Hubbry Logo
United Nations Special Committee on PalestineUnited Nations Special Committee on PalestineMain
Open search
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
Community hub
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Meetings of UNSCOP at YMCA in Jerusalem (seated at far left, David Ben-Gurion)

The United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) was created on 15 May 1947[1][2] in response to a United Kingdom government request that the General Assembly "make recommendations under article 10 of the Charter, concerning the future government of Palestine". The British government had also recommended the establishment of a special committee to prepare a report for the General Assembly. The General Assembly adopted the recommendation to set up the UNSCOP to investigate the cause of the conflict in Palestine, and, if possible, devise a solution. UNSCOP was made up of representatives of 11 countries. UNSCOP visited Palestine and gathered testimony from Zionist organisations in Palestine[3] and in the US. The Arab Higher Committee boycotted the commission, explaining that the Palestinian Arabs' natural rights were self-evident and could not continue to be subject to investigation, but rather deserved to be recognized on the basis of the principles of the United Nations Charter.[4]

The report of the committee dated 3 September 1947[5] supported the termination of the British Mandate in Palestine. It contained a majority proposal for a plan of partition into two independent states with an economic union and a minority proposal for a plan for a federal union with Jerusalem as its capital. The majority plan was supported by 7 of the 11 members, with Iran, India and Yugoslavia voting against it, and Australia abstaining.[6]

Following the report's release, the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question was appointed by the General Assembly.

On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 181, a slight modification of the recommendations proposed in the UNSCOP majority plan. [7]

History

[edit]

Shortly after the British government announced that it would be referring the Palestine problem to the United Nations, the Secretary-General, Trygve Lie, ordered the establishment of a five-member team to study the Palestine issue. The team consisted of Ralph Bunche, Constantin Stavropoulos, John Noel Reedman, Henri Vigier and Alfonso Garcia Robles.[8] Their work was to serve as background material for the "United Nations Special Committee on Palestine", which was to study the Palestine problem in the summer of 1947.[9]

On 15 May 1947, the General Assembly established UNSCOP. The Special Committee was given wide powers to ascertain and record facts, to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to make recommendations. It was authorized to conduct investigations in Palestine and wherever it might deem useful.[10]

It was decided that the committee should be composed of "neutral" countries, excluding the five permanent members of the Security Council, including the Mandatory power.[11] The committee's final composition was: Australia, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, India, Iran, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, Uruguay and Yugoslavia.[12]

Work of the committee

[edit]
UNSCOP members visiting Haifa (July 18, 1947)

From 18 June to 3 July, the committee visited Jerusalem, Haifa, the Dead Sea, Hebron, Beersheba, Gaza, Jaffa, the Galilee, Tel Aviv, Acre, Nablus, Bayt Dajan, Tulkarm, Rehovot, Arab and Jewish settlements in the Negev, and several Jewish agricultural settlements. When visiting Jewish areas, committee members were warmly welcomed, often with flowers and cheering crowds. When the committee visited Tel Aviv, a public holiday was declared.[13] The streets were decorated with flags and posters and crowds surrounded the delegates during their tour of the city. They met Tel Aviv mayor Israel Rokach, dining with him at a cafe and visiting city hall. During their visit to city hall, they were invited to step onto the balcony, at which point the crowd below sang Hatikvah. Jewish Agency officials also ensured they met with Jews who spoke the native languages of committee members such as Swedish, Dutch, Spanish, and Persian. Committee members were given presentations arguing the Jewish case translated into their native languages. They were shown Jewish industry and commerce, agricultural innovations to allow farming in Jewish agricultural settlements in arid regions, and various institutions including Hadassah Medical Center, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the laboratories of the Daniel Sieff Institute. During the committee's visit, it was accompanied by Jewish Agency officials acting as liaisons: Abba Eban, David Horowitz, and Moshe Tov.

By contrast, committee members were ignored and faced hostility in Arab areas. During UNSCOP visits to Arab areas, they were often met with empty streets, as well as locals who refused to answer their questions and even fled restaurants when they arrived. In one instance, when committee members visited a school in Beersheba, the pupils were instructed not to look at the visitors. During a visit to an Arab village in Galilee, the entire population was evacuated except for children who remained behind and cursed at the visitors. UNSCOP members were deeply impressed by the cleanliness and modernity of Jewish areas, in comparison to the dirtiness and what they viewed as the backwardness of Arab areas. They were particularly horrified by the common sight of child labor and exploitation in Arab factories and workshops.[14]

UNSCOP officials clandestinely met with members of the high command of the Haganah, the main Jewish underground militia. The Haganah officials who attended the meeting, Yisrael Galili, Yigael Yadin, Yosef Avidar, and Ehud Avriel, insisted that the Haganah could repel any Arab attack, including by the surrounding Arab states.

UNSCOP also met twice with commanders from the right-wing Zionist guerrilla group Irgun after arranging contact with the Irgun through an Associated Press correspondent. In the first meeting, UNSCOP members met Irgun commander Menachem Begin along with Irgun high command members Haim Landau and Shmuel Katz, while in the second meeting they met with Begin and Irgun official Meir Cahan.[15]

Representatives of the Palestine Communist Party address the committee, July 1947.
(L-R): Shmuel Mikunis, Wolf Ehrlich, Meir Vilner.

It then held 12 public hearings from 4 to 17 July, during which 31 representatives from 12 Jewish organizations gave testimony and submitted written depositions, totaling thirty-two tons of material. Jewish Agency representatives such as David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Sharett, and Abba Eban testified, along with Chaim Weizmann, a former senior Zionist official who held no office at the particular time and testified as a private citizen. Zionist leaders argued for a Jewish state in Palestine and accepted the principle of partition. Anti-Zionist Jewish representatives from the Palestine Communist Party and Ichud parties were included.[16][17][18][19] British officials also testified before the committee.

During the hearings, the Haganah's intelligence branch SHAI conducted an extensive operation to eavesdrop on committee members so as to ensure that Zionist leaders would be better prepared for the hearings. Microphones were placed in their hotels and conference rooms, their telephone conversations were tapped, and the cleaning staff of the building where the hearings took place was replaced with female SHAI agents who monitored them while posing as cleaning ladies. The intelligence gathered was then distributed among Jewish leaders, who were instructed to destroy the documents after reading them. This did not go unnoticed: a member of the Swedish delegation complained that the cleaning staff of the building was "too pretty and educated. They are the eyes and ears of the Zionist leaders, who come to hearings with replies prepared in advance."[20]

Despite the official Arab boycott, several Arab officials and intellectuals privately met committee members to argue for a unitary Arab-majority state, among them AHC member and former Jerusalem mayor Husayn al-Khalidi.[17] The committee also received written arguments from Arab advocates.

