Dr. Granados proposed that the three U.N. Administrators be chosen from among nationals of any states Members of the Organization with the exception of the five permanent Members of the Security Council; that the international police force be composed of contingents from all Member States other than the same “Big Five”, each state contributing in proportion to the size of its own forces; that the cost of maintaining this force be borne by the five Permanent Members of the Security Council in proportion to their annual contributions to the United Nations.
The amendment also suggests that the transitional period should not last beyond 1 September 1949, but that at any time within that period either the Jewish or Arab state envisaged may request immediate independence provided it can prove that it has complied with the conditions laid down in the Majority Report relevant to constitution, the signing of a treaty of economic union and the pledging of certain guarantees to the United Nations (Para. 2, Recommendation A, of the Majority Report).
Lastly the Guatemalan amendment calls for punitive measures as laid down in the Charter, to be taken against either of the proposed new states which may disturb the peace and against any state or states which from now on are guilty of acts of aggression against either of the two peoples, Jews or Arabs.
(For full text of amendment see Take #5 following this Summary.)
In the course of a long speech weighing the many factors which contributed to the situation in Palestine, Dr. Granados indicated that his Government was in general support of the UNSCOP Majority Report and would vote for it with such amendments as those he had suggested.
(For a chronological and more detailed account of this meeting see Take #1 through #6 following this summary.)
Department of Public Information
Press end Publications Bureau
Lake Success, New York
Dr. Granados, who was a member of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, and one of the signers of the majority report, told the Committee that his Government accepted the conclusions of the majority Report of UNSCOP.
Advancing the reasons why he had so advised his Government he quoted from the Report. “The atmosphere in Palestine today is one of profound tension. In many respects the country is living under a semi-military regime,” he read.
He cited the fact that under Defense Emergency Regulations a person may be detained for an unlimited period by an area military commander and may be deported on order of the High Commissioner. The regulations concerning military courts, he quoted, prohibit a form of judicial appeal from or questioning of a sentence or decision of a military court.
Still referring to the Report, Dr. Grenados, stated that as of 12 July 1947, 820 persons were being held in detention on security grounds, of whom all were Jews with the exception of four Arabs.
He described the prevailing situation in Palestine as “distrust and bitter resentment on the part of the Jews toward the Mandatory Power; coolness and unfriendly feelings of the Arabs toward the British; and on the part of the British, an unshakable determination to execute the laws which they have imposed, with no regard for the political consequences that such execution often entails.”
The Guatemalan Representative then recapitulated the history of the last thirty years in Palestine, recounting the facts which he said had given rise to the present situation.
“It is possible”, said Dr. Granados, “that Sir Herbert Samuel (the first High Commissioner) may have been influenced by the fact of his being a Jew; and, leaning over backwards so as not to appear an adversary of pan-Arabism, he chose the most outspoken enemy of his people”.
Dr. Granados then mentioned anti-Jewish disturbances which broke out in Jaffa in 1921, in Jerusalem, Hebron and other cities in 1929, and finally the Arab uprising, of 1936 to 1939, The lengthy uprising said Dr. Granados, was launched simultaneously against the Jews and British, but, he asserted, “the curious aspect of these, disturbances was that the Mufti’s party killed more Arabs than Jews and English combined,”
The Grand Mufti, he continued, escaped from Palestine in 1937 after the assassination of a District Commissioner, sought refuge in Iraq, where he was warmly received. However, four years later said Dr. Grenados, the Iraqi Government, finding him responsible, with the German delegation, for disturbances traceable to Nazi propaganda, made it necessary for him to fleeing once more. From Iraq, the Grand Mufti went to Teheran, finding refuge in the various Axis legations, said Dr. Granados. When the British arrived, he escaped to Southern Italy and later to Berlin. It was after the Berlin meeting with Hitler, Dr. Granados said, that the Mufti began his radio campaign against the Allies. Captured by the French, following the German collapse, he again escaped: this time to Cairo from which place, Dr. Granados asserted, he now directs the Arab Higher Committee and dictates Arab, policy in Palestine.
