Cabinet Has Outlined Three Alternative Programs of Action on Palestine

The British Cabinet has outlined three alternative programs of action to be followed by Palestine High Commissioner Sir Alen Cunningham, depending on the turn of events in the country, the diplomatic correspondant of the Sunday Observer says today.

He reports that relatively mild measures will be taken if the Jewish Agency executive decides to cooperate fully with the British military authorities in securing restoration of law and order in the country. However, if the situation in the country remains the same, the High Commissioner is authorized to use all possible means to suppress terrorism, short of proclaiming martial law. Finally, if the situation gets out of hand, martial law will then be imposed.

The correspondent points out that the executive of the Jewish Agency having repudiated terrorism can hardly be expected to extend further cooperation without risking civil war in Palestine. Therefore, the High Commissioner has only two alternatives to choose from, namely, to fight terrorism with or without martial law.

Predicting that the cabinet will decide this week on the principles of some sort of partition schems, the correspondant says that whether or not the Zionists participate in the London conference is of less importance than the provisions of the partition proposal. He says that the Jewish demand for a state based on the Peal recommendations plus the Negev is considered a “maximum” demand in government circles, but adds that unless the final proposal is nearer to that than to the Morrison plan it is doomed to rejection.

Asserting that the hand of the moderates will be strengthened in Palestine if the British Government provides evidence that their policy will pay dividends in the direction of the establishment of a viable Jewish state, the Yorkshire Post, which is controlled by Anthony Eden, urges the British, Jewish and Arab negotiators to get together not as opponents sparring for an opening, but as friendly collaborators seeking a constructive settlement which will meet the essential needs of all.

The opposite point of view is adopted by the Economist which calls on the government to dictate a settlement and pursue its own course regardless of pressure from without. It questions whether the Palestine Jews are ready to work for a suspension of terrorism, asserting that as many Palestinian delegates as Americans at the Basle Congress opposed a policy of moderation. The Economist says that “leaders who now see the disadvantage of extremism are paying dearly for past political irresponsibility.”