-
Chapter 6: The Search for Compromise in Palestine
- Temple University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
CHAPTER 6 The Search for Compromise in Palestine The Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry: An Attempt at Compromise Between January 1946 and February 1947, the Palestine question emerged as a major international problem. The period began on a promising note, with the United States and Great Britain cooperating in an effort to find a compromise solution. It proved a difficult task. The Anglo-American Committee oflnquiry (AACI), the formation of which had been announced simultaneously on 13 November 1945 by President Harry Truman and Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, was a joint attempt by the United States and Great Britain to resolve the Palestine impasse. It was instructed to examine the condition of European Jews, to evaluate, in consultation with representatives of Arabs and Jews, the prospects for Jewish immigration to Palestine, and to recommend temporary and permanent solutions for these problems. The British and the Americans differed significantly in their expectations of the AACI. Bevin hoped it would become a means for committing the United States to a joint policy on Palestine, including financial and military assistance. Truman, however, wanted it to serve as an instrumentfor sanctioning the quick evacuation of many nonrepatriable Europeans. 1 The AACI consisted of six Americans and six Englishmen, including American and British cochairmen. It was headed by Joseph Hutcheson, a federal judge from Texas, and SirJohn Singleton, a judge of Britain's High Court. The other American members were Frank W. Buxton, editor of the Boston Herald; James G. McDonald, former League of Nations high commissionerfor German refugees; Bartley C. Crum, a San Francisco attorney; William Phillips, former undersecretary of state; and Frank Aydelotte, director of the Institute for Advanced International Studies at Princeton University and former president of Swarthmore College. The remaining five British members were Wilfred P. Crick, Midland Bank economic Copyrightedraterial The Search for Compromise in Palestine adviser; Sir Frederick Leggett, former deputy secretary of the Ministry of Labour and National Services; and Members of Parliament Richard S. Crossman, Lord (Robert) Morrison (both of Labour), and Major Reginald E. Manningham-Butler (Conservative).2 The AACI began its work inJanuary 1946. It took testimony in Washington , London, the DP camps in Europe, Cairo, Jerusalem, Beirut, Amman, Damascus, Baghdad, and Riyadh. After hearing the views ofEarl O. Harrison, the Zionists and other Jewish groups, and the European DPs, as well as the Arabs of Palestine and neighboring states, the AACI moved to Lausanne, Switzerland, at the end of March to prepare its report and recommendations.3 The Council sent the AACI a nine-page memorandum, and Rosenwald testified at its hearings in Washington. Both the memorandum and the testimony categorically rejected the creation ofa Jewish state as a solution for the DP and the Palestine problems. In the "Memorandum to the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry,>. the ACJ repeated the recommendations it had made to President Truman during Rosenwald's visit to the White House on 4 December 1945. It warned that any other course ofaction would foster racial, religious, and nationalistic divisions in Palestine and, consequently, lead to civil war and potential international involvement in the conflict.4 The Council objected to any promise of a Jewish state. Such a pledge would imply artificially raising "one element of the Palestine population Uews), now a minority, to the status ofmajority" and postponing the establishment ofademocratic state in the country pending the transformation of the Jewish minority into a majority. This, claimed the ACj, would inevitably encourage the formation of a state built on racial or religious foundations. Moreover, it would create numerous problemsfor the majority of Jews living outside Palestine-problems that would derive from their relationship with such aJewish state, "a state ofwhich they are not now and never will be citizens, but which, even in its present incipient state, claims, in varying forms and degrees, support and loyalty from among them." For essentially the same reasons the ACJ objected to proposals for creating a binational state in Palestine.5 According to the Council, granting official recognition and sanction to the development ofseparate nationalities in Palestine, insteadofencouraging a Palestinian nationality, promoted discord and made conflict inevitable. In fact, the conflict in Palestine was already responsible for appeals to various groups outside Palestine: to Arab states in the Middle East and to Jews throughout the world. "So long as Palestine is subject to Copyrighted Material 130 [3.131.13.194] Project MUSE (2024-04-17 22:43 GMT) The Search for Compromise in Palestine pressures from people who do not, and never intend...