We're talking about ... Jerusalem
This document is 72 years old, but amazingly topical. It's about who rules Jerusalem. The chief justice of the supreme court of Palestine, Sir William FitzGerald, was given this task: "To enquire into and report to the High Commissioner on the local administration of Jerusalem and to make recommendations in relation thereto".
His conclusion - create two boroughs, one Jewish and the other Arab (alas, this version of the report doesn't include a map of the boundary he proposed). Only Arabs gave evidence to Sir William's enquiry, But he came to the unexceptional conclusion: 'I am forced to the regrettable but irresistible conclusion that there is no prospect of the Arabs and Jews co-operating ...'
His recommendation: two boroughs, with an over-arching authority along the lines of the London County Council. 'I see no reason to shrink from the reality of the situation, which in fact I regard as fortunate: one borough will be predominantly Jewish, and the other will be predominantly Arab.'
This wasn't quite partition, but it was a large step down that road. When newspapers bore headlines about the prospect of partition in 1946 and early 1947, they were talking about Palestine - not India.
I got this pamphlet from Oxfam, which has just taken a sizable cache of publications relating to Palestine. Another that I bought is this 1946 list of the Palestine press, which includes publications in Arabic, Armenian, English, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Italian, Polish and a solitary title in Yiddish.
Leave a Reply.
Andrew Whitehead's blog
Welcome - read - comment - throw stones - pick up threads - and tell me how to do this better!