Members of UNSCOP in 1947

The committee also met British officials. Some argued that the ideal solution would be to set up two autonomous Jewish and Arab states with Britain managing the finances of the two states due to the economic difficulties of partition and allowing Britain to retain a military presence in Palestine due to the growing threat from the Soviet Union. British military officials in particular emphasized the need for a continued British military presence in light of worsening relations between Britain and Egypt, arguing that bases in Palestine and continued control over Haifa harbor were essential for the defense of the Middle East. UNSCOP members were shown new British Army barracks being constructed in the Negev (which would never be completed), and were told that this would be the future basing area for British troops in the Suez Canal zone.[21]

The committee also noted the intense security and draconian laws in Palestine as a result of the ongoing Jewish insurgency conducted mainly by the Irgun and Lehi and to a lesser extent the Haganah. UNSCOP members noticed the constant presence of armed British security forces and armored cars in the streets, barbed wire around entire blocks of buildings, abundant pillboxes and roadblocks, and constant security checks in the streets. In addition, the Emergency Regulations imposed by the British, which allowed for detentions, confiscations, deportations, and trials before military rather than civil courts with no right to counsel, the admission of Henry Gurney, the Chief Secretary of Palestine, that the Palestine administration was spending nearly $30 million a year for police purposes, as well as the British insistence that their officials appear before UNSCOP hearings in private and a demand that they be informed in advance about who would be giving testimony, also left a negative impression.

Guatemalan delegate Jorge García Granados referred to the Palestine Mandate as a "police state." On June 16, the day of UNSCOP's first formal hearing, a British military court sentenced three Irgun fighters, Avshalom Haviv, Meir Nakar, and Yaakov Weiss, to death for their role in the Acre Prison break. UNSCOP appealed to the British government through the UN Secretary-General Trygve Lie to spare their lives. The British refused and were outraged at what they viewed as the committee's interference in the internal judicial affairs of the Mandate. Later, the Irgun captured two British sergeants and held them as hostages, threatening to kill them if the death sentences were carried out. Committee members discussed the sergeants when meeting with Begin, and refused an Irgun request to call Haviv, Nakar, and Weiss to testify before them over allegations of torture.[22]

UNSCOP also followed the events surrounding the SS Exodus, an illegal immigration ship carrying 4,554 Jewish Holocaust survivors which was intercepted by the Royal Navy. Some Committee members were present at the port of Haifa and witnessed British soldiers violently removing resisting passengers from the ship so they could be deported back to Europe. The committee completed its work in Palestine by hearing the eyewitness testimony of the Reverend John Stanley Grauel,[23] who was on the Exodus, convinced UNSCOP to reverse an earlier decision[which?]. The committee decided to hear the testimony of the Jewish refugees in British detention camps in Palestine and in European Displaced Persons camps trying to gain admittance to Palestine.[24]

Golda Meir, later Prime Minister of Israel, observed that Reverend Grauel's testimony and advocacy for the creation of the Jewish state fundamentally and positively changed the United Nations to support the creation of Israel.[25]

On July 21, the committee traveled to Lebanon, where they met with Lebanese Prime Minister Riad al-Solh and Foreign Minister Hamid Frangieh, who demanded an end to further Jewish immigration and the establishment of an Arab government in Palestine and claimed that the Zionists had territorial ambitions in Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. On July 23, the representatives of Arab League states testified before the committee in Sofar. Frangieh told the committee that Jews "illegally" in Palestine would be expelled while the situation of those "legally" in Palestine but without Palestinian citizenship would be resolved by a future Arab government. Efforts by UNSCOP members to get other Arab diplomats to soften their stance failed, with one committee member noting that "there is nothing more extreme than meeting all the representatives of the Arab world in one group... when each one tries to show that he is more extreme than the other." Privately, the committee met with pro-Zionist Maronite Christian leaders, who told them that Lebanese Christians supported partition. Half of the committee's members then flew to Amman to meet with King Abdullah of Transjordan, who claimed that the Arabs would have "difficulty" accepting partition but refused to completely rule it out, hinting that in such an event, the Arab parts of Palestine should go to Transjordan.[17]

UNSCOP then flew to Geneva, and on August 8, a subcommittee began a week-long tour of displaced persons camps in American and British occupation zones in Germany and Austria, and interviewed Jewish refugees and local military officials. They found that there was a strong desire to immigrate to Palestine among the Jewish DPs.[17]

In Geneva, while writing the report, the committee was subject to Jewish, Arab, and British pressure. Zionist representatives vigorously lobbied the committee. They repeatedly submitted memoranda and recruited a Palestinian Arab representative whose father had been murdered by the Husseini clan that dominated the Palestinian Arab community to argue in favor of a Jewish-Transjordanian partition of the country before the committee. The Arab League liaison submitted a memorandum demanding a solution satisfactory to the Palestinian Arabs, threatening catastrophe would result otherwise. The British submitted a memorandum arguing partition was a feasible option.[17]

Ad hoc committee deliberations

[edit]
Main article: Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question

The unanimous decision of the UNSCOP was for the termination of the mandate.

The Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question was appointed by the General Assembly, and two plans were drawn up for the Governance of Palestine on the termination of the Mandate. Seven members of the UNSCOP endorsed a partition plan (the Majority report) favoured by the Zionist leadership on 2 October 1947.

Members

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

United Nations Special Committee on Palestine

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) was an international body created by the on 15 May 1947 via Resolution 106 (S-1) to examine the Palestine question—arising from Britain's mandate administration—and propose recommendations for the territory's future political structure. Composed of delegates from eleven states selected for their neutrality (, , , , , , the Netherlands, , , , and ), UNSCOP operated with broad investigative authority, including the power to conduct on-site inquiries, solicit testimonies, and assess conflicting Arab and Jewish claims alongside religious and concerns. From late May through August 1947, the committee held sessions in New York, , , and ; toured displaced persons camps in ; interviewed representatives of Zionist organizations, Arab leaders, and governments; and reviewed historical precedents such as the 1937 partition proposal. Its final report, delivered on 31 , featured a plan endorsed by eight members advocating partition into sovereign Arab and Jewish states with an to foster cooperation, alongside an internationalized status for to safeguard holy sites; a minority proposal from three members (, , ) favored a single federal state with autonomous Arab and Jewish cantons under a central authority. UNSCOP's majority recommendations directly informed General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, which approved the partition framework—allocating roughly 56 percent of Mandate Palestine to the despite comprising about one-third of the population and owning under 7 percent of the land—prompting Jewish acceptance but Arab rejection and ensuing civil conflict that escalated into the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

