New York Press Sees Commission’s Report As Attempt to Satisfy Jews and Arabs; Stresses Need of Arab-

Editorial comments upon the report of the Palestine Inquiry Commission appear in the New York “Times,” “World,” “Herald Tribune” and “Evening Post” of Wednesday. These papers see in the report an attempt to satisfy both Arabs and Jews, and they stress the need of Arab-Jewish cooperation in Palestine in the future.

“The chief impression one carries away from the report is of an extraordinary lack of ability, or lack of concern, on the part of the British authorities,” says the “Times.” “A situation admittedly difficult was allowed to develop to the point of crisis. With plenty of tinder and powder lying about in Palestine, no effort was seemingly made to discourage the scattering of sparks by mischief-makers or fanatics on both sides. To say that there are fundamental causes for Arab-Jewish hostility does not mean that these causes cannot be removed by peaceful methods.”

The “Times” shows that the point made by the Commission that Jewish immigration into Palestine is one of the basic causes of Arab suspicion and hatred is not true, since if it were true the massacres of Hebron and Safed should have occurred in 1925, when the Jewish immigration reached its highest point, instead of last summer.

“A clarification of the Balfour Declaration is needed in the interests of both Jews and Arabs,” says the “Times.” “The fear of Jewish political domination must be exorcised. A way must be found to harmonize at least a measure of self-government for Palestine with the Balfour pledge.”

The “World” sees in the report a justification for its Palestine correspondent who stated that the immediate cause of the riots last summer was a Jewish demonstration at the Wailing Wall on August 15, and for which statement the “World” was criticized. According to the “World,” the British government must choose now “between a Zionist state which will really have the full support of British power, instead of shadowy encouragement, and a Palestinian state which would grant self-government to the Arabs on condition that they permit Jewish colonists to settle in the country as rapidly as it is able to support them.”

“Even if one accepts the additional memorandum of the Laborite member, very much more favorable to the Jews and more censorious of the Arabs, the question still hangs suspended,” says the “Herald-Tribune”. “Admitting that the economic effects of the Jewish experiment have been advantageous to the Arabs rather than the reverse, the fact seems to remain that the Arabs do not like it. And admitting that the Grand Mufti incited the Arabs to passionate defiance of the law, the fact remains that the law has been imposed from without in support of an alien culture introduced into Palestine without the consent of the inhabitants.

“The Arabs and the Jews in Palestine.” concludes the “Herald-Tribune”, ought to have cooperated to work out their destiny in peace, but they have not; a decision of policy under the mandate must be made, but is not the mandate self-contradictory as well as ambiguous? British statesmanship will no doubt be equal to finding some kind of formula—it is an art at which it rarely fails—but the ultimate answer will be written in the relative vitality and actuality of the two nationalisms now face to face upon the ground.”

The “Evening Post” praises the Shaw commission for investigating the causes of last summer’s riots “with British thoroughness and courage.” It expects deep feeling to develop when Prime Minister MacDonald presents the report to Parliament.

The “Jewish Daily Forward” (Socialist) compares favorably the minority report of Mr. Harry Snell, Laborite, with the majority report. It concludes a long editorial as follows:

“The Socialists, the workers and the progressive people of the entire world will understand the significance of the two reports. To the majority report they will turn their backs, to the minority report they will turn their faces. And in this lies the great guarantee for the future of the Jewish Yishub and of Jewish immigration into Palestine. For the future belongs not to the Shaws, Bettertons and Morrises, but to the Harry Snells; not to the land-owners and effendis, but to the Socialists and workers and all progressive people throughout the world.”