Myths and Facts 16.- Myth: The “Mandate For Palestine” is a Class “A” Mandate

There is much to be gained by attributing Class “A” status to the “Mandate for Palestine.” If the inhabitants of Palestine were ready for independence under a Class “A” mandate, then the Palestinian Arabs that made up the majority of the inhabitants of Palestine in 1922 38
(589,177 Arabs vs. 83,790 Jews) could then logically claim that they were the intended beneficiaries of the “Mandate for Palestine” – provided one never reads the actual wording of the document:

1. The “Mandate for Palestine” never mentions Class “A” status at any time for Palestinian Arabs.

2. Article 2 of the document clearly speaks of the Mandatory as being:

“... responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home.”

The “Mandate” calls for steps to encourage Jewish immigration and settlement throughout Palestine except east of the Jordan River. Historically, therefore, Palestine was an anomaly within the Mandate system, in a class of its own – initially referred to by the British as a “special regime.”39

Many assume that the “Mandate for Palestine” is a Class “A” mandate, a common but inaccurate assertion that can be found in many dictionaries and encyclopedias, and is frequently used by the pro-Palestinian media and lately by the ICJ. In the Court Advisory Opinion of July 9, 2004, in the matter of the construction of a wall in the “ Occupied Palestinian Territory,” the Bench erroneously stated:

“ Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. At the end of the First World War, a class [type] ‘A’ Mandate for Palestine was entrusted to Great Britain by the League of Nations, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 22 of the Covenant. ...”40

Indeed, Class “A” status was granted to a number of Arab peoples who were ready for independence in the former Ottoman Empire, and only to Arab entities. 41 Palestinian Arabs were not one of these Arab peoples. The Palestine Royal Report clarifies this point:

“(2) The Mandate [for Palestine] is of a different type from the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon and the draft Mandate for Iraq. These latter, which were called for convenience “A” Mandates, accorded with the fourth paragraph of Article 22. Thus the Syrian Mandate provided that the government should be based on an organic law which should take into account the rights, interests and wishes of all the inhabitants, and that measures should be enacted ‘to facilitate the progressive development of Syria and the Lebanon as independent States.’ The corresponding sentences of the draft Mandate for Iraq were the same. In compliance with them National Legislatures were established in due course on an elective basis.

Article 1 of the Palestine Mandate, on the other hand, vests ‘full powers of legislation and of administration,’ within the limits of the Mandate, in the Mandatory.”42

The Palestine Royal Report highlights additional differences between the Mandates:

“Unquestionably, however, the primary purpose of the Mandate, as expressed in its preamble and its articles, is to promote the establishment of the Jewish National Home.

“... Articles 4, 6 and 11 provide for the recognition of a Jewish Agency ‘as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration’ on matters affecting Jewish interests. No such body is envisaged for dealing with Arab interests.43

“... But Palestine was different from the other ex-Turkish provinces. It was, indeed, unique both as the Holy Land of three world-religions and as the old historic national home of the Jews. The Arabs had lived in it for centuries, but they had long ceased to rule it, and in view of its peculiar character they could not now claim to possess it in the same way as they could claim possession of Syria or Iraq.”44

³⁸ United Nations 1922 Census. See:
www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/80859e/80859E05. htm. (11373)
³⁹ Palestine Royal Report, July 1937, Chapter II, p. 28, paragraph 29.
⁴⁰ See Paragraph 70 in the ICJ Advisory Opinion, July 9, 2004.
⁴¹ A Class “A” mandate assigned to Britain was Iraq, and assigned to France were Syria and Lebanon. Examples of other types of mandates were the Class “B” mandate assigned to Belgium administering Ruanda-Urundi, and the Class “C” mandate assigned to South Africa administering South West Africa.
⁴² Palestine Royal Report, July 1937, Chapter II, p. 38.
⁴³ Ibid. p. 39. 
⁴⁴ Ibid. p. 40.

Eli E. Hertz

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm#37a