed, actually was a Lieutenant in the Transjordn Arab Legion and his identity card is produced elsewhere in this document. On March 9, 1948, an advertisement by him appeared in Al Urduni Amman daily. The advertisement declared:
The presence of Germans and Nazis in the Arab ranks in Haifa was revealed by the Haganah in the truce terms which it laid down. These truce terms asked for the deportation of all foreign Arab fighters from Haifa and the handing over to the British military authorities of all Germans and Nazis in Arab ranks. Five Nazis were handed over. The safety of all citizens was guaranteed by the Haganah which asked for the laying down of arms and the surrender of them to the Jews, as well as a 24-hour curfew order to arrange for the disarming. The presence in Haifa of well-armed foreign invaders, as far back as March 5, was verified in Intelligence Summary No. 68 of the Sixth Airborne Division. Reporting on the Haifa area, it said: Haifa Area
================================================== VIII. Arab
Governments ================================================== On February 16, in its first report on security to the Security Council, the Palestine Commission stated:
If the activity of the Arab League, comprising the states of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Transjordan, all members of the United Nations except Transjordan, were not sufficient evidence that the Arab states as such are in revolt against the November 29th decision of the General Assembly. British Intelligence reports offer proof of the support by Arab Governments of the armed invasion of Palestine by the so-called Arab Army Liberation. Thus the Weekly Intelligence Report No. 45, issued on January 16, 1948 by the HQ British Forces in the Middle East (M.E.B.F) reported: "The training of volunteers in Syria is with government help and the contribution of materials by the Lebanese government." This report says:
The press of the Arab countries has revealed that the recruiting regulations for the so-called Arab volunteers were issued by the Syrian Minister of Defense; that the Syrian Prime Minister himself supervised the training of troops for war in Palestine at the Qatana Barracks in Syria; that the President of the Syrian Republic presided over the meeting on February 5 at his official residence where the commanders were appointed of the Arab forces of invasion. There is ample evidence, further, that the Egyptian government has made financial allocations for operations in Palestine, that it has allotted military barracks at Hilmiyeh and Helwan for the training of troops, and that the Lebanese Prime Minister announced on February 25 his government's intention to supply Palestine with arms, money, and men. On February 13, 1948, the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 61, issued by HQ. British Troops in Palestine, reported on the visit of the Mufti, who is chairman of the Arab Higher Committee, with the President of Syria, and on his meetings with the military committee of the Arab League. The report detailed the decisions reached with respect to the military campaign in Palestine as follows:
How the Arab governments have gotten around the use of army regulars is further revealed in the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 62, HQ Palestine, dated February 27, 1948:
Thus British Intelligence challenges the claim on March 16, 1948 of Faris el Khouri, Syrian delegate in the Security Council of the U.N., that "The Arab States, including Syria, have not interfered by taking part in these encounters." On March 12, 1948, the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No.63 reported that:
============================================ X. Stringent
Measures [Note: There is no Chapter IX] ============================================ In contrast with the attitude of the British toward the Arabs and the Arab incursionists is the stringent measures undertaken to prevent the Jews from getting arms. The following series of communications exchanged in the early months of 1948 are illuminating. As this correspondence indicates, the British were attempting to prevent any possibility of the Jews receiving arms at a time when no obstacles were being placed in the way of armed Arab incursions and attacks on Jewish Palestine:
(Sgd) Fforde [* S.P is Superintendent of Police
G. G. Grimwood British Attempt to Charge Jews with Responsibility for Violence At the same time, in the United Nations, a concerted effort [was made] by the British to involve the Jews on an equal plane with the Arabs in offensive violence in Palestine. Thus on January 21, 1948, the Mandatory power told the Palestine Commission, as regards Arabs and Jews in Palestine, that "elements on each side were engaged in attacking or in taking reprisals indistinguishable from attacks." This statement ignored the fact that only a month earlier, Creech-Jones, colonial secretary, told the house of Commons on Dec. 11: "There have been serious disturbances in Palestine since the United Nations' decision was announced, do mainly to Arab incitements." The attempt to place blame on the Jews for the current violence was continued in the answers which the United Kingdom delegation gave to a series of questions asked by the four permanent members of the Security Council at an informal meeting on March 9. On March 12, the answer submitted in behalf of Sir Alexander Cadogan, reveals the bias of the Mandatory power:
