XPost: or.politics, ca.politics, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: talk.politics.guns
On 10/19/23 11:46, Delma T. Ivey wrote:
On 10/19/2023 10:34 AM, a425couple wrote:
On 10/19/23 10:06, Delma T. Ivey wrote:
A correct equation.
That is false.
It is not.
The Jewish people have every right to their own
homeland where they can enjoy self determination.
They don't have any right as Jews to a homeland, and certainly not when
it means denying an equal right to a homeland to Palestinians.
Yes, the Palestinians do deserve a right to a homeland.
They were offered one, just as the Jews were offered one
when the UK gave up it's UN mandate.
The Jews accepted what was offered, even tho it was far
from ideal. They created Israel, and have flourished
and they made the desert bloom.
The Palestinians refused to share, and decided to kill
the Jews rather than share. Surprise! Even with the
Armies of five nations helping the Palestinians,
they failed.
And have been consumed by hatred, and refusal to share
for the last 75 years. Every time the Palestinians
are offered a chance to have their own state and
live in peace, they refuse.
Please read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine
Contents hide
(Top)
Background
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP)
Toggle United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) subsection
Ad hoc Committee
Toggle Ad hoc Committee subsection
The vote
Toggle The vote subsection
Reactions
Toggle Reactions subsection
Subsequent events
Toggle Subsequent events subsection
See also
References
Bibliography
Further reading
External links
United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine
Article
Talk
Read
View source
View history
Tools
Page extended-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Partition of Palestine" redirects here. For the partition of Palestine
into Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank, see 1949 Armistice
Agreements.
UN General Assembly
Resolution 181 (II)
UNSCOP (3 September 1947; see green line) and UN Ad Hoc Committee (25
November 1947) partition plans. The UN Ad Hoc Committee proposal was
voted on in the resolution.
Date 29 November 1947
Meeting no. 128
Code A/RES/181(II) (Document)
Voting summary
33 voted for
13 voted against
10 abstained
Result Adopted
The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine was a proposal by the
United Nations, which recommended a partition of Mandatory Palestine at
the end of the British Mandate. On 29 November 1947, the UN General
Assembly adopted the Plan as Resolution 181 (II).[1]
The resolution recommended the creation of independent Arab and Jewish
States and a Special International Regime for the city of Jerusalem. The Partition Plan, a four-part document attached to the resolution,
provided for the termination of the Mandate, the progressive withdrawal
of British armed forces and the delineation of boundaries between the
two States and Jerusalem. Part I of the Plan stipulated that the Mandate
would be terminated as soon as possible and the United Kingdom would
withdraw no later than 1 August 1948. The new states would come into
existence two months after the withdrawal, but no later than 1 October
1948. The Plan sought to address the conflicting objectives and claims
of two competing movements, Palestinian nationalism and Jewish
nationalism, or Zionism.[2][3] The Plan also called for Economic Union
between the proposed states, and for the protection of religious and
minority rights.[4] While Jewish organizations collaborated with UNSCOP
during the deliberations, the Palestinian Arab leadership boycotted it.[5]
The proposed plan is considered to have been pro-Zionist by its
detractors, with 62% of the land allocated to the Jewish state despite
the Palestinian Arab population numbering twice the Jewish
population.[6] Consequently, the partition plan was accepted by Jewish
Agency for Palestine and most Zionist factions who viewed it as a
stepping stone to territorial expansion at an opportune time.[7][5] The
Arab Higher Committee, the Arab League and other Arab leaders and
governments rejected it on the basis that in addition to the Arabs
forming a two-thirds majority, they owned a majority of the lands.[8][9]
They also indicated an unwillingness to accept any form of territorial division,[10] arguing that it violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to
decide their own destiny.[5][11] They announced their intention to take
all necessary measures to prevent the implementation of the resolution.[12][13][14][15] Subsequently a civil war broke out in
Palestine[16] and the plan was not implemented.[17]
Background
The British administration was formalized by the League of Nations under
the Palestine Mandate in 1923, as part of the Partitioning of the
Ottoman Empire following World War I. The Mandate reaffirmed the 1917
British commitment to the Balfour Declaration, for the establishment in Palestine of a "National Home" for the Jewish people, with the
prerogative to carry it out.[18][19] A British census of 1918 estimated
700,000 Arabs and 56,000 Jews.[18]
In 1937, following a six-month-long Arab General Strike and armed
insurrection which aimed to pursue national independence and secure the
country from foreign control, the British established the Peel
Commission.[20] The Commission concluded that the Mandate had become unworkable, and recommended Partition into an Arab state linked to
Transjordan; a small Jewish state; and a mandatory zone. To address
problems arising from the presence of national minorities in each area,
it suggested a land and population transfer[21] involving the transfer
of some 225,000 Arabs living in the envisaged Jewish state and 1,250
Jews living in a future Arab state, a measure deemed compulsory "in the
last resort".[21][22][23] To address any economic problems, the Plan
proposed avoiding interfering with Jewish immigration, since any
interference would be liable to produce an "economic crisis", most of Palestine's wealth coming from the Jewish community. To solve the
predicted annual budget deficit of the Arab State and reduction in
