Michael's Dispatches

Who was the proponent of this report? When was it written? (Sometime in the mid-1940s, I imagine).

[quote name="Jeff"]Who was the proponent of this report? When was it written? (Sometime in the mid-1940s, I imagine).[/quote]

I note that the report cites oil production rates circa 1946.

I don't understand what the purpose is of publishing this report, without any analysis or verification. What exactly are you implying or trying to accomplish?

I see someone already asked my question. Who wrote this report and for which agency? Interesting read to say the least but my impression is that it was written by someone not too sympathetic to the Jewish cause.

The report says the Arabs were tired of imperialism, they wanted their independence and then the U.N. gave away something that didn't belong to them. Now everything in this report came true.

Looks like a Internal UK Foreign Office report circa 1946-47. Nothing really revealing. Most of the news reports at the time reflected the same, but with a large dose of partiality favoring the Jewish people and the Jewish refugee boat people trying to land in Palestine. It shows UK long term awareness to some depth of the Arab feelings towards a creation of a Jewish State at the time and what could happen should it come about. Obviously the writing was on the wall for creation of Israel,this was really a foregone conclusion mainly due to the strong US influence and the very recent horror of the Nazi Holocaust targeting mostly the Jewish populations in Europe. I can only imagine most Jewish refugees did not or could not return home and sympathy for a Jewish state arose from that mass of misplaced people.

[quote name="David Quin"]I see someone already asked my question. Who wrote this report and for which agency? Interesting read to say the least but my impression is that it was written by someone not too sympathetic to the Jewish cause.[/quote]

Initially was an appendix to a Joint Intelligence Committee, "Intelligence Estimate of the Muslim Situation" (JIC 55/2) disseminated October 1, 1946. I agree, it wasn't too sympathetic to the Jewish cause. Tom G

This is an interesting risk assessment, and it would also be interesting to read the position papers that argued, persuasively as it turns out, against it.

The report came to me raw as is. I found it very interesting. It provides its own context. Anything more is out of context...

The joint United States/United Kingdom "Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry" published its report on April 20, 1946. It contained a number of recommendations regarding Jewish immigration into Palestine. The appendix Michael has published was part of an assessment of what would happen if those recommendations were followed.

Some questions/observations:

1) I'm confused by some of the terminology. The report indicates that the Arabs would have been upset over "improper" implementation of the Palestine plan. What would have been a "proper" implementation of the plan?

2) The report goes on to say that the Arabs would have been happy had they been given "control" over the "settlement" of the Palestine issue. What would this control have entailed, and how would it have impacted the Jews then in Palestine?

) The report gives the sense that the Arabs did not recognize any Jewish claim on the land whatsoever. Although it doesn't tease it out, it seems to me that the implications of this observation are as follows:
a) the Arabs thought the U.N. had no right to give away what belonged to the Arabs.
b) the Jews thought the Arabs had no right to prevent the return of what belonged to (and had been taken from) the Jews.

I'm told that:

"JIC 55/2 was commissioned by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and issued on 1 October 1946. It is located in the National Archives in RG 266, Records of the OSS, 1941-1945, Washington Director's Office Administrative Files, microfilm 1642, roll 24, 1015-1017. An extensive discussion of the document is found in Jeffrey Herf's book Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World, pp. 245-247."

[quote name="Michael Yon"]The report came to me raw as is. I found it very interesting. It provides its own context. Anything more is out of context...[/quote]

Mike, where are the "Markings" typically used by the USG or DoD? The Title, and each paragraph are supposed to be marked according to their classification. This would lead one to believe this is from possibly the DOS or another source.

So, what happened to the page with the copier-added annotation '0502'? It's nice that someone thought far enough ahead to have annotation added to copies made of classified documents, isn't it? I would certainly like to read the report to which this is an appendix.

JIC: Joint Intelligence Committee (United Kingdom)

Some additional links. I haven't cracked a way into the entire report (80 pages. ...yet. These have some abstracts, and some other items of possible interest. There seems to not be an open copy on the internet, other than purchasing it.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/40 91945
htthttp://www.michaelyon-online.com/feed/com_content/6264.htmp://www.jstor.org/pss/40110080
http://www.jstor.org/pss/40 91940
http://archive.jta.org/article/1946/05/12/27450 8/twenty-wounded-in-cairo-during-demonstration-against-angloamerican-report-on-palestine

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/page/999698

So, where is the page with the copier-added page annotation of '0502 '?

This is garbage. A plant by Arab interests to justify atrocities and sow discord. Much of the information is a mix of half truths from the pre 1948 UN partition of Palestine to more recent times.

This report was written after WWII. I guess British and Americans thought they could manage world events and try prevent WWIII.

Also the report seems to read a bit Anti Semitic, but then many main stream (white) Christian people did hold a misplaced sense of "righteousness" over all other peoples.

What a waste of valuable time.