Asked whether arms are flowing into Palestine from outside sources to individuals or groups unauthorized by the Mandatory power to possess arms, the United Kingdom gave the following answer:
In response to a question as to what measures, military and civil, the British took to prevent the movement of hostile elements in Palestine from outside Palestine, the British again tried to implicate the Jews, putting Jewish refugees seeking asylum on the same plane with armed Arab invaders:
========================================= ========================================== Quite different is the attitude of the British to the Arabs. When asked by the United Nations whether the incursion of the Arabs from neighboring countries represents a threat to international peace, the representative of the British government replied that his government "would furnish all the facts available" and "the question of what constitutes a threat to the peace is for the Security Council to decide." This despite the fact that Creech-Jones, anticipating trouble, told the House of Commons on December 11: "The Security Council may have to be evoked by the United Nations Commission if insurmountable difficulties occurred." And when the United Kingdom was asked to identify Arab personnel who have invaded Palestine, and to say whether the incursions were privately organized or are supported or encouraged by governments outside Palestine, the United Kingdom's answer on March 12 was an attempted exoneration of the Arabs, as the following indicates:
British Praise Invaders In fact in February 1948, the British were finding praise for the Arab invaders as a stabilizing5 element, offering the following proof as reported in the Fortnightly Intelligence Newsletter No. 61:
On March 10, 1948, Mr. Rees-Williams, Deputy to Arthur Creech-Jones in the British Colonial Office, replied to questions in the House of Commons as to whether he was aware (a) that Fawzi Kawukji had established field headquarters in Palestine; (b) whether he was aware than an Arab liberation force had declared martial law in Nablus; and (c) what the government was proposing to do with respect to the incursion of Fawzi Kawukji and his followers. He said:
=============================================== XII. British Smear
Campaign ============================================== The smear campaign conducted by the British against the Jews, since the Russian vote for partition in the Fall Assembly, has taken the form of charging Communist infiltration, with Jewish help, into Palestine. A striking example of this was the charge which the British Foreign Office has allowed to be brought against the Jews in connection with the arrival in Palestine on January 1 of the Pan York and the Pan Crescent, two ships which sailed from Rumania at the end of December carrying unauthorized Jewish immigrants. The British Foreign Office first permitted Mr. Herbert L. Matthews of the New York Times to charge that among the 15,000 immigrants were "many Communist agents, according to official British sources." The Times story dated London Jan. 31, charged that "one thousand of the 15,000 immigrants spoke Russian, belonged to militant organizations. Some may have been non-Jews and some had documents showing that they had served in the Soviet forces in WW II." The Times story said further that "the immigrants on these vessels and the number of others that sailed earlier from the Black Sea were collected and sent toward Palestine with the knowledge, and sometimes with the active connivance, of the Soviet Union and its satellites, according to British officials." Later the British Foreign Office said the same thing. When this story first appeared Sir Godfrey Collins, Commissioner for the Jewish immigration camps in Cyprus, said he had no information on the subject. Subsequently, on February 5, the British Foreign Office and Colonial Office queried Sir Godfrey, and a London dispatch to the Times on February 5 stated that Sir Godfrey had denied that he had stated that there were no Communist agents aboard the ships. But a few days later he repeated he had no information on Communist agents. Actually the top secret report of the British representative Captain Linklater who supervised the disembarkment of the refugees at Cyprus said, [in a preliminary report – marked "preliminary" only because of the size of the disembarkment – dated January 2, 1948]
And Captain Linklater further explained:
