Lipsky Calls on Britain to Remove Political Anomaly Known As Transjordan State

The maintenance of an artificial division between Transjordan and Palestine is accentuating Jewish-Arab differences was asserted here yesterday by Louis Lipsky, National Chairman of the American Palestine Campaign, and former President of the Zionist Organization of America in an address at the semi-annual meeting of the Seaboard Zionist Region at the Jewish Community Center.

Referring to the recent offer of Emir Abdullah to lease his land holdings in Transjordan to a Jewish company, Mr. Lipsky declared that “if England is really in earnest about establishing peace between Arabs and Jews and at the same time is seriously interested in the development of the Jewish National Home, it would take steps at once to remove the political anomaly known as the Transjordan State.”

The meeting of the Seaboard Zionist Region Executive Committee marked the opening of a series of fund-raising efforts for Palestine throughout this section of the country.

Mr. Lipsky’s address was the key-note speech of the session, attended by delegates from the states of Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Terming Britain’s policy in keeping Transjordan and Palestine apart as short sighted, Mr. Lipsky declared.

“The arguments advanced for establishing a separate government in Transjordan, with Emir Abdullah as the nominal head, were never convincing. These arguments have to do with post-war British imperial policies which since have broken down. A separate Transjordan is of no value to the indigenous Transjordan Arabs, has no genuine significance for the Palestinian Arabs, and is certainly detrimental to Jewish interests.

“Palestine, as an industrial and commercial center, needs the hinterland of Transjordan for a workable economic field. Separated from Palestine, Transjordan is incapable of economic self-development.

“The growth of the Jewish National Home is seriously affected because Transjordan contains only 200,000 inhabitants in a territory twice as large as that of Palestine, in which there are over 1,000,000 inhabitants. If these two unequal parts were consolidated, there could be an easy and natural exchange of populations and of all the benefits of industry and commerce.

“The continuance of the Transjordan contrivance — a government maintained by Britain with no resource of its own — prevents the development of a Jewish National Home large enough for Jewish needs, and, at the same time, accentuates Jewish-Arab differences which arise out of the feeling of Palestine Arabs that a delimited Palestine is not large enough for both nationalities.

“Great Britain can, without difficulty alter the situation. The separation of Transjordan from Palestine was effected upon its own motion at a session of the Council of the League of Nations in September 1922 by an amendment to the Palestine Mandate. In fact, Transjordan is still legally subject to the general provisions of the Mandate, the full effect of which is withheld from application to Transjordan by special and detailed exemptions.

“Great Britain can, if it wishes, have all the provisions of the Mandate apply also to Transjordan, and can govern it as it now governs Palestine.

“Why should it hesitate to take this step which is bound to pave the way to peace and prosperity on both sides of the Jordan”.