Dr. Grenados noted that the Permanent Mandates Commission that same year condemned, the White Paper, but that the Commission’s report was not taken up by the Council of the League owing to the outbreak of hostilities in Europe. Consequently, he pointed out, the declaration of the Mandates Commission condemning the White Paper was still in force.
Dr. Grenades contended that since 1939, the United Kingdom had not been executing the terms of the Mandate.
The reason, he suggested, why Great Powers appear unable to assume Mandates and trusteeships, was that the Great Powers place their national economic and defense interests above those of the people whom they are called upon to govern.
Praising the British people for their splendid defence against German aggression and for the sacrifices they have agreed to in order to carry into affect their program of socialization, Dr. Granados said the brilliant domestic policy of Great Britain was out of step with its foreign policy.
“When”, he said, “a country is in possession of an empire, it often comes about that instead of leading it, men of good will are led, nay, dragged by it, Expansionist interests have always been the curse of the human race, and they will continue to be for many centuries to come.”
The antagonism and disaffection, he said, which the Mandatory Power now bore both from the Jewish and Arab side, had reached a point where the Administration was paralysed. It was for that reason, said Dr. Granados that the Palestine Administration declared the Mandate to be unworkable.
Dr. Granados said that because of the state of crisis in Palestine, he hesitated during consideration of the UNSCOP Report, before accepting a situation in which Great Britain would continue to be entrusted with the Mandate during the transitional period.
He then quoted from the examination of Mr. Ben Gurion, representative of the Jewish Agency, in which the latter stated that if a satisfactory partition plan were enacted, there would be no need of a transitional period.
The Guatemalan Representative next brought up the statement by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Mr. Arthur Creech-Jones, in which he had stated Great Britain’s decision to withdraw her administration and armed forces from Palestine.
This decision, said Dr. Granados which he applauded, had caused Guatemala to present an amendment to the Majority Report at this time, to meet the conditions “to be encountered in the implementation of that report and to assure peace in Palestine during the short transition period.”
The Ad Hoc Committee on Palestine,
Considering that the Report submitted by the majority of the members of the United Nations Committee on Palestine assures a just and workable solution that corresponds to the facts contained in the analysis of the case which preceeds the specific proposal of partition for the territory of Palestine with economic unity;
And considering that the Mandatory Power has declared its determination not to undertake implementation of the agreement of the majority, and that it is necessary to establish an authority which would execute the resolution of the Assembly.
Therefore The Committee resolves:
To recommend to the Assembly the approval, of the said majority proposal with the following amendments:
1) The transition period envisaged in Recommendation A, entitled “Partition and Independence”, will have a maximum duration up to the 1st September 1949 but within that period, at any time, either of the states may request its independence if it proves that it has complied with conditions required in Paragraph 2 of the same Point A.;
2) In Recommendation B, entitled, “Transition period and Constitution” the term “Mandatory Power” should be substituted by “the United Nations”, which latter shall administer the territories of Palestine by means of three delegates, who shall be elected by the General Assembly among people of high integrity, who are nationals of Member States of the United Nations, with the exception of the 5 permanent members of the Security Council;
3) That an international military police force be constituted to assure order during the period of transition. Such a force should be formed with military contingents of those Member States which are not permanent members of the Security Council in proportion to the total number of the armed forces of each country. The contingents should be made up preferably of volunteers, but until this is possible, the Member States should make them available from their regular forces.
4) The strength and composition of the International Police Corps should be fixed by the administering delegates after listening to the opinion of military and political experts to be placed at their disposal by the Secretariat of the United Nations.
5) The expenses needed for the maintenance of such a police corps and for the armaments and implements that it would require, should be borne by the 5 permanent Members of the Security Council and should be distributed among them in proportion to their yearly contributions to the United Nations.