The Pan York, Pan Crescent story is revelatory of the lengths to which the British are prepared to go to smear the Jews. As soon as the boats had left Balkan waters, British officials sent a cable to their Intelligence officers in Palestine stating that the British surmise that Communists are aboard. As a result, when the boats landed at Cyprus, for the first time in the history of Cyprus, baggage and documents of the refugees aboard the boats were searched. The flimsy evidence on which the charges against the Jews was based is revealed in the following partial record of Captain Linklater:
Actually, only five young men were taken off the boat by British Intelligence agents. All the remainder of the passengers were taken directly to the camps where no subsequent searches or interrogations took place. The five young men were interrogated by a member of the Palestine Criminal Investigation Department who had been sent to Cyprus in order to conduct the investigation. He told them outright that he was concerned only with information about Soviet activities in Bulgaria and Rumania, with particular reference to Soviet ship movements in the Black Sea and Soviet troop movements in Rumania and Bulgaria. When the questions failed to elicit any information the five immigrants were slapped and kicked and finally returned blindfolded from the interrogation center to the camp under escort. There were no further interrogations of passengers. ======================================= XIII. British
Dissipate ======================================= On December 11, 1947, Arthur Creech-Jones told the House of Commons:
This is a promise honored only in the breach. The refusal of the Mandatory power to permit the Palestine Commission to reach the country until May 1st, two weeks before the scheduled termination of the mandate, was predicted on the intention, as the facts substantiate, to dismember the Palestine administration so as to have little or nothing to turn over to the Palestine Commission, and to take such action as would safeguard British interests after the end of the mandate. Today, virtually all departments in the Palestine government have ceased to function. The exceptions are those like the Palestine Broadcasting Service, the Attorney General's office and the Chief Secretariat, which serve the British primarily. Railway and Port Services Collapsing 1. Typical examples of collapsing public services are the railways and the port services, so that it appears unlikely that after May 1 any operating system will exist. Yet this did not come as a sudden development. Actually the Chief Secretary had received a number of warnings concerning such an eventuality as early as December 17, 1947 from the manager of the railways, Mr. A.F. Kirby. On that date Mr. Kirby wrote to Sir Henry Gurney as follows:
In the same letter, he expressed his anxiety concerning the disposition of the property of the railroads:
Three days later, on December 20, 1947, Mr. Kirby again wrote to the Chief Secretary, this time about the port situation, declaring:
Willing to Isolate the Jews The Mandatory was willing to allow this breakdown on the assumption that Jewish need for supplies would force the Jews to keep roads open for themselves as well as the British. If the Jews failed, they could starve and for military purposes the British could make other arrangements. This was clearly indicated last November 27, two days before the General Assembly passed its partition resolution, in instructions issued by the Chief Secretary of Palestine to military commanders and heads of government departments. In his directive of that date, he stated:
Government Disposes of its Property 2. As early as April 1 the Land Settlement Department closed down its offices. This was done after the head of the department, R.F. Jardine, sold out the lands in the state domain to private persons, mostly Arabs. Parcels of land in the Haifa Harbor Estate were sold by him. All plans and documents relating to irrigation projects in Palestine were shipped by him to the United Kingdom. Water installations were handed over to the Arab town and village councils. Having closed his offices he secured release from his post and has now been named by the Iraqi government as its irrigation expert. No Possibility of Handing Over Land Registry to U.N. Commission 3. The land registers have been distributed by the Palestine government among several centers while microfilms of these registers have been shipped to England. The effect of this is to create chaos in the event of any disputes arising on land questions. This has been done despite the fact that on January 5, 1948, the Solicitor General of Palestine, M.J.P. Hogan, wrote to the Chief Secretary:
Disruption of Postal Services 4. The disruption of the postal service has ensued as a result of instructions to create a vacuum. This is confirmed by Mr. Eric Mills, Commissioner of Withdrawals, who wrote:
On December 3, 1947 Mr. Mills in a circular to heads of departments and district commissioners declared:
Artificial Deficit Produced 5. The Palestine Commission has charged the British government with deliberately inducing a deficit where a surplus existed and thus creating ensuing financial and economic difficulties. Four specific charges in this connection are made by the Commission in its reports submitted both to the Security Council and to the General Assembly. It stated that the deficit was created by the Mandatory power by charging against its funds what the Commission called "certain extraordinary items" such as the maintenance of Jewish illegal immigration camps, and the payment of pensions to British civil servants. The commission objected to both these charges. As a further means of creating a deficit the British paid out 300,000 pounds recently to the Supreme Moslem Council, knowing full well that the treasury of this organization represents the war chest of the Mufti. The lack of a working fund, moreover, according to the Commission, has been created by the action of the Mandatory power on March 20, 1948 in freezing an unspent balance of 3,000,000 pounds remaining from three issues of bonds made in Palestine since 1947. This balance was invested in British securities, pending a general financial settlement, and the Mandatory power had decided not to make any disbursements from this total prior to the termination of the mandate. These transactions were brought to the notice of the Commission only after they had been arranged. Discussing the disappearing surplus, the Commission charged on April 10, that "the disappearance of the existing treasury surplus is almost entirely due to special and extraordinary claims," which the Commission feels "should not have precedence over securing essential food supplies and the provision of essential working funds." The Commission also expresses fears concerning the control of the Haifa dock by the mandatory power, pointing out that "the ordinary revenue of Palestine after May 15 will depend in a high degree on customs duties on imports. These imports will come in mainly through the port of Haifa. Hence the fiscal position. . .will depend partly on the manner in which the control of the Haifa dock will be shared with evacuating troops between May 15 and August 1. As a consequence of these acts, Palestine was in danger of suffering a famine as a result of food shortages, which would be created by the termination of the mandate. Although the Palestine Commission had been discussing this problem for months, and had even sent a special representative to London to take this matter up with the mandatory government, no agreement was reached. The excuse of the British government was that it could not undertake to make commitments for food after May 15 as it had no funds with which to do so. Moreover, it refused to advance the money to the Palestine Commission even on the promise that the United Kingdom would be reimbursed from the future revenue of Palestine. On April 19 a private arrangement was agreed to by the importing firm of Steel Brothers in Palestine. The arrangement is with Steel Brothers, the Jewish Agency, and certain Arab Chambers of Commerce, and involves a transaction of about $5,200,000. Under this arrangement Steel Brothers will guarantee to bring into Palestine until July 15 normal food supplies in the amount of some 30,850 tons. Steel Brothers will advance 80% of the cost of wheat, meat, and sugar to be imported. The Jewish Agency will pay for 20% of the food going to the Jews, and the Arab Chamber of Commerce, 20% for food going to Arabs. The food will be imported and delivered to the warehouses of Steel Brothers in Haifa. Distribution to the Arab and Jewish groups is left to the two communities. Palestine Excluded from Sterling Area 6. The Palestine Commission also charged financial complication resulting from the action taken by the Mandatory power of February 22, 1948, without consultation or even information to the Commission, blocking the accumulated Palestine sterling balances held in London and excluding Palestine from the sterling area. The Commission describes the effect of this act as creating uncertainty among Palestine importers, and says that it regards that the release of the sterling balances in particular is essential; otherwise, "sterling may become a scarce currency of Palestine, and imports from the sterling area may be difficult to obtain." ======================================= XIV. The Breakdown
====================================== A continuous transfer of authority to municipal corporations and local councils by the Palestine administration has been going on based, not on a desire to prevent chaos, but rather to destroy central authority, to undermine partition, and to pave the way toward a revival of a scheme for a federal Palestine, which is the real British desire. Preparations for this transfer were made as far back as February 14, 1948 by Sir Henry Guerney, the chief Secretary. In a communication on that date to heads of departments and district commissioners throughout Palestine, he proposed:
In February, 1948 a special law, to amend the Municipal Corporation Ordinance of 1937, was enacted empowering municipal corporations and local councils to collect property taxes due up to April 1, 1948, and thereafter, for the fiscal year 1948 – 1949. The purposes of this new law were explained by the Attorney General in the following terms: "It is anticipated that during the year 1948 – 49, the councils of municipal corporations and local councils will have to carry out many of the functions which would normally be carried out by Government, and consequently they will need additional sources of revenue. On the other hand, they may not be able to obtain from the Government the grants-in-aid which they have received in the past. "Government has therefore decided to enable such councils to collect and recover arrears of urban property tax remaining due on the first day of April 1948, and urban property tax due in respect of the year 1948 – 1949, and this draft Ordinance is designed to give effect to that decision. "Arrangements will be made for the handing over to such councils of the records relating to the house property and land in respect of which they will be entitled to collect and cover urban property tax, and such councils will be empowered to do such acts as may be necessary to ensure that those records will be kept up to date. "Furthermore, in order that it will not be necessary to prepare during the year 1948 – 1949 valuation lists to replace those valuation lists which on the first day of April 1949 will have been in force for five years, the period of validity of valuation lists has been extended from five to six years." Anticipated No Successor Government The draft law, it was explained in a communication by Mr. L.B. Gibson, Attorney General of Palestine, to Sir Henry Gurney, was in anticipation of the possibility of no successor government being named. He declared:
Arabs, Chief Beneficiaries of Transfers As a result of this special legislation the three regions heavily populated by Jews, have been placed under Jewish control. All the remaining regions have been left to the Arabs. The exception are Jerusalem, Haifa, the valley of Ezdraelon, and Eastern Galilee. Ceded to the Arabs were such important installations as the water plants at Ras-el-Ain and Safed. In addition, the Arabs have received most of the government services including Health, Education, Social Welfare, Agriculture and Broadcasting Departments – services which are paid for by the taxes imposed on the population to which the Arabs, constituting two-thirds off the population of Palestine, contribute 26%, and the Jews, 74%. In dividing the assets of the country the British allocated for themselves the Haifa enclave with all its services and installations. ================================================== XV. How the British
Safeguard ================================================== While liquidating the mandate, the British have concentrated on safeguarding in perpetuity the British hold in Palestine in key areas, including Haifa and the Negev, and to insure uninterrupted lines of communication by air, sea and land. New Laws to Assure British Airfields in Palestine 1. Thus on March 2, 1948 the Attorney General of Palestine drafted a law, the purpose of which is to establish the legal basis for transferring airfields or other lands now held in the name of the High Commissioner, to various British Ministries for War, Air, or to the President of the Air Council in London. In particular the new legislation aims to assure continued British control of the R.A.F stations in Aqir, Ramle, Gaza, as well as certain property in Jerusalem. Preparations for this action began in October 1947 while the General Assembly for the United Nations was in session. On October 19, 1947, in a secret dispatch cabled to the Air Ministry in London from Air Headquarters Levant, the Air Ministry was informed that, in view of the political situation, legal difficulties might arise with respect to the property bought by the Air Ministry in Palestine, held in the name of the High Commissioner, in trust for the R.A.F. In subsequent cables, in view of the pending liquidation of the Palestine government, warning was given that the British government might lose control of these assets, and that action was necessary. This is explained in the following exchange of cables: ***boxes center From Air Headquarter Levant "OX 303. Oct. 19. Secret. Subject – Registration of Properties acquired in Palestine on behalf of R.A.F. One. All property bought by the Air Ministry in Palestine held in name of High Commissioner in trust for R.A.F. leases held name of High Commissioner in trust for R.A.F. held similar manner. Two. In view of political situation of entries in Land Registers appear to be open to objection from legal point of view. Three. Palestine Government request decision made into whose name this property and leases should be vested. Four. Request you advise." From Air Headquarter Levant "F. 7283/4 Nov. unclassified From A.H.Q. Levant "0.63 Nov12. Secret. Your F.7283 Nov 4 and my 0.303 Oct 17. Subject – Registration of properties acquired Palestine on behalf of R.A.F. One. On acquisition it has been customary to enter this