Background and Formation

The Palestine Mandate Crisis

The British Mandate for Palestine, established in 1920 following the League of Nations' confirmation in 1922, incorporated the 1917 Balfour Declaration's commitment to facilitate a Jewish national home while safeguarding the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities. Arab opposition to increased Jewish and land purchases manifested in recurrent violence, including the in , which killed five Jews and injured over 200, and the 1929 riots, particularly the Hebron and massacres that claimed 133 Jewish lives amid widespread Arab assaults on Jewish communities. The 1936–1939 escalated these tensions into a sustained insurgency against British rule and Jewish settlement, involving strikes, bombings, and attacks that resulted in approximately 5,000 Arab, 400 Jewish, and 200 British deaths, prompting Britain to deploy over 20,000 troops to suppress the uprising. The 1939 White Paper policy marked a pivotal shift, capping Jewish at 75,000 over five years—despite the Mandate's provisions—and requiring Arab consent for any thereafter, while restricting Jewish land transfers in 95% of to appease Arab demands amid the revolt's aftermath. This restriction clashed with the post-Holocaust crisis, where over 250,000 Jewish displaced persons, primarily survivors, languished in European camps by 1946, fueling operations that attempted to bring more than 100,000 Jews to Palestine illegally, often intercepted by British naval blockades and leading to internment in or deportation. British enforcement, including the forcible return of passengers from ships like the Exodus 1947, intensified Jewish resistance and public opinion backlash in Britain and the . Demographic changes underscored the Mandate's challenges: the Jewish population rose from 11.1% (83,790 individuals) in the 1922 census to approximately 32% (around 608,000) by late , driven by legal , natural increase, and illegal arrivals, while Arabs grew from 589,177 to over 1.2 million through high birth rates and migration. legally purchased about 6–7% of Palestine's by , focusing on underutilized areas like marshes reclaimed for agriculture, yet Arabs rejected the 1937 Peel Commission's partition proposal—which allocated a small comprising 20% of the territory—insisting on exclusive Arab and viewing any Jewish self-rule as illegitimate. By 1947, Britain faced unsustainable burdens, expending £30–40 million annually on security amid escalating attacks by Jewish groups like and Lehi, including the 1946 that killed 91, alongside Arab irregular violence. On February 14, 1947, Prime Minister announced referral of the question to the , citing the failure of bilateral negotiations, irreconcilable communal demands, and the military's inability to maintain order without indefinite occupation. This decision reflected Britain's post-World War II exhaustion and prioritization of imperial retrenchment over enforcing the Mandate's conflicting promises.

Establishment of UNSCOP

On February 14, 1947, Britain announced its intention to terminate the Mandate and refer the issue to the , citing irreconcilable Arab-Jewish conflicts, financial strain, and escalating violence that rendered continued administration untenable. This prompted a of the UN from April 28 to May 15, 1947, during which the and advocated for an international inquiry into 's future governance, overriding British reservations about external intervention. The Assembly adopted Resolution 106 (S-1) on May 15, 1947, by a vote of 47 in favor, 5 against, and 7 abstentions—including Britain—thereby establishing the United Nations Special Committee on (UNSCOP) to conduct an impartial investigation. The resolution tasked UNSCOP with ascertaining the factual situation in Palestine, including political, economic, and social conditions, and preparing recommendations for a just and viable settlement that safeguarded the rights of both communities, upheld principles of , and protected minority interests as well as the sacred places of , , and . To promote neutrality, membership was limited to 11 states elected from those not permanent Security Council members, not administering powers, and without direct involvement as interested parties—explicitly excluding major powers like the and USSR, Britain as the mandatory, and states aligned with Arab or Jewish claims, such as members. The selected nations were , , , , , , , , , , and , chosen for their perceived impartiality despite subsequent criticisms of potential biases in some delegations. UNSCOP was required to report to the Secretary-General by September 1, 1947, providing approximately three months for fieldwork amid persistent unrest, including bombings and clashes in the aftermath of the July 1946 attack, which complicated logistics and security for the committee's operations. The exclusion of Arab states from membership, despite their assertions of regional stakeholding, sparked immediate procedural objections and contributed to the Arab Higher Committee's decision to boycott the committee, viewing it as predisposed toward partition and Jewish statehood. This boycott limited direct Arab input during initial phases, forcing reliance on alternative testimonies and underscoring tensions over the committee's composition from the outset.

Membership and Leadership

Selection and Composition

The United Nations General Assembly established the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) via Resolution 106 (S-1), adopted on 15 May 1947, directing a subcommittee to nominate eleven Member States based on criteria including demonstrated interest in the Palestine question, capacity for impartial judgment, and absence of direct political or economic stakes therein. The process prioritized geographic balance across continents—encompassing , , , and other regions—while explicitly barring permanent members of the Security Council and limiting Commonwealth dominions to and to avoid perceived alignments with British Mandate policies. This framework sought to assemble a body insulated from great-power rivalries and colonial entanglements, though the subcommittee's nominations reflected compromises among Assembly delegates amid broader debates on Mandate termination. The nominated and approved member states were , , , , , , , , , , and . These selections drew from middle- and smaller powers without mandatory territorial responsibilities in Palestine, with Latin American states (, , ) providing regional diversity, Asian members (, ) representing non-Western viewpoints, and European nations (, , , ) contributing varied ideological outlooks, including post-war communist influences in the former two. Each state appointed a compact delegation, typically comprising one principal representative, an alternate, and limited advisory or secretarial staff—totaling no more than a handful per —to enable agile operations during the mandated three-month timeline. UNSCOP held its organizational meetings in New York starting 16 June 1947 before departing for on 25 June, arriving amid heightened tensions to conduct fieldwork over roughly six weeks, including site visits, interviews, and evidence collection until early August. UNSCOP's composition deliberately excluded delegates from Arab League countries or Jewish agencies to uphold claims of detachment, relying instead on ad hoc submissions and oral testimonies from external stakeholders during Palestine hearings. Notwithstanding these neutrality provisions, the member states' backgrounds introduced heterogeneous influences: and , as nations with substantial Muslim demographics and recent anti-colonial experiences, displayed inclinations sympathetic to Arab rejectionism, whereas —despite Soviet bloc ties—adopted a results-oriented stance shaped by pragmatic geopolitical calculations rather than rigid . Such variances, evident in internal deliberations, underscored the challenges of achieving unalloyed in a committee drawn from ideologically diverse mid-tier powers.

