Says Limit Jewish Palestine Influx to Half of Population, to Calm Arab Fears of Encroachment

The fixing of a final limit of Jewish immigration into Palestine at somewhat less than half of the total population as the basis of eliminating the fear “which haunts the Arab mind today that he is destined to be overwhelmed by alien thousands,” is suggested by Henry Noel Brailsford, an eminent British Socialist, in an article on “Great Britain and the Palestinian Mandate” in the December issue of the “Menorah Journal.”

Mr. Brailsford believes that this limit should be not “less than 33, per cent and not more than 45.” Within these limits “little of anything would be sacrificed, for the chances of exceeding such a figure during the probable duration of the Mandate are remote. Within these modest limits the atmosphere of a cultural focus would be created. Jewish thought would have its own home, and a compact population would be living under natural conditions… under a stable treaty of friendship and Jewish ability and wealth would command an influence, even in politics, out of all proportion to the number of Jews.”

Arabs in Overwhelming Majority

After a brief discussion about an admission of British responsibility for the recent events in Palestine Mr. Brailsford speaking of the Arab claims says “when (British Labor) looks at Palestine it sees a nearly homogeneous Arab population which even today forms an overwhelming majority. It has settled in Palestine for almost as many centuries as our Germanic ancestors have held England. One can not doubt that it is bitterly and generally opposed to any considerable immigration of Jews. Can one refuse it the right of self-determination? One many deplore its fanaticisms; one may regret it is blind to the economic and cultural gains which Zionism has brought it already and promises in much richer measure for the future. This, if the appeal to right be considered, are irrelevant considerations. One might reason with the Arabs; one might insist that some time be allowed for a fair trial of this experiment, but if in the end they cannot overcome their prejudices, then it is they and not we who must decide what is best for them.”

Mr. Brailsford then goes into a discussion about the moral right of the Jews to the country. “In right… and in morals the Jewish ambition is capable of good defense… if we believe in any system of rights at all, an organized humanity must preserve to itself the power to override the particular race or tribe in the interest of the great society of mankind… The League sees in Palestine a territory negligently cultivated and sparsely inhabited, in the hands of a race which if left to itself gives little promise of progress. Has it not the right to say: ‘Make room. There is place in your territory for others, who will reclaim its deserts and restore its civilization. You shall not obstruct their coming but neither shall you suffer in any of your civil rights.’… The true basis… for the Jewish claim in Palestine calls for a builder, that the Jews lack a home, and that here is the site on which they, and they alone are ready to lavish their wealth, their science and their devotion. The Arab race has for the development of its nationality and culture the whole of North Africa. Syria, Iraq and Arabia. Palestine it is reckoned is only one percent of its estate.”

Time Limit for British

Then he goes on to say that England has undertaken to support this Jewish claim but while there is no chance of Britain giving the mandate in the near future a reasonable time limit or say fifteen years must be placed upon her responsibility. He points out that at the present rate of immigration the date of the Jews obtaining a majority population is infinitely distant. “It is not a small achievement that the Jews form 18% of the population. But when one analyzes the figures of immigration it is not easy to feel sanguine about the attainment of a majority within any period which even a patient man might be willing to accept… about one hundred and sixty years must elapse before the Jews whose natural increase is slightly less than the natives could outnumber the Arabs…”

He then asks should England under take to control the land for a century and half and is it legally and morally justified in doing so. He answers it by saying “we have done it in India. We shall not do it much longer… One must coldly face the fact that… an immense change has come about in the attitude of the whole nation towards territorial expansion overseas…. There have always been strategical thinkers who wished to hold Palestine as we hold Cyprus, as a guarantee for the security of the Suez Canal… but realists of this school would be content to hold Palestine without the Jews. They would achieve their strategical ends by concluding a treaty of Alliance with an autonomous Arab Palestine, and save their faces by obtaining on paper guarantees for the toleration of some severely limited Jewish settlements. They might provide for some such guardianship by the League of the rights of the Jewish minornty as it exercises today in Roumania and Poland… as solution on these lines would be in conformity with the whole trend of the development of British Imperialism since the War.”

Mr. Brailsford concludes by remarking that since the changing attitude toward imperialism must influence the national view of the Palestine man-date and since the possibility of a Jewish majority, the one real solution is so remote… he feels that the fixing of a final limit for Jewish immigration would considerably improve Arab-Jewish relations.