As far as it goes, this appendix represents a laudably serious attempt to engage the Arab perspective on the situation in Palestine. However, I'm curious that the appendix seems to have treated Arabs as a monolith, and to have accepted the then Arab leaders as its representatives. Perhaps this was justified, but the appendix might also have considered the possibility that the various non-democratic regimes in the Middle East were using the Palestine issue to divert attention from the problems of their own reigns. This was actually one of the first things that came to my mind, at least, when I read that the one thing the Hashemites, Saudi royal family and Egyptians could agree about was opposition to the establishment of a Jewish state in Israel.

I would say this is definitely US for the following (non-exhaustive) reasons:
- date format of declassification stickers is US. We would post this as 20/9/90.
- The fact that you have this at all: there is no way that the UK Foreign Office would release a paper of this nature even now. We don't have the US culture of openness
- The discussion of British troop levels. The FO would not need to discuss in such vague terms: it would have been available to them directly, not as estimates.
- The discussion of US jewish voting intentions. We wouldn't have given a fig about that. ;-)

This was declassified 21 years ago? Why is this news?

Thanks Michael, this is interesting. While not "new news" people who wish to learn more of the situation and how it came about, will be informed, while some of the people who have choosen to put blinders on as to the historical reason why Arabs dislike Israel will surely deride and ignore it. As most Arabs like to point out, Jews and Muslims got along fine in the mideast until the formation of Israel. To bad the politicians of the day did not have some of the foresight of the author.
That being said nothing justifies the intentional killing of innocents from either side.

Added to this American Geezer's 20/20 hindsight, it indicates the absolute futility of any proposed American "outreach", "negotiations", "talks", etc., and confirms the Colonial origins of the present day impasse in the Middle East/Central Asian theatre.

With the basis of this long continuing standoff firmly rooted in Colonialism, it galls me that we Americans are expected to provide the bulk of the material means and youth to support anything other than open pipelines for oil.

The near total containment/isolation of Islam is the only rational approach now in 2011.

Yea, Jews and arabs got along fine, as long as the Jews knew their place. As for the historical reasons Arabs dislike Israel it's kind of easy to figure out, it's because they're Jews!

Adam, you are correct it is a fallacy that they ever got along, but who do the Arabs get along with, they are still angry about the Jews not accepting Islam.

So, with this supposed prescient document warning of coming conflict are we now supposed to say, Never mind, and sell out the only ally remaining, the only nation to have any regard for human rights in the region, the only nation that does not adopt an ideology that calls for the death or submission of all human beings to their archaic and barbaric beliefs which would exist with or without the presence of Israel?

The enemy is unreformed Islam and it should be condemned to the same dustbin that holds German National Socialism.

Since when is there a state of Palestine? It can be wished for all that people want, but until people accept that the Jewish people have a right to live on this earth and in the places that they now live,,,,,there will be no PEACE! go to pftv and look for the video:
How about a one state Israel.

It's an age old truth since revealed to Abraham that the land of Isreal belongs to the Jews. The followers of "Christ" and the hateful followers of the murdering, lying, thieving and child molesting prophet of Mecca have ventured in and out in plundering and trying to "occupy". Truth is God in these last days has brought the sons of Issac home and they will soon kneel to their messiah....Jesus of Nazereth. Bless the Jews..be blessed...Curse..be cursed of God. We can not leave him out.

ooopps! I meant: PJTV Andrew Klavan's How About a One State Solution for Israel. Thanks for watching. B

have you ever talked with a Palestinian Christian? They are Arab and so are the Jews who were in what is now Israel before it was founded. This is not what they tell me.
So, since there are Arab Jews then by your logic they must hate themselves.

So, Sherrill, you and I both know that we never really get exiled from that business, even if all we do is watch from the sidelines and know how to read the signs,....and talk to old friends who have some collateral that helps us ferret out the true from the fictitious. Give yours a call, or drop them an email like I do. Callng on them with cold beer works best though.

You should be confused you state many things that are not true.
First Israel exists. It ain't going away. So, the Arabs need to except that.
I disagree that Israel has regard for human rights. They have for many years tortured suspects legally. It was only recently that their supreme court outlawed torture except in extreme case of national security. Recently a Israel soldier pumped a little girl full of bullets, because she dropped her books within site of his outpost while walking to school. No discipline was taken. Where were her human rights? If the ideology is common Islam you are talking about you are again wrong. It is illegal to kill Jews or Christians in Islam. Whack jobs like Osama may think different, but the book directly contradicts them. It's kinda like judging Christianity based on David Koresh's beliefs. And, no Arab nation has adopted the ideology you claim.

nothing to see here ... more of the same to try and justify radical hatred

Jeff

The report was written between 1946 and 1948 when the first coinage was issued for the Palestine (Israel) state, and not later than Dec 1950 when Libya got its independence given to it under the leadership of King Idris I.

The language of the report plus the term 'TOP SECRET" indicate that the report was prepared by an American.

The control number indicates that it was the second copy of of the report.

Paul Garner, USAF (Ret)
aka The Old Sarge

Why was this published?

1. Michael found it interesting and shared this document with us. Thanks Mike!

2.The amount of knowledge in this network of Mikes is stunning.