Key Figures

Emil Sandström, a Swedish judge and diplomat born in 1886, served as the elected chairman of UNSCOP following preliminary meetings in New York in May 1947. Operating independently from Swedish government directives, Sandström prioritized on-site empirical investigation amid challenges such as the Arab Higher Committee's , which limited direct Arab input but did not halt the committee's fieldwork. His leadership focused on procedural fairness and factual inquiry, including private sessions with British officials to elicit testimony otherwise withheld. Jorge García Granados, Guatemala's delegate and a career , played a pivotal role in bridging early divisions toward the majority partition proposal. Initially viewing the British Mandate as akin to a "," Granados advocated linking the plight of Jewish displaced persons to Palestine's resolution, insisting on UNSCOP subcommittees visiting camps in to assess conditions firsthand. These visits influenced his perspective, leading him to co-develop the partition framework with provisions alongside delegates like Rand. Ivan Rand, a Canadian appointed in 1943, emerged as a steadfast majority supporter, contributing decisively to the formulation of the partition plan. Though initially undecided, Rand's engagement with evidence from Palestine hearings solidified his endorsement of separate Jewish and Arab states, emphasizing practical viability over unitary alternatives. His legal acumen helped navigate internal debates, prioritizing demographic and security realities in the majority report. Nasrollah Entezam, Iran's seasoned diplomat and former ambassador, represented the minority viewpoint, advocating a federal state structure to preserve Palestine's unity while accommodating ethnic divisions. Entezam's proposals, aligned with and , emphasized binational governance with autonomous provinces, reflecting Iran's strategic interest in regional stability without endorsing partition. The Yugoslav delegate, operating within the minority bloc, reinforced the federal state alternative, proposing mechanisms like potential clauses if failed, to address irreconcilable communal tensions without territorial division. Supporting these efforts, UN Secretariat head Victor Hoo, Assistant Secretary-General for Trusteeship and Non-Self-Governing Territories, oversaw administrative impartiality, coordinating logistics and documentation to maintain procedural neutrality amid geopolitical pressures.

Mandate and Investigative Process

Terms of Reference

The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 106 (S-1), adopted on 15 May 1947, established the terms of reference for the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), directing it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the Palestine problem. The mandate required examination of the political, economic, and social conditions in Palestine, the operation of the British Mandate, the responsibilities of the mandatory power, the wishes of both and Jewish communities, and the causes of ongoing Arab-Jewish tensions and violence. Recommendations were to prioritize feasible settlements that aligned with Charter principles, including national of peoples and respect for fundamental and freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. UNSCOP's scope focused on post-Mandate governance options, such as , partition into separate states, a federated binational state, or temporary trusteeship under auspices, while explicitly avoiding prejudice toward any specific outcome or alteration of the existing Mandate's terms. The committee lacked authority to enforce recommendations or modify legal instruments like the Mandate or the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry's prior findings; its role was strictly advisory, emphasizing practical viability, protection of , where possible, and resolution of pressing issues like Jewish immigration limits based on Palestine's and the of European displaced persons. Particular attention was mandated to safeguarding holy places and ensuring due regard for the religious interests of , , and . In cases of internal disagreement, the terms required submission of both and minority reports to reflect divergent views. The compressed timeline—report submission no later than 1 September 1947—reflected urgency amid Britain's announcement of Mandate termination by 1 May 1948 and intensifying , which had already resulted in hundreds of deaths in preceding months.

Fieldwork and Hearings in Palestine

The United Nations Special Committee on (UNSCOP) commenced its fieldwork in upon the arrival of its members on June 14 and 15, 1947, with the first meeting held in on June 16. The committee conducted on-site investigations until departing on July 20, 1947, touring key locations including , , , Arab villages, the Dead Sea, , , Gaza, and to assess demographic, economic, and security conditions. To address specialized aspects such as the refugee situation, UNSCOP formed subcommittees that later extended inquiries to displaced persons camps in , including visits starting August 8, 1947, though a proposed trip to detention camps for intercepted Jewish immigrants was rejected by a vote of six to three with two abstentions. Public hearings were primarily hosted at the YMCA building in from late June through early August, comprising sixteen sessions, thirteen of which were open to witnesses and observers. The format emphasized oral testimonies supplemented by written submissions and site inspections, but the Arab Higher Committee's of the proceedings limited official Arab input, compelling reliance on individual Arab testimonies, documents, and indirect sources rather than coordinated representations. UNSCOP divided into working groups to analyze specific domains such as , economic viability, and security dynamics, drawing on field observations and restricted British-provided data. Fieldwork faced logistical hurdles, including heightened security risks amid ongoing violence; Arab leaders issued public threats against committee members, and the volatile environment—marked by terrorist incidents targeting British infrastructure—necessitated guarded movements and private deliberations. British authorities offered briefings in post-Palestine but withheld comprehensive statistical data on demographics and administration, citing administrative burdens and their impending mandate termination, which hampered quantitative assessments. Media speculation and premature leaks of preliminary views further complicated impartiality efforts.

Evidence and Analysis

Jewish Perspectives and Testimonies

The Jewish Agency for Palestine, representing the Jewish community (), presented comprehensive submissions to UNSCOP during hearings in from June 17 to July 1947, advocating for the establishment of a in as fulfillment of the of 1917 and the League of Nations Mandate of 1922, which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish people to Eretz Israel and their right to reconstitute a national home there. Leaders such as and emphasized that only an independent could provide security and , arguing that partition was feasible given the Yishuv's demonstrated capacity for state-like institutions, including self-defense via the and economic organization through bodies like the . Testimonies highlighted the urgency created by , in which approximately 6 million Jews were murdered by and its collaborators between 1941 and 1945, leaving hundreds of thousands of survivors in displaced persons camps across desperate for refuge, with many attempting illegal immigration () to Palestine despite British restrictions. Jewish representatives urged UNSCOP to prioritize immediate statehood to enable absorption of these refugees, noting that the had already integrated over 100,000 immigrants in the preceding years despite economic blockades and Arab violence, such as the 1936-1939 revolt that killed over 500 Jews. Economic experts from the Jewish Agency provided data on self-sufficiency, including Histadrut-managed industries and agriculture that contributed significantly to Palestine's exports, such as citrus fruits where Jewish orchards accounted for the majority of production by the 1940s, alongside rapid industrialization that generated 70% of the Mandate's manufacturing output despite Jews comprising about one-third of the population. Jewish submissions underscored contributions to land development under restrictive Mandate policies, with Jewish ownership reaching approximately 1.5 million dunams (about 6% of total land) by 1945, much of it transformed from malarial swamps and uncultivable areas into productive farmland through , , and scientific methods by organizations like the . Representatives proposed cooperative frameworks in a partitioned state, including with an Arab state and constitutional safeguards for Arab minorities, such as and protection of religious sites, while citing the Arab Higher Committee's rejection of the 1937 partition proposal—which offered Arabs 80% of the land—as evidence of intransigence precluding binational alternatives. These arguments were supported by tours of Jewish settlements and data presentations demonstrating viability for absorbing up to 1 million immigrants within a through planned development.

