UN Palestine Commission – Recent developments in Palestine – Communication from United Kingdom

19 February 1948

UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE CONCESSION

Communication from United Kingdom Delegation Concerning
 “Note on Recent Developments in Palestine” Transmitted by Letter of 9th February.

The following communication, clarifying a statement in the “Note on Recent Developments in Palestine” which was circulated to Members of the Commission on 11 February, has been received from Mr. Fletcher-Cooke of the United Kingdom Delegation.

C

 O

  P

   Y

UNITED KINGDOM DELEGATION TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Empire State Building

New York 1, N.Y.

18th February 1948

My dear Bunche,

May I refer you to the Note on Recent Developments in Palestine which was enclosed in my letter to you of 9th February.

In the first paragraph it was stated that “although this force (of Armed Arabs) has dispersed, it remains cohesive and is increasingly exercising considerable administrative control over the whole area”.

It has been suggested that this statement may have led to a general belief that Government control over the Samaria District has ceased. This, of course, is not the case.

The position is briefly as follows:

(1) The District Commissioner continues to reside at Nablus and his Headquarters and Sub-District Offices are functioning normally.

(2) Palestinian members of the Palestine Police Force continue to perform their normal duties throughout the District under the supervision and control of British Police Officers.

(3) In addition, a Company of Welsh Guards is stationed in Nablus and military patrols operate from time to time in the District.

(4) The contingents of the so-called “Arab Liberation Army” which , entered Samaria have now dispersed among the villages of the District. They have so far undertaken no offensive operations against the Jews and have been careful not to come into conflict with the Security Forces.

(5) They are not interfering with the activities of the Civil Administration.

Thus, the “considerable administrative control” referred to in the passage mentioned above is not being exercised in opposition to or in substitution for the Government of Palestine’s administration but is a supplementary system of communal organisation not unlike that existing among the Jews in the Mishmar area, which is, of course, no more and no less under British control than the District of Samaria.

You will no doubt bring this information to the notice of the Commission and I would suggest, if the Commission sees no objection, that it should be given the same publicity as the original statement.

Yours sincerely,

Sd) John Fletcher-Cooke