.The most noteworthy part of the report was the underestimation of the fighting ability of the Jews to fight and the over estimation of the fighting ability of the Arabs to fight the Jews. One exception was the Arab Legion which put up a commendable effort.

Thanks for publishing this Mike.

Paul Garner, USAF (Retired)
aka The Old Sarge

I won't bother to quote the verses knowing full well that you will claim 'context' while ignoring or remaining willfully ignorant of the history of Islam---- submit or die to put it in full concise context. Or, just look at current events where Christians are being raped and murdered just as in the good old days of its founding. People who care need to read the texts and history for themselves. Muhammed was a thief, murderer and slave rapist---- you may think it was all for Allah, but the facts are the facts.

In 19 9, before the start of WWII, the British closed off all Jewish immigration to Palestine (due to pressure from the Arabs) thereby closing off one of the main safe havens for pre-war Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany. After the war, the British continued the immigration ban, and placed captured Jewish refugees in a refugee camp in Cyprus. The discussion in this "top secret" document revolves around what do with the refugees in Cyprus. The 100,000 number jives with what is written in the following link, and dates the document to 1946: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005459. According to link, "The report of the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry in January 1946 led U.S. president Harry Truman to pressure Britain into admitting 100,000 Jewish refugees into Palestine."

Often reports such as this have been so sanitized of specific national interests in the composition of such reports as to sound amorally cruel. As for the Arab interest in having control of settling the issue I would remind everyone that very early in WWII the Arab leaders fully endorsed and showed great interest in Hitler's "solution" to the Jewish problen.

Also, in response to one of the previous posts claiming that Jewish-Arabs were idyllic before the creation of Israel, Wikipedia has an interesting entry about the "Farhud", the anti-Jewish pogrom that took place in Baghdad in June 1941 (during WWII): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhud

Everything written in this supposed "Top Secret" document has been common knowledge for years and was used for the basis of the movie Exodus. The things stated in he report was why the British createda seperate state for the Jews.

Lybia was created by the Italians in 19 4 by combining seperate provinces.

I have no idea why Mike would think this is something new but here are a few facts about the time and area.



Severe anti-Jewish violence erupted in Libya following the liberation of North Africa by Allied troops. From November 5 to November 7, 1945, more than 140 Jews (including 6 children) were killed and hundreds injured in a pogrom in Tripoli. Five synagogues in Tripoli and four in provincial towns were destroyed, and over 1,000 Jewish residences and commercial buildings were plundered in Tripoli alone.[15][16][17] In June 1948, anti-Jewish rioters in Libya killed another 12 Jews and destroyed 280 Jewish homes.[16] The fear and insecurity which arose from these anti-Jewish attacks and the founding of the state of Israel led many Jews to flee Libya. From 1948 to 1951, 0,972 Libyan Jews moved to Israel.[18] By 1970s, the rest of Libyan Jews (some 7,000) were evacuated to Italy.

It looks like a State Dept. authored or commissioned document. Definitely not pro-Zionist, but more even-handed than anything the Obama/Hillary people have done.

You are demonstrating abject ignorance on the subject. Christians in 'Palestine' are being chased out as we speak. Several Holy sites have been defaced with increasing frequency.
Race is not the issue-- both are Semitic and both claim the same patriarch by their tradition. Islam commands all followers to persuade all others to submit to the tenets of the faith either by conversion or subjugation--- or death. READ the Koran and the Hadith if you doubt me. Don't stop at the beginning accounts of Mohammed trying to 'gently' persuade the Christians and Jews. Read his instructions and actions against them when they rebuffed his efforts to convert. THAT is what we are living today and that is why there will never be peace in the ME until it is acknowledged in the West and Islam goes the way of its cousin Nazism.

mid level 'analysis' asked for by upper level to buttress pre-existing thinking against Zionists at State & 'other' (pre CIA, OSS waning) ... as stated above, I'd like to see the countervailing paper from the Jewish side

Mike's posting demonstrates how we (US & UK, et al) think we can move the pieces on the board sitting on the banks of the Potomac

here we are 60+ years later and the same tectonic plates are still rumbling

hubris

This was a fascinating read -- to say the least. Some equally fascinating comments. I agree with Jake MacGregor who sums it up with a single word: "hubris."

I don't think "hubris" sums it up. It's a most difficult problem scenario of global import and consequence, and with not obvious or easy answers available in real time. You can't Monday-morning-quarterback this thing. What the paper showed me was the degree to which the essential Islamic problem does not change much over lifetimes, however, that fact in no way alleviates the requirement for western nations to deal with it.

This report is as useless as tits on a bull. It is obviously very old and out of date. Why it was ever top secret to begin with is probably because the government stamps everything top-secret, just because they can.

with respect Mr Brooks "Imperial' (excuse me, but Imperial says it all :>) )

otherwise, the notion is 'the natives do not understand the benefits of our colonizing them'

we, in the USA, rejected Colonialism in 1776 ... so to sit in Foggy Bottom, 150 years later (or now) and author top secret reports dispensing with millions of lives half a world away is

well, it is Hubris