# Proposals for the Future of Palestine/Morrison-Grady Plan

PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE OF PALESTINE JULY 1946–FEBRUARY 1947
(1)
Representatives of His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States, whom I shall describe as the expert delegations, have completed their examination of the recommendations made in the report of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on the problems of European Jewry and Palestine. The experts made unanimous recommendations on both sides, British and American, as to the policy to be adopted in respect of all the matters covered by the report of the Anglo-American Committee; and I think that I should outline, inevitably at some length, the main features of their proposals.
The expert delegations first dealt with the recommendations of the Anglo­-American Committee regarding the position of the Jews in Europe. The events of recent years, after Hitler's rise to power, have given a special emphasis to the character of the Jewish National Home as a sanctuary for those who could reach it from among the tragically few survivors of European Jewry. It is the pressure of immigration from Europe that has so intensified the difficulties of the Palestine problem. The Anglo-American Committee recognised that Palestine alone cannot meet the immigration needs of the Jewish victims of Nazi and Fascist persecution, and recommended that our two Governments, in association with other countries-for the whole world shares the responsibility-should endeavour immediately to find new homes for all displaced persons, irrespective of creed or nationality.
The expert delegations proposed that our two Governments should adopt the following means of making an immediate contribution to the solution of this problem. First, they proposed that our two Governments should seek to create conditions favourable to the resettlement of a substantial number of displaced persons in Europe itself, since it is recognised that the overwhelming majority will continue to live in Europe. In the British and American zones of Germany and Austria, our two Governments are doing their utmost to assist resettlement and to eradicate anti-Semitism. In Italy and the ex-enemy satellite States, the authorities will be required by the Peace Treaties to secure to all persons under their jurisdiction human rights and the fundamental freedoms. As regards the countries in Europe, the expert delegations recommended that our Governments should support the efforts of the United Nations to ensure the protection of those rights and freedoms. Further, by assisting to re-establish political and economic stability in Europe, we should continue to contribute to the restoration of those basic conditions which will make possible the reintegration in Europe of a substantial number of displaced persons, including Jews.
But, when all that is possible has been done in Europe, it is clear that new homes must be found overseas for many whose ties with their former communities have been irreparably broken. The expert delegations out­lined the following measures-some of which are already in train-designed to promote this movement. First, we should continue to press for the establishment of an International Refugee Organisation designed to deal effectively with the problem of refugees and displaced persons as a whole.
​Secondly, we should give strong support at the forthcoming General Assembly of the United Nations to an appeal calling upon all Member Governments to receive in territories under their control a proportion of the displaced persons in Europe, including Jews. I should here interpolate that His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom have already given a lead in this matter by accepting a commitment to promote the resettlement of about 235,000 Polish troops and civilians and their dependants. This is, of course, in addition to refugees admitted during the period of Nazi persecution, of whom some 70,000 Jews remain in the United Kingdom. His Majesty’s Governments in the Dominions have been informed of the action being taken by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom, and they will, we hope, support the appeal to Member Governments of the United Nations, an appeal which will include an invitation to receive a number of displaced persons in the territories under their control. I also understand that the United States, where 275,000 refugees, including 180,000 Jews have permanently resettled in the same period, are now resuming normal immigration and expect to receive some 53,000 immigrants each year from the European countries from which the displaced persons are drawn. Finally, pending the establishment of an International Refugee Organisation, we shall, in co-operation with the Government of the United States, continue to promote the resettlement of refugees and displaced persons through the agency of the Inter-Governmental Committee on Refugees. Plans are in preparation, in co-operation with the nations con­cerned, for resettling large numbers of displaced persons in Brazil and other South American countries.
It will thus be seen from what I have said that the broader aspects of the refugee and displaced persons problem have not been overlooked, nor the restoration of conditions in Europe permitting the re-integration there of as many displaced persons, including Jews, as may wish to remain. The ability and talent of Jews and others is needed for the difficult tasks of reconstruc­tion that lie ahead. At the same time, we are taking urgent and practical steps to ensure that other countries as well as Palestine will contribute to the resettlement of those displaced persons, including Jews, who must look else­where than to Europe for their permanent homes.
