Partitioning Palestine

Partitioning Palestine is the first history of the ideological and political forces that led to the idea of partition—that is, a division of territory and sovereignty—in British mandate Palestine in the first half of the twentieth century. Inverting the spate of narratives that focus on how the idea contributed to, or hindered, the development of future Israeli and Palestinian states, Penny Sinanoglou asks instead what drove and constrained British policymaking around partition, and why partition was simultaneously so appealing to British policymakers yet ultimately proved so difficult for them to enact. Taking a broad view not only of local and regional factors, but also of Palestine’s place in the British empire and its status as a League of Nations mandate, Sinanoglou deftly recasts the story of partition in Palestine as a struggle to maintain imperial control. After all, British partition plans imagined space both for a Zionist state indebted to Britain and for continued British control over key geostrategic assets, depending in large part on the forced movement of Arab populations. With her detailed look at the development of the idea of partition from its origins in the 1920s, Sinanoglou makes a bold contribution to our understanding of the complex interplay between internationalism and imperialism at the end of the British empire and reveals the legacies of British partitionist thinking in the broader history of decolonization in the modern Middle East.

Without the Canadian mediation between the two world blocs in 1947, UN resolution 181(II) to partition Palestine would likely have failed to secure the two thirds majority necessary for adoption by the General Assembly. In fact, the Canadians were among the main initiators of the partition plan and the establishment of a Jewish state. Tauber demonstrates that this Canadian involvement was not an official government policy, but rather a private initiative of some high-ranking Canadian foreign service officials who believed partition to be the only practicable solution for the Palestine question. Thus, due to humanitarian concerns, these officials followed an independent policy against the express will of their prime minister. The results would forever change the history of the Middle East. Tauber explores this little known aspect of Canadian foreign policy. Canada's under secretary of state for external affairs, Lester Pearson, assisted by other foreign service officials, decided on his own accord which policy to follow in this instance. Based upon many original Canadian, British, American, UN, and Israeli documents, this study shows that Pearson's motivation was not the desire to make Canada a middle power involved in international affairs, as some scholars of Canadian international affairs have previously argued. Instead, the impact of the Holocaust drove these officials to break ranks with their superiors at home to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.

Some seventy-five years after the boundaries of the British Mandate for Palestine were set, the State of Israel still lacks a defined territory and agreed-upon boundaries, except for its boundary with Egypt. This book examines this unusual situation, concentrating especially on the perceptions of territory and boundaries within the Zionist movement. Galnoor discusses the period from the first territorial decision in 1919 up to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, placing special emphasis on the relatively unknown Zionist, Palestinian, and Arab positions regarding territorial partition in 1937. And he argues that although dramatic changes have occurred in the international and regional arena, the partners to the conflict, the security considerations, and the international dilemmas, the 1937 decision contained the parameters of the choices that have confronted Arab and Israeli leaders ever since. His findings are of direct relevance to the ongoing Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, which once again revolve around the trade-off between national goals and territorial aspirations.

*Includes pictures *Includes online resources and a bibliography for further reading The conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is technically 69 years old and counting but has its roots in over 2,000 years of history. With so much time and history, the Middle East peace process has become laden with unique, politically sensitive concepts like the right of return, contiguous borders, secure borders, demilitarized zones, and security requirements, with players like the Quartet, Palestinian Authority, Fatah, Hamas, the Arab League and Israel. Over time, it has become exceedingly difficult for even sophisticated political pundits and followers to keep track of it all. Nearly a century before the state of Israel was founded in 1948, Palestine was under the control of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, consisting mostly of Arabs. During the 1850s, Jews began settling in small villages across the lands that once comprised Judea and Samaria, which the Jews considered their ancient Biblical homeland. These efforts to buy property were driven by the motivation of some Jews to help reestablish the land as the Jewish homeland. These Jews became known as Zionists, in reference to Zion, which is often thought of as a reference to all of Israel but was in fact a reference to part of Jerusalem. The Zionists attempted to establish a Jewish National Fund that would assist Jews in buying land in Palestine for Jewish settlement. In the middle of World War I, the British pledged their support to the Zionist cause and the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration of November 1917. At the time, the British realized the strategic importance of Palestine because it was near the Suez Canal, and they saw the Zionists as potentially helpful allies in the region following the war. British foreign secretary Arthur James Balfour sent a letter to Lord Rothschild on November 2, 1917, declaring the government's "sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations," and favoring "the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish People," with an intent to assist the Jews in achieving it. In 1947, the British delegated the issue of partitioning the British Mandate to the United Nations, and the U.N. General Assembly set up the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). UNSCOP eventually came up with what is now known as the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947. The Partition Plan carved up two strange looking states, but their motive was to create an Israel in which the Jewish population was a 55% majority, while Palestine had an over 90% Palestinian Arab majority. Meanwhile, the city of Jerusalem would be administered internationally, due to the sensitive religious concerns of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In addition to several Christian holy spots, Jerusalem's Al-Aqsa Mosque is the third holiest site in Islam, and it is situated right next to the Western Wall, the Jews' holiest remaining site. On May 14, 1948, the British Mandate officially expired. That same day, the Jewish National Council issued the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel. About 10 minutes later, President Truman officially recognized the State of Israel, and the Soviet Union also quickly recognized Israel. However, the Palestinians and the Arab League did not recognize the new state, and the very next day, armies from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq invaded the former British Mandate to squelch Israel, while Saudi Arabia assisted the Arab armies. Jordan would also get involved in the war. In early 1949, Israel began signing armistices with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, which left Israel in control of nearly 75% of the lands that were to be partitioned into the two states under the 1947 plan. The new armistice lines became known as the "Green Line," and the conflict has continued to involve those lines and the issues that were contested in a war now nearly 70 years old.

