J. D. B. News Letter

however, when the French drove King Feisal from Damascus and the question of which country Transjordania was to belong to was abated. It is interesting to recall how the English press insisted upon the inclusion of Transjordania in the British and not in the French Mandate. The London Times wrote on September 19, 1920, Transjordania is the natural frontier of Palestine. The Manchester Guardian of February 24, 1920 declared that from a historical and economic standpoint, Transjordania is an organic part of Palestine.

In March of 1921, the influential French journal “The French-Asian,” wrote that the English are endeavoring to revise the frontier question in order “to guarantee complete success for something which is not English in the ordinary sense of the term, but truly international, viz. the forthcoming Zionist government.”

The English demanded Transjordania in the name of Jewish government to be established, but the very first step England took was contrary to the independence of Palestine. In 1920, the first High Commissioner for Palestine, Sir Herbert Samuel, established in Transjordania local autonomous councils. When it was discovered that this form was unfortunate and that anarchy reigned Emir Abdullah was approached in March of 1921. The latter took over Amman, whence he sought to march on Syria to recover that country from the French. The English asked Emir Abdullah to take over the administration of the country and restore order for a period of six months. However, Abdullah’s tenure of office continued for a longer period and England began to think of a basis for further separating Transjordania from Palestine.

The first draft of the mandate for Palestine contained 27 paragraphs, none of which mentioned Transjordania. The final text of the Mandate consisted of 28 paragraphs, paragraph 25 of which empowered the mandatory government, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations “to withhold or set aside, in the territories between the Jordan river and the eastern boundary of Palestine, the employment of such mandate agreements which are found to be unapplicable because of local conditions.”

On the basis of this paragraph, Great Britain, in a memorandum sent to the League of Nations on September 16, 1923, declared that it would not employ in Transjordania all the stipulations of the mandate relating to the duty as sumed of helping to establish a Jewish national homeland in Palestine.

On April 26, 1923, Sir Herbert Samuel, in the name of the British government, declared: that Great Britain is willing to recognize the independence of Transjordania under Emir Abdullah.

On February 20, 1928, a pact was concluded between Great Britain and Emit Abdullah which completed the separation of Transjordania from Palestine, although the British mandate over the new government remains in full force.

Dr. Fishelev marshals a brilliant array of facts to prove that England openly violated Article 25 of the mandate in its memorandum of September 22, 1923. Article 25, he holds, refers only to a temporary situation in its provision for unapplication of certain articles of the mandate and does not refer to the establishment of an independent government. In taking this action, Britain is contravening the text and the spirit of the mandate, he asserts.

It is also contrary to Article 5 of the Mandate, which makes the mandatory government responsible for the unity of Palestine territory, declares Dr. Fishelev.

NEXT STORY