In formulating a new policy for Palestine, the expert delegations accepted as a basis the principles laid down in the third recommendation of the Anglo­-American Committee, that Palestine as a whole can be neither a Jewish nor an Arab State, that neither of the two communities in Palestine should dominate the other, and that the form of Government should be such as to safeguard the interests in the Holy Land of both Christendom and the Moslem and Jewish faiths.
The expert delegations argue as follows: The political aspirations of the two communities in Palestine are irreconcilable. The conflict which these aspirations have provoked is so bitter, that there is little hope of securing within any reasonable period that measure of co-operation between Arab and Jew which would make possible the establishment in Palestine of a unitary system of Government, consistent with these basic principles, in which each people played its part. The only chance of peace, and of immediate advance towards self-governing institutions, appears to lie in so framing the consti­tution of the country as to give to each the greatest practicable measure of power to manage its own affairs. The experts believe that, in present circumstances, this can best be secured by the establishment of Arab and Jewish Provinces, which will enjoy it large measure of autonomy under a central Government.
It is their proposal that, for this purpose, Palestine shall be divided into four areas, an Arab Province, a Jewish Province, a District of Jerusalem and a District of the Negeb. The Jewish Province would include the great bulk of the land on which Jews have already settled and a considerable area between and around the settlements. The Jerusalem District would include Jeru­salem, Bethlehem and their immediate environs. The Negeb District would consist of the uninhabited triangle of waste land in the South of Palestine beyond the present limits of cultivation. The Arab Province would include the remainder of Palestine; it would be almost wholly Arab in respect both of land and of population. The provincial boundaries would be purely adminis­trative boundaries, defining the area within which a local legislature would be empowered to legislate on certain subjects and a local executive to administer its laws. They would have no significance as regards defence, Customs or communications, but, in order to give finality, the boundaries, once fixed, would not be susceptible of change except by agreement between the two Provinces. A provision to this effect would be embodied in any trusteeship agreement, and in the instrument bringing the plan into operation.
The provincial governments would have power of legislation and adminis­tration within their areas with regard to a wide range of subjects of primarily provincial concern. They would also have power to limit the number and determine the qualifications of persons who may take up permanent residence in their territories after the introduction of the plan. The provincial govern­ments would be required by the instrument of government which establishes the fundamental law to provide for the guarantee of civil rights and equality before the law of all residents, and for the freedom of interterritorial transit, trade and commerce. The provincial governments would have the necessary power to raise money for the purpose of carrying out their functions.
There would be reserved to the Central Government exclusive authority as to defence, foreign relations, Customs and Excise. In addition, there would be reserved initially to the Central Government exclusive authority as to the administration of law and order, including the police and courts, and a limited number of subjects of all-Palestine importance. The Central Government would have all powers not expressly granted to the provinces by the instrument of government. An elected Legislative Chamber would be established in each Province. An executive, consisting of a chief Minister and a Council of Ministers, would be appointed in each Province by the High Commissioner from among the members of the Legislative Chamber after consultation with its leaders. Bills passed by the Legislative Chambers would require the assent of the High Commissioner. This, however, would not be withheld unless the Bill is inconsistent with the instrument of government, whose provisions would afford safeguards for the peace of Palestine and for the rights of minorities.
It would also be necessary to reserve to the High Commissioner an emergency power to intervene if a Provincial Government fails to perform, or exceeds, its proper functions. The executive and legislative functions of the Central Government would initially be exercised by the High Commissioner, assisted by a nominated Executive Council. Certain of the departments of the Central Government would be headed, as soon as the High Commissioner deems practical, by Palestinians. The High Com­missioner would establish a Development Planning Board and a Tariff Board composed of representatives of the Central Government and of each province. In the Jerusalem District, a council would be established with powers similar to those of a municipal counsel. The majority of its members would be elected, but certain members would be nominated by the High Commissioner. The Negeb District would be administered, for the time being, by the Central Government.