6. The member states of the United Nations shall take the measures prescribed in the Charter against either of the two peoples, Arab or Jewish, that should attempt to disturb the peace, as well as against any state or states that from this day should commit any type of aggression against either of the peoples of Palestine.
Explaining that the claims of both parties could not be satisfied completely. Dr. Granados said the committee assumed a middle position, unanimously recognizing that both peoples have rights and material claims to the disputed territory - the Jews by reason of historical ties and the legality of the Mandate - and the Arabs by virtue of a numerical majority, long possession and on the principle of self-determination.
But the phrase “self-determination,” he declared, while a beautiful principle, had not been given application after either world wars, and cannot, therefore, be taken as an axiom of international law solely and exclusively for the case of Palestine. He the cited numerous examples, where the peoples of the countries ceded by various treaties were given no chance to voice their wishes.
Further, he pointed out, only sovereign states – of which Palestine was not one - can be the objects of international law,
Returning to his own observations, during the UNSCOP’s visit in Palestine, he praised the Jewish system of land tenure, saying, “One could wish that the cooperative system would spread, not only over the rest of Palestine, but also to many other countries in which analogous problems exist, thus putting an end once and for all to misery and want.”
There are many Arabs in Palestine, Dr. Granados declared, who are in disagreement with the Mufti’s policy, but do not dare express this disagreement publicly, Such a situation, he continued, does not exist in the Arab state of Lebanon where there is toleration for differences of opinion and “where the long arm a the Mufti or Jerusalem does not reach.”
Dr. Granados then read a letter to the UNSCOP from the Catholic Arc-bishop of Lebanon, Monsignor Ignace Mobarat, which said in part:
Dr. Granados refuted a statement made earlier in the General Debate by the delegate of Pakistan. The Pakistan delegate, he said, had declared it would be dishonest to pretend that Palestine was not included in the area promised to the Arabs by the British Government through Sir Henry McMahon in 1916-17.
To make his point, that Palestine was so excluded, Dr. Granados quoted a statement to that effect made in 1939 by the Lord High Chancellor of England, on behalf of a British-Arab Commission and also one made by Sir Henry, himself, in 1937, which said: “1 feel it my duty to state, and I do so definitely and emphatically, that it was not intended by me in giving this pledge to King Hussein to include Palestine in the area in which Arab independence was promised.
Dr. Granados then, in turn, refuted Pakistan’s assertion that an equal number of Arabs would be living under Jewish domination in the proposed Jewish state, as Jews would be, declaring that instead of Pakistan’s figure of approximately a half million persons of each party, there would probably be hearer eight hundred thousand Jews and 337 thousand Arabs,
Refuting still another Pakistan statement, namely that the proposed map of partition resembled a carpet of crazy design, Dr. Granados showed the Committee a map of Pakistan. The Pakistan map, he termed, instead of resembling a crazily designed carpet, looked more like the chessboard on which the Queens were playing with Alice in the garden behind the looking glass.
In conclusion, Dr. Granados asserted that the prediction that the Arabs in the Jewish state would be plunged into misery and forced to emigrate to other Arab countries had been disclaimed by the history of the last 25 years. It was, he said, the economic progress of the Jews in Palestine which drew the Arabs down from the hill districts. And he pointed out, further, that despite the boycott which prohibits open trading between Arabs and Jews, it is still carried on clandestinely in the cities and openly in the settlements. The attraction, he declared, of mutual economic interests is irresistible - a fact which for the Committee must be a hope and an incentive.
And the Guatemalan delegate ended by declaring: “There is no reason why there should be a fundamental conflict between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine. The Arabs are producers of agricultural commodities for home consumption; the Jews are primarily producers of agricultural commodities for export and they tend to industrial expansion. Such industrial expansion can only be eminently favorable to the interests of the Middle East.”
The meeting adjourned at 1.00 p.m. end will meet again tomorrow at 11.00 a.m.
# # # #