public services due to loss of tax from the Jewish state, it was
proposed that the Jewish state pay an annual subsidy to the Arab state
and take on half of the latter's deficit.[21][22][24] The Palestinian
Arab leadership rejected partition as unacceptable, given the inequality
in the proposed population exchange and the transfer of one-third of
Palestine, including most of its best agricultural land, to recent immigrants.[23] The Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion, persuaded the Zionist Congress to lend provisional approval to the Peel recommendations as a basis for further negotiations.[25][26][27][28] In
a letter to his son in October 1937, Ben-Gurion explained that partition
would be a first step to "possession of the land as a
whole".[29][30][31] The same sentiment, that acceptance of partition was
a temporary measure beyond which the Palestine would be "redeemed . . in
its entirety,"[32] was recorded by Ben-Gurion on other occasions, such
as at a meeting of the Jewish Agency executive in June 1938,[33] as well
as by Chaim Weizmann.[31][34]
The British Woodhead Commission was set up to examine the practicality
of partition. The Peel plan was rejected and two possible alternatives
were considered. In 1938 the British government issued a policy
statement declaring that "the political, administrative and financial difficulties involved in the proposal to create independent Arab and
Jewish States inside Palestine are so great that this solution of the
problem is impracticable". Representatives of Arabs and Jews were
invited to London for the St. James Conference, which proved
unsuccessful.[35]
With World War II looming, British policies were influenced by a desire
to win Arab world support and could ill afford to engage with another
Arab uprising.[36] The MacDonald White Paper of May 1939 declared that
it was "not part of [the British government's] policy that Palestine
should become a Jewish State", sought to limit Jewish immigration to
Palestine and restricted Arab land sales to Jews. However, the League of Nations commission held that the White Paper was in conflict with the
terms of the Mandate as put forth in the past. The outbreak of the
Second World War suspended any further deliberations.[37][38] The Jewish
Agency hoped to persuade the British to restore Jewish immigration
rights, and cooperated with the British in the war against Fascism.
Aliyah Bet was organized to spirit Jews out of Nazi controlled Europe,
despite the British prohibitions. The White Paper also led to the
formation of Lehi, a small Jewish organization which opposed the British.
After World War II, in August 1945 President Truman asked for the
admission of 100,000 Holocaust survivors into Palestine[39] but the
British maintained limits on Jewish immigration in line with the 1939
White Paper. The Jewish community rejected the restriction on
immigration and organized an armed resistance. These actions and United
States pressure to end the anti-immigration policy led to the
establishment of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry. In April 1946,
the Committee reached a unanimous decision for the immediate admission
of 100,000 Jewish refugees from Europe into Palestine, rescission of the
white paper restrictions of land sale to Jews, that the country be
neither Arab nor Jewish, and the extension of U.N. Trusteeship. The U.S. endorsed the Commission's findings concerning Jewish immigration and
land purchase restrictions,[40] while the British made their agreement
to implementation conditional on U.S. assistance in case of another Arab revolt.[40] In effect, the British continued to carry out their White
Paper policy.[41] The recommendations triggered violent demonstrations
in the Arab states, and calls for a Jihad and an annihilation of all
European Jews in Palestine.[42]
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP)
Further information: UNSCOP
Map showing Jewish-owned land as of 31 December 1944, including land
owned in full, shared in undivided land, and State Lands under
concession. This constituted 6% of the total land area or 20% of
cultivatable land,[43] of which more than half was held by the JNF and
PICA[44]
Under the terms of League of Nations A-class mandates each such
mandatory territory was to become a sovereign state on termination of
its mandate. By the end of World War II, this occurred with all such
mandates except Palestine, however the League of Nations itself lapsed
in 1946 leading to a legal quandary.[45][46] In February 1947, Britain announced its intent to terminate the Mandate for Palestine, referring
the matter of the future of Palestine to the United Nations.[47][48] The
hope was that a binational state would ensue, which meant an
unpartitioned Palestine. British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin's policy
was premised on the idea that an Arab majority would carry the day,
which met difficulties with Harry S. Truman who, sensitive to Zionist
electoral pressures in the United States, pressed for a British-Zionist compromise.[49] In May, the UN formed the United Nations Special
Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) to prepare a report on recommendations
for Palestine. The Jewish Agency pressed for Jewish representation and
the exclusion of both Britain and Arab countries on the Committee,
sought visits to camps where Holocaust survivors were interned in Europe
as part of UNSCOP's brief, and in May won representation on the
Political Committee.[50] The Arab states, convinced statehood had been subverted, and that the transition of authority from the League of
Nations to the UN was questionable in law, wished the issues to be
brought before an International Court, and refused to collaborate with
UNSCOP, which had extended an invitation for liaison also to the Arab
Higher Committee.[46][51] In August, after three months of conducting
hearings and a general survey of the situation in Palestine, a majority
report of the committee recommended that the region be partitioned into
an Arab state and a Jewish state, which should retain an economic union.