This plan for provincial autonomy would greatly simplify the problem of Jewish immigration into Palestine. Though final control over immigra­tion would continue to rest with the Central Government, this control ​would be exercised on the basis of recommendations made by the Provincial Governments. So long as the economic absorptive capacity of the province was not exceeded, the Central Government would authorise the immigration desired by the Provincial Government. It would have no power to authorise immigration in excess of any limitations proposed by the Provincial Governments. Thus, though the Government of the Arab Province would have full power to exclude Jewish immigrants from its Province, the Jewish Province would, normally, be able to admit as many immigrants as its Government desires.
As part of this plan, the experts suggest that it would become possible to accept the recommendations of the Anglo-American Committee for the immediate admission of 100,000 Jewish immigrants into Palestine, and for continuing immigration thereafter. The experts prepared a plan for the movement of 100,000 Jews from Europe into the Jewish area of Palestine, and this plan would be set in motion as soon as it is decided to put into effect the scheme as a whole. The immigration certificates would be issued as rapidly as possible, and every effort would be made to complete the operation within 12 months of the date on which the immigration begins. The immigrants would be selected, primarily, from Jews in Germany, Austria and Italy, and priority would be given to those who have already spent some time in assembly centres in those countries and to others who, though no longer in those centres, were liberated in Germany and Austria. Within those groups, priority would be given to building craftsmen and agricultural workers, young children, the infirm and the aged. The bulk of the 100,000 would be drawn from Germany, Austria and Italy; any certificates available for the Jews in other countries of Eastern and South Eastern Europe would be issued only to orphan children. Shipment would proceed at the maximum rate consistent with the clearance of the transit camps in Palestine, in which the immigrants would be temporarily accommodated until they could be absorbed.
Under this plan, the United States Government would be asked to undertake sole responsibility for the sea transportation of those Jewish refugees, to whom I have referred, from Europe to Palestine. They would provide the ships and would defray the whole cost of sea transportation. They would also provide food for the immigrants for the first two months after their arrival in Palestine. The cost of transferring and settling this number of persons in Palestine would, of course, be considerable. The Jewish organisations have accepted the financial responsibility, and the experts saw no reason why the required finance should not be found from reparations, from contributions by world Jewry and from loans. The experts accepted the recommendation of the Anglo-American Committee that improvements of the economic and social conditions of the Arabs in Palestine were desirable. The programme which they suggested would include the provision of a health service comparable to that already available to the Jews, an expansion of educational facilities, the provision of cheap credit for the Arab cultivators, and other measures designed to increase the productivity of the land, the promotion of the co-operative movement, the development of light industries and improvements in both rural and urban living conditions.
The expert delegations gave warning that, for some years, the implementation of these and other plans for the improvement of economic opportunities and living standards in Palestine would impose heavy capital costs not eligible for loans, and would constitute a severe strain on the finances of Palestine. The setting up of the provincial system would also entail a deficit in the budget of the Arab Province which would have to be met by a Central Government subvention. Further financial aid for Palestine would be required if the plan, as a whole, is to be carried out. To meet this situation, the experts suggested that the United States should be asked to make a substantial grant to the Government of Palestine, to be used principally for financing Arab development projects not suitable for self-liquidating loans, and for assisting in the meeting of extraordinary expenditure during the transitional period, while this country should be asked to take ultimate responsibility for meeting Palestine’s annual budgetary deficit up to the time when increased revenues made this unnecessary.
The experts believed that the need for economic development in Palestine should be considered against the background of the Middle East as a whole. They understood that the Governments represented in the Arab League were now examining the possibilities of economic development in their countries, and they, therefore, suggested that if any of those States found difficulty in obtaining international loans for this purpose the United States should authorise large-scale development loans. These loans would be made through an appropriate agency for the development of the Middle East region, including Palestine. Most large-scale development from which Palestine could benefit should he undertaken in cooperation at least with Transjordan, and probably with Syria and Lebanon. The experts proposed that, subject to the consent of the Government, of Transjordan, the common water resources of both Palestine and Transjordan should be surveyed as soon as possible by consulting engineers acting under government auspices.