Arab Perspectives and Testimonies

The , representing Palestinian Arabs, decided on non-cooperation with UNSCOP on June 13, 1947, leading to an official of hearings within . This stance limited direct Palestinian Arab testimonies in the territory, though the committee received memoranda, written submissions, and presentations from Arab representatives outside , including meetings in on August 27 and 29, 1947. Jamal al-Husseini, Vice-Chairman of the , communicated this non-cooperation policy in a letter dated July 10, 1947, emphasizing the as a means to counter Zionist aims. Arab submissions highlighted their demographic , citing 1946 figures of approximately 1,203,000 comprising 67 percent of Palestine's total population of 1,846,000, against 608,000 . They argued this entitled to an independent with a permanent , proposing Jewish residents receive but be limited to one-third representation in a elected by . Historical claims asserted uninterrupted Arab inhabitation since the , with the population having Arabized through intermarriage and settlement, rejecting any basis for partitioning the land. Opposition to Jewish immigration framed it as colonial settlement violating Arab rights, demanding its immediate cessation and future prohibition to preserve the demographic balance. The was denounced as an imposition prejudicing non-Jewish communities' rights, rendering the Mandate incorporating it inconsistent with Article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant and thus illegal. Land ownership data emphasized Arab possession of approximately 85 percent of the territory, including endowments and much uncultivated land, with proposals for restrictions on transfers to prevent further Jewish acquisition. Submissions warned that partition would provoke conflict, portraying Arab resistance to a Jewish state as defensive self-preservation amid pan-Arab solidarity coordinated through the Arab Higher Committee and League. Religious arguments stressed Muslim custodianship of holy sites, ranking Jerusalem below Mecca and Medina but essential to Islamic patrimony, seeking international guarantees subordinate to Arab sovereignty. Economic interdependence was invoked to argue against separation, though separate Arab and Jewish sectors had developed under the Mandate.

British and Other Inputs

British officials, including High Commissioner Sir Henry Gurney and Chief Secretary Mr. D.C. MacGillivray, provided factual briefings to UNSCOP during private meetings in June 1947, emphasizing the administrative challenges of the Mandate without endorsing specific political solutions. These inputs highlighted the exhaustion of British resources, noting that the of 1937 had already deemed the Mandate "almost unworkable" due to irreconcilable Arab-Jewish aspirations, a view reaffirmed by the Mandatory Power's referral of the issue to the on April 2, 1947. British submissions underscored the failure of prior policies, such as the 1939 , which capped Jewish immigration at 75,000 over five years and restricted land transfers to safeguard Arab economic interests, yet provoked widespread Jewish non-cooperation and lawlessness since 1945. Intelligence shared by British authorities detailed ongoing militia activities, including operations by the and Stern Group in 1946-1947, which contributed to a deteriorating security environment and strained Mandate enforcement capabilities. Officials expressed reluctance to support partition or other schemes, arguing in a policy statement that no viable boundary could be drawn without creating economic dependencies, and warning of a potential security vacuum following the planned withdrawal on May 15, 1948, absent broad acceptance by both communities. Practical concerns included the indivisibility of key , such as the Palestine Electric Corporation's concessions for power generation and established in 1921, which spanned proposed state boundaries and necessitated economic coordination to avoid collapse. Neutral expert analyses presented to UNSCOP included demographic data from official censuses and estimates, revealing a 1946 population of 1,846,000, comprising 1,203,000 (including 1,076,783 and 145,063 Christians) and 608,000 , with nomadic Bedouins estimated at 90,000.
YearTotal PopulationArab PopulationJewish Population
19461,846,0001,203,000608,000
1931 (Census, incl. Bedouins)--(Bedouins: 66,000)
These figures underscored uneven development, with Jewish agricultural settlements expanding from 203 in 1937 to over 300 by 1947 amid a population increase of 400,000-625,000. Economic surveys indicated viable sectors but stark disparities, such as 1944-45 agricultural output totaling £21,814,059, with contributing £4,710,926 and £17,103,133, projecting budget surpluses for a but deficits for an Arab one under partition scenarios. Water resource assessments estimated availability at 1,100 million cubic meters in dry years and 2,900 in wet years, highlighting shared dependencies that complicated territorial divisions. Submissions on holy places drew from Mandate Articles 13 and 14, which obligated of access and rights, with a 1924 granting the jurisdiction over disputes; experts advocated international oversight to preserve sites like , , and , citing precedents for in multi-ethnic mandates. Reports from the UN Relief and Rehabilitation Administration on displaced persons in European camps provided data on 250,000 Jewish DPs as of mid-1947, focusing on humanitarian pressures without political advocacy, though integrated into broader administrative context. The Permanent Mandates Commission (1930) offered neutral evaluation, affirming equal obligations to and under the Mandate.

Recommendations

Majority Partition Plan

The majority recommendation, endorsed by eight members of UNSCOP (representing , , , the , , , and ), proposed partitioning into two independent states—a and an Arab state—connected through a mandatory , with and surrounding areas placed under international trusteeship. This plan aimed to terminate the British Mandate by August 1, 1948, following a two-year transitional period under UN supervision starting September 1, 1947, during which boundaries would be demarcated and provisional governments established. The territorial division allocated approximately 56% of Palestine's land area (about 14,560 square kilometers) to the , encompassing , the , the coastal plain from Acre to (including and ), and the Beersheba subdistrict in the Desert; 43% (about 11,180 square kilometers) to the Arab state, covering , the hill regions of and (excluding ), and the coastal plain south of Isdud to the Egyptian border; and 1% (about 260 square kilometers) to the for , including and adjacent villages like and Shu'fat. Boundaries were detailed in the report's accompanying maps, prioritizing contiguous territories while incorporating the Negev into the Jewish state to enhance its economic viability through potential agricultural and development, despite the Jewish population comprising roughly one-third of Palestine's total inhabitants.
EntityJewish PopulationArab/Other PopulationTotal Population
Jewish State498,000407,000905,000
Arab State10,000725,000735,000
Jerusalem Zone100,000105,000205,000
The economic union required shared customs tariffs, a common currency, joint operation of railways, ports ( and ), highways, postal services, and utilities like water and electricity, overseen by a Joint Economic Board with three representatives from each state and three UN-appointed neutral members, where decisions passed by majority vote. Customs revenues were to be pooled and divided equally between the states after allocating 5-10% to , with provisions for minority safeguards including optional citizenship in the other state for up to one year post-independence, extendable, and protections against . Immigration granted the authority over its inflows after an initial transitional allowance of 150,000 (prioritizing displaced persons), regulated by the UN to match absorptive capacity, while prohibiting to the Arab state except by special permission; Arab to the was similarly restricted. Holy sites across both states were to retain their status with tax exemptions and free access for worship, supervised by an international commission, while 's regime ensured non-sectarian policing and UN trusteeship to preserve its universal significance. This partition reflected the committee's assessment that unitary governance was untenable due to conflicting national claims and histories of violence, favoring separate to foster accountability and development, with the mitigating disparities in resources and markets; the inclusion of sparsely populated desert areas in the Jewish allocation was justified by projections of transformative cultivation based on prior Jewish efforts, ensuring long-term over strict demographic proportionality.