An international regime was envisioned for Jerusalem.
The Arab delegations at the UN had sought to keep separate the issue of Palestine from the issue of Jewish refugees in Europe. During their
visit, UNSCOP members were shocked by the extent of Lehi and Irgun
violence, then at its apogee, and by the elaborate military presence
attested by endemic barb-wire, searchlights, and armoured-car patrols. Committee members also witnessed the SS Exodus affair in Haifa and could
hardly have remained unaffected by it. On concluding their mission, they dispatched a subcommittee to investigate Jewish refugee camps in Europe.[52][53] The incident is mentioned in the report in relation to
Jewish distrust and resentment concerning the British enforcement of the
1939 White Paper.[54]
UNSCOP report
On 3 September 1947, the Committee reported to the General Assembly.
CHAPTER V: PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS (I), Section A of the Report
contained eleven proposed recommendations (I – XI) approved unanimously. Section B contained one proposed recommendation approved by a
substantial majority dealing with the Jewish problem in general (XI).
CHAPTER VI: PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS (II) contained a Plan of Partition
with Economic Union to which seven members of the Committee (Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, the Netherlands, Peru, Sweden and Uruguay), expressed themselves in favour. CHAPTER VII RECOMMENDATIONS (III)
contained a comprehensive proposal that was voted upon and supported by
three members (India, Iran, and Yugoslavia) for a Federal State of
Palestine. Australia abstained. In CHAPTER VIII a number of members of
the Committee expressed certain reservations and observations.[55]
Proposed partition
See also: Land ownership of the British Mandate of Palestine
Land ownership
Population distribution
Two maps reviewed by UN Subcommittee 2 in considering partition
The report of the majority of the Committee (CHAPTER VI) envisaged the
division of Palestine into three parts: an Arab State, a Jewish State
and the City of Jerusalem, linked by extraterritorial crossroads. The
proposed Arab State would include the central and part of western
Galilee, with the town of Acre, the hill country of Samaria and Judea,
an enclave at Jaffa, and the southern coast stretching from north of
Isdud (now Ashdod) and encompassing what is now the Gaza Strip, with a
section of desert along the Egyptian border. The proposed Jewish State
would include the fertile Eastern Galilee, the Coastal Plain, stretching
from Haifa to Rehovot and most of the Negev desert,[56] including the
southern outpost of Umm Rashrash (now Eilat). The Jerusalem Corpus
Separatum included Bethlehem and the surrounding areas.
The primary objectives of the majority of the Committee were political
division and economic unity between the two groups.[4] The Plan tried
its best to accommodate as many Jews as possible into the Jewish State.
In many specific cases,[citation needed] this meant including areas of
Arab majority (but with a significant Jewish minority) in the Jewish
state. Thus the Jewish State would have an overall large Arab minority.
Areas that were sparsely populated (like the Negev desert), were also
included in the Jewish state to create room for immigration. According
to the plan, Jews and Arabs living in the Jewish state would become
citizens of the Jewish state and Jews and Arabs living in the Arab state
would become citizens of the Arab state.
By virtue of Chapter 3, Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine
outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not
holding Palestinian citizenship, resided in Palestine outside the City
of Jerusalem would, upon the recognition of independence, become
citizens of the State in which they were resident and enjoy full civil
and political rights.