I have now completed my outline of the recommendations of the expert delegations. His Majesty's Government, believing that these recommenda­tions represent the best line of advance towards a solution of the problem, informed the United States Government of their willingness to accept them as a basis for negotiation. We had hoped before the Debate to receive from President Truman his acceptance, but we understand that he has decided, in view of the complexity of the matter, to discuss it in detail with the United States expert delegation who are returning to Washington for the purpose. The President is thus giving further consideration to the matter, and we hope to hear again from him in due course.
Meanwhile, however, the situation in Palestine will brook no delay. We are inviting the representatives of the Jews and Arabs to meet us for discussion of these problems and we hope that we shall be able to bring before them as a basis for negotiation the plan recommended by the expert delegations. If it is found acceptable, our intention would be that it should be embodied in a trusteeship agreement for Palestine. But I should make it clear that we mean to go ahead with discussion with Arabs and Jews of a constitutional scheme on these lines. We believe that it offers many advantages to both communities in Palestine.
The Jews will be free to exercise a large measure of control over immigration into their own Province, and to forward there the development of the Jewish national home. The Land Transfers Regulations will be repealed. It will be open to the Government of the Arab Province to permit or to refuse permission to Jews to purchase land there, but the area of the Jewish Province will be larger than that, in which Jews are free to buy land at present. The Arabs will gain, in that the great majority of them will be freed once and for all from any fear of Jewish domination. The citizens of the Arab Province will achieve at once a large measure of autonomy and powerful safeguards will be provided to protect the rights of the Arab minority left in the Jewish Province. To both communities the plan offers a prospect of development, of which there would be little hope in a unitary Palestine.
​In the long term, the plan leaves the way open for peaceful progress and constitutional development either towards partition, or towards federal unity. The association of representatives of the two Provinces in the administration of central subjects may lead ultimately to a fully developed federal constitution. On the other hand, if the centrifugal forces prove too strong, the way is open towards partition. Our proposals do not prejudge this issue either way. We believe that this plan provides as fair and reasonable a compromise between the claims of Arab and Jew as it is possible to devise, and that it offers the best prospect of reconciling the conflicting interests of the two communities. This, however, must be made clear. The full implementation of the experts’ plan as a whole depends on United States co-operation. I hope that that will be forthcoming. If not, we shall have to reconsider the position, particularly as regards the economic and financial implications, and this is bound to affect the tempo and extent of immigration and development.
These, then, are our proposals. I ask the indulgence of the House for the fact, that I have had to stick closely to my notes in the circumstances in making this speech, because a great deal of this speech was necessarily based upon the recommendations of the expert delegations, and I was exceedingly anxious to be accurate in what I said. It would, in any event be impracticable to enter, at this stage, into greater detail regarding pro­posals which it is intended shall form the basis of discussion with repre­sentatives of the Arabs and Jews whom we have promised an opportunity for consultation before a final decision is reached.
I commend these proposals to the House, and I would urge upon both communities in the Holy Land to give them their most earnest considera­tion. While our consultations are proceeding, I would appeal to all men of good will on either side to co-operate with the Government in suppressing terrorism and in bringing to justice those responsible for crimes of violence. Let nothing be said or done that will render it more difficult to reach a final settlement. The world is weary of this senseless strife of Jew and Arab, and sickened by its barbarous incidents. It calls upon them to end a sordid chapter of history, and join with the civilised nations in building the foundations of a nobler and happier world. Their friends everywhere will anxiously await their verdict. Mere negation, however, does no good and would be particularly dangerous and regrettable in a combustible situation of the kind with which we are dealing. There is a responsibility on both Jews and Arabs to be willing to sit down as practical people to discuss, to negotiate and to talk with a view to reaching a practicable solution, with the expedition and with the sense of urgency which this grave problem demands.
[The explanatory map appears at the end of the Paper]