property in the Land Registry in the name of the High Commissioner in trust for the President of the Air Council or in some cases the Secretary of State for Air. The position of trust in Palestine law is obscure and this form of registration may be open to objection on that account alone. In addition registration in name of High Commissioner might give rise to difficulties particularly when Government of Palestine is transferred from High Commissioner to Palestinian or to a U.N.O. authority and it seems desirable that the land should be registered directly in the name of whatever authority the Air Force considers most appropriate either the President or the Air Council, the Air Council or the Secretary of State for Air. Two. Legal advice is that if properties remain in name of High Commissioner there is risk that we may lose all chance of realizing value or of retaining control of these assets. Three. Main properties concerned are R.A.F. stations Aqir, Ramle, Gaza and certain property in Jerusalem." As the result of this exchange a draft law was prepared by the Attorney General transferring the land now registered in the name of High Commissioner to the British Secretary of State for War, the British Secretary of State for Air, or the President of the Air Council in London. In submitting a draft of this proposed law to the Chief Secretary of Palestine the Attorney General stated:
The Transfer of the Hejaz Railway 2. Early in 1948 the Hejaz Railway linking Palestine, Transjordan, and Syria was transferred by the Palestine Government to the Government of Transjordan. The explanation given was that actually the British Government was the Mandatory power, initially for Transjordan as well as Palestine, and therefore was trustee for Transjordan. Transfer of the El Kantara-Rafa line to the Egyptian State Railways 3. On April 1, 1948 the El Kantara-Rafa Railway Line was turned over to the Egyptian State Railways by the Palestine Government. The Egyptian Railways System is partially controlled by British capital. Moreover, the El Kantara-Rafa Line links with Rafa in the Southern Negev, now being transformed into a military base by the British. By disposing of the El Kantara-Rafa Railway and the Hejaz Railway, the British government has attempted to seal off Jewish Palestine from access to the outside world. The El Kantara-Rafa Railway is the principal Palestine railway connection to the outside world and consists of three sections: (1) The El Kantara-Rafa line which starts at El Kantara in the Suez Canal, continues across the Sinai Peninsula into Rafa, Palestine; (2) The Rafa-Lydda link to Jerusalem; (3) The Rafa-Haifa connection. The Kantara-Rafa line, built by the British during World War I, was owned by the British government, with 12% share of the capital held by the Palestine government. Until its transfer it had been operated by the Palestine Railways in behalf of the British government. All profits have gone to the British government with the exception of 12%, the proportion to the Palestine government. The Rafa-Haifa line was sold to the government of Palestine after the establishment of the Mandate. In disposing of the El Kantara-Rafa line to the Egyptian Railways, which British capital also owns, the British have assured themselves a continuous railway connection from the port of Haifa to Egypt where their soldiers are still stationed. They have also assured a railway link between their new military encampment at Rafa and their military encampment in Egypt. At the same time, by placing this railway link in the hands of the Arabs, they have placed the railway access of the Jewish community to the outside world at the mercy of the Arabs. The Hejaz Railway, built by the Turks, has been under British control, although its ownership remains in dispute. In a survey of Palestine submitted to the Anglo-American Committee of inquiry by the Palestine administration, it is stated that the Hejaz Railway "is operated by Palestine Railways in behalf of His Majesty's Government who hold it in trust." The Hejaz Railway runs from Damascus, Syria to Ma-an, Transjordan, from Ma-an to Haifa in Palestine. Two branch lines from Haifa run from Haifa to Acre and from Haifa to Zamakh in Palestine, which is just south of Lake Tiberias. The effect of the transaction is to assure British rail connections from Haifa to Transjordan and uninterrupted military links between the military enclave in Haifa and the British military base in Transjordan, which continues to exist under the new British military Treaty with Transjordan. British Establish Negev Foothold 4. A main military base has been established by the British at Rafa at the Southern border of Palestine. To insure undivided control, the British authorities, three days after the passage of the partition resolution by the United Nations General Assembly, which gave the Negev to the Jewish State, invited the Jews to evacuate the area. The ostensible reason was the inability of the British to protect the Jews against Arab aggression. The real reason