The Plan would have had the following demographics (data based on 1945).
Territory Arab and other population % Arab and other Jewish population %
Jewish Total population
Arab State 725,000 99% 10,000 1% 735,000
Jewish State 407,000 45% 498,000 55% 905,000
International 105,000 51% 100,000 49% 205,000
Total 1,237,000 67% 608,000 33% 1,845,000
Data from the Report of UNSCOP: 3 September 1947: CHAPTER 4: A
COMMENTARY ON PARTITION
The land allocated to the Arab State in the final plan included about
43% of Mandatory Palestine[57][58][59] and consisted of all of the
highlands, except for Jerusalem, plus one-third of the coastline. The
highlands contain the major aquifers of Palestine, which supplied water
to the coastal cities of central Palestine, including Tel Aviv.[citation needed] The Jewish State allocated to the Jews, who constituted a third
of the population and owned about 7% of the land, was to receive 56% of Mandatory Palestine, a slightly larger area to accommodate the
increasing numbers of Jews who would immigrate there.[58][59][60] The
Jewish State included three fertile lowland plains – the Sharon on the
coast, the Jezreel Valley and the upper Jordan Valley. The bulk of the
proposed Jewish State's territory, however, consisted of the Negev
Desert,[56] which was not suitable for agriculture, nor for urban
development at that time. The Jewish State would also be given sole
access to the Sea of Galilee, crucial for its water supply, and the economically important Red Sea.
The committee voted for the plan, 25 to 13 (with 17 abstentions and 2 absentees) on 25 November 1947 and the General Assembly was called back
into a special session to vote on the proposal. Various sources noted
that this was one vote short of the two-thirds majority required in the
General Assembly.[60]
Ad hoc Committee
Map comparing the borders of the 1947 partition plan and the armistice
of 1949.
Boundaries defined in the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine:
Area assigned for a Jewish state
Area assigned for an Arab state
Planned Corpus separatum with the intention that Jerusalem would be neither Jewish nor Arab
Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949 (Green Line):
Israeli controlled territory from 1949
Egyptian and Jordanian controlled territory from 1948 until 1967
Main article: Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question
On 23 September 1947 the General Assembly established the Ad Hoc
Committee on the Palestinian Question to consider the UNSCOP report. Representatives of the Arab Higher Committee and Jewish Agency were
invited and attended.[61]
During the committee's deliberations, the British government endorsed
the report's recommendations concerning the end of the mandate,
independence, and Jewish immigration.[citation needed] However, the
British did "not feel able to implement" any agreement unless it was
acceptable to both the Arabs and the Jews, and asked that the General
Assembly provide an alternative implementing authority if that proved to
be the case.
The Arab Higher Committee rejected both the majority and minority recommendations within the UNSCOP report. They "concluded from a survey
of Palestine history that Zionist claims to that country had no legal or
moral basis". The Arab Higher Committee argued that only an Arab State
in the whole of Palestine would be consistent with the UN Charter.
The Jewish Agency expressed support for most of the UNSCOP
recommendations, but emphasized the "intense urge" of the overwhelming
majority of Jewish displaced persons to proceed to Palestine. The Jewish
Agency criticized the proposed boundaries, especially in the Western
Galilee and Western Jerusalem (outside of the old city), arguing that
these should be included in the Jewish state. However, they agreed to
accept the plan if "it would make possible the immediate
re-establishment of the Jewish State with sovereign control of its own immigration."
Arab states requested representation on the UN ad hoc subcommittees of
October 1947, but were excluded from Subcommittee One, which had been
delegated the specific task of studying and, if thought necessary,
modifying the boundaries of the proposed partition.[62]
Sub-Committee 2
The Sub-Committee 2, set up on 23 October 1947 to draw up a detailed
plan based on proposals of Arab states presented its report within a few weeks.[63]
Based on a reproduced British report, the Sub-Committee 2 criticised the
UNSCOP report for using inaccurate population figures, especially
concerning the Bedouin population. The British report, dated 1 November
1947, used the results of a new census in Beersheba in 1946 with
additional use of aerial photographs, and an estimate of the population
in other districts. It found that the size of the Bedouin population was greatly understated in former enumerations. In Beersheba, 3,389 Bedouin
houses and 8,722 tents were counted. The total Bedouin population was
estimated at approximately 127,000; only 22,000 of them normally
resident in the Arab state under the UNSCOP majority plan. The British
report stated:
"the term Beersheba Bedouin has a meaning more definite than one would
expect in the case of a nomad population. These tribes, wherever they
are found in Palestine, will always describe themselves as Beersheba
tribes. Their attachment to the area arises from their land rights there
and their historic association with it."[64]
In respect of the UNSCOP report, the Sub-Committee concluded that the
earlier population "estimates must, however, be corrected in the light
of the information furnished to the Sub-Committee by the representative
of the United Kingdom regarding the Bedouin population. According to the statement, 22,000 Bedouins may be taken as normally residing in the
areas allocated to the Arab State under the UNSCOP's majority plan, and
the balance of 105,000 as resident in the proposed Jewish State. It will
thus be seen that the proposed Jewish State will contain a total
population of 1,008,800, consisting of 509,780 Arabs and 499,020 Jews.