Minority Federal State Proposal

The minority proposal, advanced by the representatives of , , and , recommended establishing an independent Federal State of Palestine as a unified entity comprising two autonomous cantons—one and one Jewish—each with defined boundaries, elected legislatures, and executives responsible for internal affairs such as , local taxation, police, , , and . The central federal government would exercise authority over , defense, immigration, currency, transport, communications, and federal taxation, with a bicameral featuring in one chamber and equal community representation in the other, alongside a federal to resolve disputes. would serve as the federal capital, with separate and Jewish municipalities for local administration but joint public services, while Holy Places would fall under international supervision to ensure free access and protection of religious interests. The Australian representative abstained from endorsing either the majority or minority plans. This federal structure aimed to reconcile Arab and Jewish national aspirations by preserving Palestine's and economic unity, thereby averting the violence and economic disruptions anticipated from partition, which the minority viewed as impracticable due to intertwined geography, shared water resources, and risks of or . Drawing on principles from the 1946 , the proposal emphasized avoiding domination by either community—particularly safeguarding the Arab majority's influence—while promoting cooperation through equitable participation in international delegations and a single Palestinian citizenship. Jewish immigration would be regulated centrally, limited initially to the Jewish canton's economic absorptive capacity for three years and assessed by an international commission (three Arab, three Jewish, and three UN members), with Arab consent required for subsequent phases to prevent demographic shifts threatening the Arab majority. An immediate admission of up to 100,000 Jewish immigrants was permitted during transition, subject to federal oversight. Constitutional provisions would enshrine , including non-discrimination, protection of linguistic, religious, and ethnic freedoms, and prohibitions on discriminatory , with enforcement via provincial and potential international guarantees. The transition from the British Mandate would occur over a two-to-three-year period under UN supervision, beginning with a UN-appointed authority or leading an executive council, followed by elections and a to draft the federal . Boundaries could be adjusted only by mutual consent, allowing flexibility for future evolution into full or, if cooperation failed, alternative arrangements, without immediate state creation. This approach prioritized gradual development to foster trust, contrasting partition's abrupt separation as likely to exacerbate conflict rather than resolve underlying tensions.

Responses and Deliberations

Immediate Reactions from Parties

The Jewish Agency for Palestine issued a statement on September 1, 1947, accepting the UNSCOP majority partition proposal in principle, despite reservations over the limited territory allocated to the proposed , which they described as evoking "pleasure and surprise tempered with disappointment." , a prominent Zionist leader, publicly advocated for the plan, viewing it as a pathway to Jewish statehood amid post-Holocaust displacement pressures, though he urged adjustments to include more arable land and the Desert. The Agency explicitly rejected the minority federal state proposal, arguing it perpetuated British control and failed to address Jewish self-determination needs. The , representing Palestinian Arabs, immediately rejected both the majority partition and minority federal proposals upon the report's release on August 31, 1947, demanding instead a single democratic with safeguards for the Arab majority. Committee leaders, including Jamal al-Husseini, warned of armed resistance and if partition advanced, framing the recommendations as a violation of Arab rights under the Mandate and . The Committee boycotted further UN engagement, aligning with broader Arab refusal to recognize any division of . Britain's government response was cautious and skeptical, with officials emphasizing the need to review the full report while expressing doubts about partition's feasibility amid ongoing violence. Foreign Secretary indicated neutrality on the proposals but reiterated Britain's intent to terminate the Mandate by May 15, 1948, without committing forces to implement or enforce UNSCOP recommendations, citing risks of chaos and troop casualties. Internationally, the initially endorsed the majority partition plan, seeing it as aligning with Zionist aspirations and post-war refugee solutions. The also backed partition with minor revisions, motivated by desires to expel British influence from the and foster a potentially sympathetic . The , convening urgently, condemned the report and began mobilizing regional support against partition, foreshadowing coordinated opposition.

UN Ad Hoc Committee and General Assembly

The established the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question on 23 September 1947 to deliberate on the UNSCOP report and develop recommendations for Palestine's future governance. The Committee conducted sessions from 25 September to 25 November 1947, forming subcommittees to scrutinize the and minority proposals; Sub-Committee 1 focused on the partition framework, while Sub-Committee 2 examined alternatives, including protections for minorities and constitutional mechanisms. During these proceedings, amendments were introduced to refine the plan, such as boundary adjustments that incorporated additional Arab-majority areas into the and expanded the internationalized corpus separatum for to encompass a broader surrounding zone. Several UNSCOP delegates offered testimony and guidance to the Ad Hoc Committee, reinforcing support for the majority partition proposal amid competing suggestions. On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 181 (II), endorsing a modified partition plan with , by a vote of 33 in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions, meeting the required two-thirds majority among the 57 member states. The outcome reflected pressure on wavering delegations, including direct appeals from President Truman to secure votes, alongside the Soviet Union's affirmative stance, driven by strategic aims to dismantle British imperial presence in the and anticipate a potentially sympathetic . Resolution 181 authorized the formation of the United Nations Palestine Commission on 2 December 1947, comprising representatives from , , , , and the , to supervise the transition to partitioned states and manage interim administration. However, the Commission's preparatory work and planned arrival in were undermined by widespread Arab violence immediately after the vote, encompassing general strikes, riots, and armed confrontations that escalated into , rendering on-site implementation infeasible without security guarantees Britain declined to provide.

Criticisms and Controversies

Allegations of Bias and Procedural Flaws

The Arab Higher Committee accused members of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) of pro-Zionist bias, claiming that the committee's reports demonstrated a "shallow knowledge of the Palestine problem" and a "no sense of justice." Iraqi representative Fadhel al-Jamali similarly condemned UNSCOP's formation in May 1947, arguing that its composition predisposed it toward Zionist positions by excluding Arab-majority representation and prioritizing Jewish refugee concerns over Palestinian self-determination. These charges centered on the committee's hearings in Palestine from June to July 1947, where Jewish Agency presentations provided extensive data on land development and economic viability, while Arab input was minimal due to the Arab Higher Committee's boycott. Procedurally, the boycott—announced prior to UNSCOP's arrival and enforced through threats of against potential collaborators—severely limited Arab participation, resulting in fewer direct testimonies and site visits to Arab areas compared to Jewish ones. UNSCOP had proposed including Arab states in its membership but withdrew the offer after Arab rejection, framing the absence as self-inflicted rather than a deliberate exclusion. Critics, including later legal analyses, have argued that this dynamic skewed evidence collection toward Zionist narratives, with the committee's emphasizing Mandate termination without mandating majority rule, potentially biasing outcomes against the demographic reality of a two-thirds Arab population. Counterarguments highlight UNSCOP's diverse composition—eleven neutral states including , , , , , , , , , , and —which produced a split report: eight members endorsed partition on September 3, 1947, while three (, , ) proposed a federal state, rebutting claims of monolithic pro-Zionist influence. The majority report empirically noted Arab economic underperformance, observing that significant in required intensive and , areas where Arab-held lands showed limited prior investment compared to Jewish settlements. It assessed viability as feasible despite comprising only 55% of the land for 33% of the population, based on demonstrated , while acknowledging Arab land at 45-48% but critiquing fragmented holdings and lower yields. Modern historical assessments remain divided: some scholarly works portray UNSCOP as a pragmatic compromise amid irreconcilable claims, crediting its neutrality for proposing to mitigate partition's inequities. Others contend it overlooked Arab majority rights under principles, with procedural flaws amplifying a structural tilt toward partition by sidelining consequences and over-relying on Jewish-submitted data. No verified evidence substantiates specific allegations of Zionist sympathies against chairman Emil Sandström, though his confidence in Jewish implementation capacity influenced majority deliberations.

