Last blog for 1 City 3 Faiths

            This last section of reading was really interesting.  In particular, the discussion of the British Government’s pledges to both the Arabs and Jews sparked my attention. Prior to this reading I did some research on whether or not Israel was “twice promised” and have formed my own opinion on the mater.  Since this relates directly to this section of the reading I thought I would share this research. First I am going to share my interpretation of the three documents all of which were created between the years 1915 and 1917.

In 1915-1916 in the MacMahon-Hussayn Correspondance the Sheriff of Mecca, Hussayn, and the British High Commissioner at Cairo exchanged multiple letters regarding Great Britain recognizing the independence of Arab countries.  MacMahon wrote to Hussayn that Palestine is part of the territory that “cannot be purely Arab” and is not included in the boarders that Great Britain supports the independence of the Arabs in.  MacMahon also explained to Hussayn in this exchange of letters that Britain’s ally, France, is involved in some of the regions he demanded, and Great Britain must carefully continue to communicate about this region before supporting Arab independence.  Palestine is part of this region that must be further communicated about (Laqueur and Rubin, 11-12).  The Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 was a secret agreement between the UK and France, which divided up the Ottoman Empire’s territory in the Middle East into areas that the French and the British would control.  A portion of Palestine lying West of the Jordan River was assigned to be under French authority.  However, a large portion of Palestine, which included Jerusalem, was to be administered internationally.  The international administration would be decided after consulting with Russia, the other allies of France and Britain, and the sheriff of Mecca (Laqueur and Rubin, 13-16). The Balfour Declaration of 1917 stated that the UK is in favor of the establishment of a National Homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine and will do everything in order to achieve this.  The agreement also included that this national Jewish homeland must not prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities existing in Palestine, in addition to the rights of the Jews who will not be living in Palestine (Laqueur and Rubin, 16).

Based off of these three texts, I believe it would incorrect to say that Palestine was twice promised.  On October 24^th, 1915, as part of the MacMahon-Hussayn Correspondance, it was specified that Britain would support the independence of the Arab state, however “the two districts of Mersina and Alexandretta and portions of Syria lying west of the Damascus, Homs, Hama, and Aleppo cannot be said to be purely Arab.” This statement excluded Palestine from the agreement as part of the costal territory lying to the West of the Damascus Vilayet.  MacMahon also explained in this letter that Britain would be safeguarding the holy places against external aggression.  If Palestine were not included in the “holy places” the British were protecting, it would not be necessary to add this statement to the agreement (MidEastWeb).  These two statements show that Palestine was not promised in the MacMahon-Hussayn Correspondence to the Arabs.  In addition, in this correspondence Britain agreed to help the Arabs maintain certain territories, establish policies, and assist in gaining liberation from Turkish rule.  There was no such promise to actually create an Arab state.  The agreement made by the letters exchanged between MacMahon and Hussayn was political and not legal by international law, therefore none of the land mentioned in this correspondence was legally promised (Fry, 219).   The 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement did not conflict with the MacMahon-Hussayn Correspondence.  Both of these arrangements clearly stated that any decisions regarding the Middle East would have to take French interests into account (Review Essay: A Twice Promised Land, 569).  In 1917, the Balfour Declaration stated that the UK cabinet is in favor of the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people.  This declaration was a separate enterprise that had its own conditions that only show that Britain is in favor of a Homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine and does not specify anything more.  It does not state that the Jews will be in full rule over this territory and it did not take anything away that was promised to the Arabs (Fry, 219).

After examining these three documents closely, I have come to the conclusion concluded that Palestine was only promised once.  In both the MacMahon-Hussayn Correspondence and Sykes-Picot agreement Palestine was not promised to the Arabs, however in the Balfour Declaration it is clearly stated that the British are in favor of the establishment of a Jewish Homeland in Palestine. I realize that there is a lot of “grey” and many interpretations can be made.  I am interested to hear how you guys react to my interpretation and your opinions on this mater.