In other words, at the outset, the Arabs will have a majority in the
proposed Jewish State."[65]
The Sub-Committee 2 recommended to put the question of the Partition
Plan before the International Court of Justice (Resolution No. I [66]).
In respect of the Jewish refugees due to World War II, the Sub-Committee recommended to request the countries of which the refugees belonged to
take them back as much as possible (Resolution No. II[67]). The
Sub-Committee proposed to establish a unitary state (Resolution No.
III[68]).
Boundary changes
The ad hoc committee made a number of boundary changes to the UNSCOP recommendations before they were voted on by the General Assembly.
The predominantly Arab city of Jaffa, previously located within the
Jewish state, was constituted as an enclave of the Arab State. The
boundary of the Arab state was modified to include Beersheba and a strip
of the Negev desert along the Egyptian border,[56] while a section of
the Dead Sea shore and other additions were made to the Jewish State.
This move increased the Jewish percentage in the Jewish state from 55%
to 61%.[citation needed]
The proposed boundaries would also have placed 54 Arab villages on the
opposite side of the border from their farm land.[citation needed] In
response, the United Nations Palestine Commission established in 1948
was empowered to modify the boundaries "in such a way that village areas
as a rule will not be divided by state boundaries unless pressing
reasons make that necessary". These modifications never occurred.
The vote
Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question, document
A/516, dated 25 November 1947. This was the document voted on by the UN
General Assembly on 29 November 1947, and became known as the "United
Nations Partition Plan for Palestine".[69]
Passage of the resolution required a two-thirds majority of the valid
votes, not counting abstaining and absent members, of the UN's then 57
member states. On 26 November, after filibustering by the Zionist
delegation, the vote was postponed by three days.[70][71] According to
multiple sources, had the vote been held on the original set date, it
would have received a majority, but less than the required two-thirds.[71][72][73] Various compromise proposals and variations on a
single state, including federations and cantonal systems were debated (including those previously rejected in committee).[74][75] The delay
was used by supporters of Zionism in New York to put extra pressure on
states not supporting the resolution.[70]
Reports of pressure for and against the Plan
Reports of pressure for the Plan
Zionists launched an intense White House lobby to have the UNSCOP plan endorsed, and the effects were not trivial.[76] The Democratic Party, a
large part of whose contributions came from Jews,[77] informed Truman
that failure to live up to promises to support the Jews in Palestine
would constitute a danger to the party. The defection of Jewish votes in congressional elections in 1946 had contributed to electoral losses.
Truman was, according to Roger Cohen, embittered by feelings of being a
hostage to the lobby and its 'unwarranted interference', which he blamed
for the contemporary impasse. When a formal American declaration in
favour of partition was given on 11 October, a public relations
authority declared to the Zionist Emergency Council in a closed meeting:
'under no circumstances should any of us believe or think we had won
because of the devotion of the American Government to our cause. We had
won because of the sheer pressure of political logistics that was
applied by the Jewish leadership in the United States'. State Department
advice critical of the controversial UNSCOP recommendation to give the overwhelmingly Arab town of Jaffa, and the Negev, to the Jews was
overturned by an urgent and secret late meeting organized for Chaim
Weizman with Truman, which immediately countermanded the recommendation.