Arab Rejection and Consequences

The , representing Palestinian , rejected both the majority partition plan and the minority federal state proposal in UNSCOP's September 3, 1947, report, insisting on a unitary Arab state encompassing all of . This stance stemmed from the view that partition constituted an illegitimate division of land predominantly owned and inhabited by , who comprised approximately two-thirds of the (around 1.2 million versus 600,000 as of 1946) and held about 85% of the cultivable area despite Jewish land purchases. Leaders argued that allocating over half the territory to a violated principles of for the demographic majority and echoed pan-Arab demands for without compromise, prioritizing maximal territorial claims over pragmatic accommodation. Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem and exiled leader of the Arab Higher Committee, actively boycotted UNSCOP hearings and issued threats against Arabs cooperating with the committee, fostering an atmosphere of intimidation that limited testimony and reinforced intransigence. The Arab League, coordinating regional support, condemned the proposals as a threat to Arab unity and began military preparations, including volunteer recruitment and arms stockpiling, while endorsing strikes and demonstrations in Palestine immediately following the report's release. These actions escalated tensions, with Arab-initiated riots and attacks on Jewish communities starting in late September 1947, marking the onset of sporadic violence that intensified into full civil war by December after the UN General Assembly's partition endorsement. The rejection's consequences included the practical nullification of the minority federal state option, as Arab opposition to any Jewish political autonomy made binational governance unfeasible and highlighted a preference for conflict over shared rule. This pattern of outright refusal—mirroring the 1937 proposal, which Arabs also rejected despite offering a larger Arab state—demonstrated a consistent of all-or-nothing demands, forgoing opportunities for in favor of pan-Arab . The ensuing Arab assaults prompted organized Jewish responses via the , which defended settlements and supply lines, thereby underscoring the partition's defensive rationale and contributing to the international perception of Jewish viability for statehood amid demonstrated Arab belligerence.

Jewish and Zionist Critiques

The Jewish Agency, representing mainstream , formally endorsed the UNSCOP majority report's partition proposal on October 2, 1947, viewing it as a pragmatic pathway to sovereignty despite significant reservations about the allocated territory. The plan assigned the Jewish state roughly 56 percent of Mandate Palestine's land area (approximately 15,100 square kilometers), but this included the vast, arid Desert comprising over half the territory, which offered limited immediate agricultural or settlement viability while exposing strategic vulnerabilities such as a narrow coastal waistline less than 15 kilometers wide at points, rendering defense challenging. Zionist leaders like acknowledged these borders as suboptimal and tactically provisional, prioritizing statehood establishment over maximalist territorial claims, with Ben-Gurion later reflecting that acceptance was a "steppingstone" to secure international legitimacy amid post-Holocaust displacement of over 250,000 Jewish survivors awaiting entry. A core critique centered on the exclusion of Jerusalem from the Jewish state, proposing instead an internationalized corpus separatum for the city and surrounding areas like , severing Zionists from their historic capital and key religious sites central to and national aspirations. The Jewish Agency urged modifications to incorporate Jewish-majority neighborhoods in and emphasized that the proposed —envisaging shared customs, currency, and infrastructure—risked compromising nascent , though it was pragmatically accepted as transitional rather than permanent. In contrast, the minority report's federal state model, advocating a binational framework with joint governance and restricted Jewish immigration, was outright rejected by Zionists as perpetuating minority status and diluting , failing to address the demographic imperatives of absorbing Holocaust refugees. Internally, Revisionist Zionists, including leaders like of the , vehemently opposed partition altogether, insisting on Jewish sovereignty over all of historic Palestine west of the and rejecting any compromise that ceded land to an Arab state as a betrayal of maximalist principles. The Zionist Actions Committee approved welcoming the majority report by a 51-16 vote, reflecting broad but not unanimous support, with dissenters arguing it legitimized Arab claims to the land and undermined the vision of undivided Eretz . Despite these flaws—indefensible contours and symbolic losses—the plan's endorsement provided causal foundation for 's unilateral declaration of independence on May 14, 1948, transforming UNSCOP's framework into de facto legal and moral basis for statehood against British withdrawal and Arab non-recognition.

Legacy and Historical Assessment

Influence on Partition Resolution

The majority report of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), submitted on September 3, 1947, served as the primary blueprint for General Assembly Resolution 181 (II), which recommended partitioning Mandatory Palestine into independent Arab and Jewish states with an economic union and an international regime for Jerusalem. The resolution retained the core principle of territorial division to enable self-determination for both Jewish and Arab communities, allocating approximately 56 percent of the land to the Jewish state and 43 percent to the Arab state, reflecting the majority's emphasis on viable, contiguous territories despite demographic disparities. This framework directly informed the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question's deliberations from September 25 to November 1947, where the partition proposal evolved into the final text. Delegates from UNSCOP, including representatives from , the , and who endorsed the majority plan, provided expert testimonies before the Ad Hoc Committee in October 1947, elucidating the rationale for partition based on on-site investigations and evidence of irreconcilable communal aspirations. These presentations addressed concerns over feasibility, influencing the committee's subcommittees to refine rather than reject the proposal; for instance, boundary adjustments expanded Arab-allocated areas in western and designated as an Arab enclave to improve territorial contiguity and economic viability for the proposed Arab state. Such modifications, while altering specific allocations from the original report, preserved the partition's dual-state structure over alternatives like binational federation. The minority report's federal state proposal, advocating a single sovereign entity with autonomous Jewish and Arab provinces, was effectively sidelined during Ad Hoc Committee debates, as members prioritized the majority's separation model amid evidence of deepening communal violence and British withdrawal pressures. Resolution 181's adoption on November 29, 1947, by a vote of 33 in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions—achieving the required two-thirds majority—demonstrated the persuasiveness of UNSCOP's empirical findings on the need for distinct self-governing entities, with the clause carried over intact from the majority plan to mitigate partition's disruptions. This outcome underscored the report's causal role in shifting undecided delegations toward endorsing partition as the pragmatic resolution to Mandate-era impasse.