Law lies at the heart of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict Israel's creation was rooted in the need for a Jewish homeland, as enshrined in 'public law'. Palestinian rights to return to their homes and livelihoods are also established in law.John Strawson argues that legal tools are being used to undermine Palestinian self-determination. His chronological account of modern Palestinian history shows that the League of Nations and the United Nations are responsible for developing a legal framework which marginalises the Palestinian people.The book focuses on three key moments in the conflict: the League of Nations Mandate, the United Nations partition plan and the Oslo agreements. None of these documents are neutral but rather encode a variety of meanings. The book traces the way in which these legal narratives have shaped national identity. Law, far from offering conflict resolution, has reinforced the trenches from which Palestinians and Israelis confront each other.

This timely work, contributed by noted authorities, explains the crucial events in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that led to the UN resolution to partition Palestine into two states on November 29, 1947. The book first analyzes the historical context of UN resolution 181, including the positions and internal debates of the Jewish and Arab parties and of the international community. It then introduces primary sources related to the resolution, such as protocols, letters, reports, and speeches, some of these published for the first time in English. By combining in-depth analyses with such sources, the book provides a rich and comprehensive overview of the subject from a variety of perspectives. It shows that the arguments for a two-state solution, i.e., a Jewish state along a Palestinian state, are as relevant today as they were then. Featuring both Israeli and Palestinian points of view, this significant work renews the debate that has shaped --and is still shaping-- the Arab-Israeli conflict. It will be an essential resource for anyone interested in the past and future of Israel and Palestine.

Partitioning Palestine is the first history of the ideological and political forces that led to the idea of partition—that is, a division of territory and sovereignty—in British mandate Palestine in the first half of the twentieth century. Inverting the spate of narratives that focus on how the idea contributed to, or hindered, the development of future Israeli and Palestinian states, Penny Sinanoglou asks instead what drove and constrained British policymaking around partition, and why partition was simultaneously so appealing to British policymakers yet ultimately proved so difficult for them to enact. Taking a broad view not only of local and regional factors, but also of Palestine’s place in the British empire and its status as a League of Nations mandate, Sinanoglou deftly recasts the story of partition in Palestine as a struggle to maintain imperial control. After all, British partition plans imagined space both for a Zionist state indebted to Britain and for continued British control over key geostrategic assets, depending in large part on the forced movement of Arab populations. With her detailed look at the development of the idea of partition from its origins in the 1920s, Sinanoglou makes a bold contribution to our understanding of the complex interplay between internationalism and imperialism at the end of the British empire and reveals the legacies of British partitionist thinking in the broader history of decolonization in the modern Middle East.

This timely work, contributed by noted authorities, explains the crucial events in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that led to the UN resolution to partition Palestine into two states on November 29, 1947. The book first analyzes the historical context of UN resolution 181, including the positions and internal debates of the Jewish and Arab parties and of the international community. It then introduces primary sources related to the resolution, such as protocols, letters, reports, and speeches, some of these published for the first time in English. By combining in-depth analyses with such sources, the book provides a rich and comprehensive overview of the subject from a variety of perspectives. It shows that the arguments for a two-state solution, i.e., a Jewish state along a Palestinian state, are as relevant today as they were then. Featuring both Israeli and Palestinian points of view, this significant work renews the debate that has shaped --and is still shaping-- the Arab-Israeli conflict. It will be an essential resource for anyone interested in the past and future of Israel and Palestine.