867N.01/1205: Telegram
The Consul General at Jerusalem (Wadsworth) to the Secretary of State
[Received 4 p.m.]
From Murray. During a conversation yesterday with the High Commissioner88 (and earlier with others as indicated below) the following views were expressed on the present situation in Palestine:
Sir Harold described the situation here as being now one of national revolt enveloping the entire country. While force must and will be used to restore order, he said, the announcement of a new British policy respecting Palestine is not likely, as desired by the Jews, to be withheld pending complete restoration of law and order which, according to General Haining, would take 2 to 3 years to accomplish.
Sir Harold intimated that it was useless to go on sacrificing lives on all sides when a solution might be offered that would render bloodshed unnecessary. He stated at the same time that he was utterly opposed to any negotiations with the Mufti although he was conscious of the fact that the Mufti is at the moment controlling the revolt and that there is no one else here with authority to speak for the Arabs of Palestine.
General Haining on the other hand was of the opinion that the British would in the end negotiate with the Mufti. Others—id est leading British officials, Arabs and Jews, with whom I have discussed the question—put it this way:
The British Government can, as it appears to be doing, negotiate with the Arab princes and political leaders of the Near East, including the Mufti, thus “diluting” but at the same time availing itself of his influence.
Sir Harold intimated that partition was no longer a practicable solution but he was at the same time emphatic in condemning the form of the present Palestine Mandate which he said was based on gross ignorance of conditions prevailing in Palestine at the time it was drafted and had since been shown to be wholly unworkable. In this connection he said it was a mistake ever to have separated [Page 966] Palestine from Syria which had always been united in the Ottoman Empire.
This latter remark may have been an indirect reference to the proposed union of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and possibly Iraq which is being much discussed here and which, if realized, would in the opinion of both Jews and Arabs eventually offer an enlarged outlet for Jewish immigration in this region. It seems clear, however, that the neighboring Arab States are not prepared, in advance of such federation, to obligate themselves to accept Jewish immigrants and that the Jews will not agree to stake their future here or in the Near East as a whole on such a hypothetical eventuality.
The High Commissioner was rather guarded in his remarks on this all-important subject of immigration but his observations on the general subject led me to believe that he considers a drastic limitation of immigration into Palestine proper to be essential to any lasting settlement. British official circles generally tend to the view that the Arabs can not be brought even to discuss the bases of permanent settlement unless such limitation be enforced at least as an interim measure. [Murray.]
- Sir Harold MacMichael.↩