Long-Term Impact on the Region

The majority report of UNSCOP, advocating partition into separate Jewish and Arab states, formed the basis for United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) adopted on November 29, 1947, which provided the legal and political framework for Israel's on May 14, 1948. Following the immediate Arab invasion by forces from , , , , and , Israel repelled the attacks and expanded its territory beyond the partition lines, while the envisioned independent Arab state failed to emerge; annexed the (including ) and administered the until 1967. This outcome stemmed directly from the Arab Higher Committee's rejection of partition and the subsequent war initiated by Arab states, which forfeited the territorial allocations intended for Palestinian Arab self-governance under UNSCOP's scheme. The 1948 war precipitated parallel refugee crises: approximately 711,000 to 750,000 fled or were displaced from areas that became , registering as refugees under auspices, while over 850,000 were expelled or compelled to flee from Arab and Muslim-majority countries between 1948 and 1952, with around 586,000 resettling in . These displacements, exceeding pre-war populations in scale for from Arab lands, arose causally from the conflict's escalation after partition's adoption, with Arab states' hostilities against Jewish communities accelerating expulsions despite no equivalent UN partition role in those regions. UNSCOP's legacy exposed the organization's enforcement constraints, as Resolution 181 lacked mandatory mechanisms absent Security Council backing, establishing a pattern in disputes where recommendations yielded to military realities rather than diplomatic fiat. Empirically, the process affirmed by enabling a viable state amid existential threats, absorbing immigrants and achieving economic self-sufficiency despite initial losses; conversely, Arab states' strategic choice to pursue total territorial control over negotiation squandered opportunities for a Palestinian entity, perpetuating statelessness and reliance on host governments like and . Assessments from Israeli-aligned scholars emphasize this agency in rejection and as the root of lost statehood, while critics in Palestinian narratives often attribute outcomes to partition's inherent inequities, though without addressing the counterfactual viability absent .

References

  1. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-179435/
  2. https://www.un.org/unispal/history2/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-ii-1947-1977/
  3. https://www.un.org/unispal/history2/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-i-1917-1947/
  4. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=osu1253563737&disposition=inline
  5. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7052&context=etd
  6. https://ismi.emory.edu/documents/Readings/Mattar%2C%2520Philip%2520Mufti%2520of%2520Jrslm.pdf
  7. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp
  8. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/displaced-persons
  9. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/aliyah-bet
  10. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/aliyah-bet-1939-1948
  11. https://www.jewishdatabank.org/api/download/?studyId=910&mediaId=bjdb%255C1946_Statistics_of_Jews_World_and_US_Jewish_Population_%28AJYB%252C_1946-1947%29.pdf
  12. https://www.palquest.org/en/historictext/33948/memorandum-arab-higher-committee-peel-commission-report
  13. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-208638/
  14. https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/british-army-palestine
  15. https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine/World-War-I-and-after
  16. https://israeled.org/report-of-the-un-special-committee-on-palestine-unscop-summary/
  17. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/un-general-assembly-resolution-106-may-1947
  18. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-183472/
  19. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d781
  20. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-186346/
  21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373632682_UNSCOP_and_the_Arab_Israeli_Conflict_The
  22. https://www.un.org/unispal/ar/history/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-ii-1947-1977/
  23. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781000772395_A43412879/preview-9781000772395_A43412879.pdf
  24. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d778
  25. https://www.merip.org/1986/05/israel-and-guatemala/
  26. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/the-unlikely-canadian-who-helped-create-the-state-of-israel
  27. https://www.cjpme.org/fs_173
  28. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11926422.2020.1867596
  29. https://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/180075
  30. https://www.jta.org/archive/yugoslav-unscop-delegate-advocates-secession-if-palestine-federation-unworkable
  31. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-210967/
  32. http://www.mideastweb.org/unscop1947.htm
  33. https://www.sharett.org.il/downloads/doc-e/doc-e0194.pdf
  34. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-181975/
  35. https://journals.sfu.ca/jmh/index.php/jmh/article/view/11/9
  36. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00263206.2023.2280232
  37. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-182033/
  38. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d783
  39. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-178863/
  40. https://eh.net/encyclopedia/a-brief-economic-history-of-modern-israel/
  41. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d784
  42. https://www.palestine-studies.org/en/node/195174
  43. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d804
  44. https://ecf.org.il/issues/issue/454
  45. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-01617A003000180001-8.pdf
  46. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/cia-weekly-summary-related-to-partition
  47. https://israeled.org/unscop-report/
  48. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d797
  49. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d807
  50. https://www.jta.org/archive/soviet-backs-partition-with-ceptain-revisions-of-unscop-plan-u-s-welcomes-stand
  51. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1948v05p2/d69
  52. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-214131/
  53. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/ad-hoc-committee-on-the-palestine-question-report-of-sub-committee-2-11-november-1947/
  54. https://www.palquest.org/en/highlight/159/un-partition-plan-29-november-1947/
  55. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-185393/
  56. https://resolve.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/AB8EE8DE195D7805F39DF1D88123531C/9781316513897c3_52-109.pdf/1947-the-un-plan-of-partition-for-palestine.pdf
  57. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/res181.asp
  58. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d872
  59. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-soviet-position-on-partition
  60. https://www.jta.org/archive/arab-higher-committee-charges-unscop-members-with-pro-zionist-bias
  61. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00207020251357009
  62. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/why-1947-un-partition-resolution-must-be-celebrated
  63. https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/comments/1f6z6ot/was_it_a_mistake_for_arabs_in_palestine_to_reject/
  64. https://law.queensu.ca/sites/default/files/files/The%2520United%2520Nations%2520and%2520the%2520Question%2520of%2520Palestine%2520-%2520A%2520Study%2520in%2520International%2520Legal%2520Subalternity.pdf
  65. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/united-nations-and-the-question-of-palestine/1947-the-un-plan-of-partition-for-palestine/AB8EE8DE195D7805F39DF1D88123531C
  66. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3186&context=lcp
  67. https://jcpa.org/article/aftershock-nazi-war-jews-1947-1948-could-war-middle-east-prevented/
  68. https://honestreporting.com/united-nations-partition-plan/
  69. https://israeled.org/jewish-agency-accepts-partition-plan/
  70. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/myths-facts-partition-and-the-war-of-1948
  71. https://www.jta.org/archive/silver-tells-u-n-that-jews-will-accept-partition-wants-unscop-plan-modified
  72. https://www.commentary.org/articles/palestinius/palestines-mood-after-unscopthe-yishuv-ponders-partition/
  73. https://www.jta.org/archive/zionist-actions-committee-adjourns-after-backing-resolution-welcoming-unscop-report
  74. https://unispal.un.org/pdfs/8374F178803CC1E18525692900754287.pdf
  75. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-196128/
  76. https://www.un.org/unispal/history/
  77. https://www.unrwa.org/palestine-refugees
  78. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-refugees-from-arab-countries
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.