was the desire of the British to hold the whole of the Negev as a base for themselves. Ask Jews to Leave Base Area On December 2, 1947 the British Assistant District Commissioner for the Gaza District, W.F.M. Clemens, informed the representative of the Jewish settlements in the South, that he could not see how Jews could be protected against Arab attack. He suggested the Jewish settlement south of Gaza-Beersheba be transferred to the north of this road. Two days later, on December 4, the Jewish representative was summoned by Brigadier Nelson, the Commanding Officer of Camp Julius, who reiterated the request for evacuation, again on the score that the Jews could not hold out against Arab attack even for a few minutes. The offer was declined. Thus far the Jews have retained every settlement in the Negev, as elsewhere throughout Palestine. British Government Grants Concession to the Iraq Petroleum Company 5. In March, 1948 the British government granted a new concession to the Iraq Petroleum Company in the form of a right to build a second pipe line terminating at Haifa. The Iraq Petroleum Company holds the exclusive concession to the oil fields of Iraq, Quatar, the Trucial Coast, Muscat, Oman. A 23¾ % interest in the Iraq Petroleum is held by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, in which the British government owns 50% of the shares. Royal Dutch Shell, closely allied with British interests, holds a similar percentage. The French interests own 23¾ %, American interests, (Socony Vacuum and Standard Oil of New Jersey) 25%. Five percent is owned by Participations and Investments, Ltd. The excuse offered for the granting of this concession four months after the United Nations decision, without consultation with the United Nations or the Palestine Commission, is that it represented the conclusion of discussions entered into in March of 1947. *** [Footnotes and Further Reading Follows the Fundraising Appeal] ======================================================== Emperor's Clothes Needs Your Help! ======================================================== [Make a donation] We are still short
covering February expenses. Now we have additional costs associated with
helping defend Francisco Gil-White, the Deputy Editor of Emperor's
Clothes who has been persecuted for his opinions and is now threatened
with firing by University of Pennsylvania. The attacks on Gil-White have
aimed at trying to get him to stop writing for Emperor's Clothes. We are
proud that he has not given in to the crude pressure to
recant. For documented evidence of the amazing campaign to silence Prof.
Gil-White, go to
http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~fjgil/open.htm You, our readers, are our only source of funds. Here's how to make a donation. Please send this
text or
the link to a friend. Subscribe to the Emperor's Clothes email
list. ======================================================== Footnotes and Further Reading ======================================================== For articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict,
please see [1] In order to search The Nation's online archives one must pay a fee. We did so, and then looked for articles that we'd found in bound volumes of The Nation, which refute widespread anti-Israel views about the Arab-Jewish war of 1947 to 1949. Some of the articles were missing. For example, you can find the cover of the May 8, 1948 Nation in the digital archives, and the cover has a table of contents which includes "The British Record on Partition." But the article itself isn't the digital archives. Given that this and other missing documents contradict the Arabs-as-David/Jews-as-Goliath view put forward nowadays by The Nation, and given the unwillingness of The Nation and other Left publications to allow real discussion of who is at fault in the Middle East (and also Yugoslavia!) I wonder: were these articles excluded by mistake? Or is this a case of, "If the historical documents contradict your analysis, don't let people see them." -- Jared Israel, Emperor's Clothes ======================================================== Follow-up on Fund-Raising Appeal ======================================================== [To make a donation] Last week we sent out a fundraising appeal for help covering unpaid bills for December and January. To everyone who responded, thank you! With your help we're about half way to covering costs. To those who have not yet responded, if you value Emperor's Clothes and can afford it, please make a donation now. Your help is our only source of funds! Our best is yet to come...
Here's how to make a donation. http://emperors-clothes.com/gilwhite/talk.htm
Subscribe to our newsletter at
===========================================================
Emperor's Clothes
This Website is mirrored at |
The Emperor's Clothes movie 'Judgment!' proves the Western media lied about Bosnia, demonizing the Serbian people. Learn more about 'Judgment!'
Emperor's Clothes needs your help!
Emperor's Clothes needs your help!
|