The United States initially refrained from pressuring smaller states to
vote either way, but Robert A. Lovett reported that America's U.N.
delegation's case suffered impediments from high pressure by Jewish
groups, and that indications existed that bribes and threats were being
used, even of American sanctions against Liberia and Nicaragua.[78] When
the UNSCOP plan failed to achieve the necessary majority on 25 November,
the lobby 'moved into high gear' and induced the President to overrule
the State Department, and let wavering governments know that the U.S.
strongly desired partition.[79]
Proponents of the Plan reportedly put pressure on nations to vote yes to
the Partition Plan. A telegram signed by 26 US Senators with influence
on foreign aid bills was sent to wavering countries, seeking their
support for the partition plan.[80] The US Senate was considering a
large aid package at the time, including 60 million dollars to
China.[81][82] Many nations reported pressure directed specifically at them:
United States (Vote: For): President Truman later noted, "The facts
were that not only were there pressure movements around the United
Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the
White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I
ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I
had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders—actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats—disturbed and annoyed me."[83]
India (Vote: Against): Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru spoke
with anger and contempt for the way the UN vote had been lined up. He
said the Zionists had tried to bribe India with millions and at the same
time his sister, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, the Indian ambassador to the UN,
had received daily warnings that her life was in danger unless "she
voted right".[84] Pandit occasionally hinted that something might change
in favour of the Zionists. But another Indian delegate, Kavallam
Pannikar, said that India would vote for the Arab side, because of their
large Muslim minority, although they knew that the Jews had a case.[85]
Liberia (Vote: For): Liberia's Ambassador to the United States
complained that the US delegation threatened aid cuts to several
countries.[86] Harvey S. Firestone, Jr., President of Firestone Natural
Rubber Company, with major holdings in the country, also pressured the
Liberian government[72][80]
Philippines (Vote: For): In the days before the vote, Philippines representative General Carlos P. Romulo stated "We hold that the issue
is primarily moral. The issue is whether the United Nations should
accept responsibility for the enforcement of a policy which is clearly repugnant to the valid nationalist aspirations of the people of
Palestine. The Philippines Government holds that the United Nations
ought not to accept such responsibility." After a phone call from
Washington, the representative was recalled and the Philippines' vote changed.[80]
Haiti (Vote: For): The promise of a five million dollar loan may or
may not have secured Haiti's vote for partition.[87]
France (Vote: For): Shortly before the vote, France's delegate to the
United Nations was visited by Bernard Baruch, a long-term Jewish
supporter of the Democratic Party who, during the recent world war, had
been an economic adviser to President Roosevelt, and had latterly been appointed by President Truman as United States ambassador to the newly
created UN Atomic Energy Commission. He was, privately, a supporter of
the Irgun and its front organization, the American League for a Free
Palestine. Baruch implied that a French failure to support the
resolution might block planned American aid to France, which was badly
needed for reconstruction, French currency reserves being exhausted and
its balance of payments heavily in deficit. Previously, to avoid
antagonising its Arab colonies, France had not publicly supported the resolution. After considering the danger of American aid being withheld,
France finally voted in favour of it. So, too, did France's neighbours, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.[70]
Venezuela (Vote: For): Carlos Eduardo Stolk, Chairman of the
Delegation of Venezuela, voted in favor of Resolution 181 .[88]
Cuba (Vote: Against): The Cuban delegation stated they would vote
against partition "in spite of pressure being brought to bear against
us" because they could not be party to coercing the majority in
Palestine.[89]
Siam (Absent): The credentials of the Siamese delegations were
cancelled after Siam voted against partition in committee on 25 November.[71][90]
There is also some evidence that Sam Zemurray put pressure on several
"banana republics" to change their votes.[91]
Reports of pressure against the Plan
According to the Israeli historian Benny Morris, Wasif Kamal, an Arab
Higher Committee official, tried to bribe a delegate to the United
Nations, perhaps a Russian.[92]
Concerning the welfare of Jews in Arab countries, a number of direct
threats were made:
Jamal Husseini promised, "The blood will flow like rivers in the Middle East".[93]
Iraq’s prime minister Nuri al-Said told British diplomats that if the
United Nations solution was not "satisfactory", "severe measures should
be taken against all Jews in Arab countries".[94]
Concerning the welfare of Jews in Arab countries, a number of
predictions were made:
'"On 24 November the head of the Egyptian delegation to the General
Assembly, Muhammad Hussein Heykal Pasha, said that "the lives of
1,000,000 Jews in Moslem countries would be jeopardized by the
establishment of a Jewish state."[95] At the 29th Meeting of the UN Ad
Hoc Committee on Palestine on 24 November 1947, Dr Heykal Pasha, the
Egyptian delegate, said, "if the U.N decide to amputate a part of
Palestine in order to establish a Jewish state, no force on earth could
prevent blood from flowing there… Moreover… no force on earth can
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
