The Modern Middle East, Semester 2, 2010
Document Test Answers
Q1) For the three maps in source J, provide approximate dates and explain
what they represent. (3 marks)

Left: This map depicts Palestine in the early 20th Century, certainly prior to
1947, either as part of the Ottoman Empire or, after WW1, the British
Mandate. The dark area – the vast majority of the territory – are lands
predominately inhabited by Arabs. The white areas, in the North and the West
on the Mediterranean Sea, represent Zionist settlements.

Centre: This map depicts the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
(UNSCOP) partition plan for Palestine. UNSCOP proposed the partition of
Palestine in November 1947 after the British had indicated they were
renouncing their mandate over Palestine. The areas in white indicate the
territory proposed for the new State of Israel, the dark areas are those that
were proposed for an independent Arab state.

Right: This map depicts the situation in 1948/9 after the First Arab-Israeli War.
This war began in earnest upon the declaration of the State of Israel on May
14, 1948. The white area is the Israel. The black area on the right of the map,
known as the West Bank, was annexed by Jordan after the war. The narrow
black strip on the Mediterranean Sea, the Gaza Strip, was occupied by Egypt.
Q2) How does Source A help us understand the religious basis for antiSemitism? (3 marks)

In Chapter 26, Jesus is charged with blasphemy by a Jewish high priest. As a
result of this charge, Jesus is spat on, beaten, slapped, derided and ultimately
handed over to the Roman authorities.

When the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, asks the crowd, they insist he
crucify Christ and not Barabbas.

Pilate says “I am innocent of the blood of this righteous person.” The Jews
present declare “may his blood be on us, and on our children!” Thus the Jews
have explicitly declared that they and their descendants are responsible for
what Christians regard as deicide.

The bible is self-evidently central to Christianity. It depicts Jesus, the Son of
God, being spat on, beaten, slapped, derided, tried and crucified by or
because of the Jews. This helps us understand why there has been a
longstanding tradition of Christian anti-Semitism.
Q3) What is Zionism? What were the central arguments for Zionism offered by
Theodor Herzl and others? (3 marks)

Zionism is a movement for the creation and maintenance of a Jewish state.

Herzl argued a state was necessary to defend Jews from anti-Semitic
persecution. Jews had been subject to a centuries of hostility in Europe. In
the Middle Ages they were massacred in pogroms, banished from some
countries, herded into ghettoes in others and denied access to many
1
professions as well as many other rights enjoyed by their fellow countrymen.
In the nineteenth century anti-Semitic persecution was particularly vicious in
Russia, where Jews were victims of a wave of pogroms. This long history
indicated that assimilation into European societies was impossible.

Herzl argued that the root cause of Jewish misery was their state of diaspora
or dispersal. As small ethnic minorities, Jews faced courts, police forces,
cultures that were hostile to them and against which they had little power.
Therefore, to guarantee their security, Jews needed to form a state of their
own. As it was theirs it would protect and defend and foster Jews and Jewish
culture.

Herzl also provided other reasons for anti-Semitism. The Jews had a deep
historical and religious connection with Palestine. Apart from the inherent
good of re-establishing that connection, Herzl believed a Jewish state in
Palestine could be a bulwark or outpost for European interests in the East.
Q4) Do you accept the interpretation of the Hussein-McMahon correspondence
(Source B) provided in Source F? (2 marks) (You may find it helpful to refer to
the map in Source G).

The 1939 British White Paper rejected the Arab “contention that Palestine
was included within the area in which Sir Henry McMahon, on behalf of the
British Government, in October, 1915, undertook to recognise and support
Arab independence.” It held that “the whole of Palestine west of Jordan was
excluded from Sir Henry McMahon's pledge.”

The validity of the White Paper’s interpretation largely depends on what the
following McMahon meant when he wrote; “… portions of Syria lying to the
west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo cannot be said to
be purely Arab, and should be excluded from the limits demanded.” Palestine
is west of Damascus which supports the White Paper’s interpretation but it is
also south of it, which undermines it.

The rationale for this exclusion is that the area is no ‘purely Arab.’ This could
refer to the significant Christian (although ethnically Arab) population in
modern-day Lebanon, strictly west of Aleppo, Homs, Hama and Damascus. It
could also refer to the relatively small Zionist settlements in Palestine.

McMahon states that “Great Britain will guarantee the Holy Places against all
external aggression…” Addressed to Sherif Hussein this would definitely
include Mecca but could also be taken to include the Dome of the Rock and
the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, Islam’s third holiest site. If the latter is the
case, it would tend against the White Paper’s interpretation of Hussein’s
commitment.

The White Paper states “the whole of Palestine west of Jordan was
excluded.” This begs the question as to why this simple phrase wasn’t used
by McMahon if that, in fact, was what he meant. The River Jordan is a clear
geographical marker that could have been referred to as the border of an
independent Arab state. The absence of any reference by Hussein to the
Jordan undermines the ’39 White Paper’s interpretation.
2
Q5) Why, according to Chaim Weizmann (Source D) did the British make the
Balfour Declaration (Source C)? (2 marks)

Weizmann points out that Lloyd George and Arthur Balfour were deeply
religious Christians. There immersion in the bible which tells how God
promised Israel to the Jews made them sympathetic to Zionism.

According to Weizmann, the Balfour Declaration was also motivated by an
attempt to gratify American Jewry and therefore increase the chances that the
US would come into WW1 in support of the British.
Q 6) In what ways, if any, are the Hussein-McMahon correspondence, the
Sykes-Picot agreement and the Balfour Declaration, inconsistent with each
other? In your answer draw on your own knowledge and consider Sources B,
C, and F. (5 marks)

H-M, S-P & Balfour are all British statements about the fate of the Middle
East, premised on the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. They were all made
during the First World War, while the British were fighting the Ottomans. The
imperative of gaining as much support for the war effort as possible led the
British to promise to various parties what they wanted, even though these
promises were inconsistent.

H-M pledges British support for Arab rule throughout Arabia and the Fertile
Crescent.

It is contested as to whether the area designated for Arab rule in H-M
included Palestine. It is understandable that, on the basis of H-M, the Arabs
believed Palestine was part of the area designated for Arab rule.

S-P specifies international rule over Palestine. This plan is absent from H-M.

S-P introduces French and British ‘zones of influence’. H-M did allow for
British support to the Arab state/s (in a state-building capacity). However, it
did not allow for the kind of influence envisaged in S-P: controls over arms
importation and other trade.

A French zone of influence in modern day Syria is totally foreign to H-M.

S-P envisages direct British control to extend down the Eastern Arabian
coast. It is not clear that this is the understanding elaborated in H-M.

The meaning of Balfour is difficult to ascertain and possibly, it is internally
inconsistent. This is because it supports both a Jewish home in Palestine and
the maintenance of the religious and political rights of the Arabs. On one
construction, those rights include Palestine as part of sovereign Arab territory;
thus the question of a Jewish homeland in Palestine would be solely a matter
for the Arabs. Britain supporting the notion would itself be abrogating the
Arab’s political rights.

As much as Balfour is, after all, committed to a Jewish home in Palestine and
H-M designates Palestine for Arab rule, the two commitments are
inconsistent.
3

Whether or not S-P and Balfour are consistent is contingent upon the nature
of international rule in Palestine and the nature of a Jewish ‘home’ there.
Q7) What was the cause and consequences of the spike in Jewish immigration
to Palestine in the mid 1930s? (3 marks)

Cause: increased anti-semitism in Europe, particularly in Nazi Germany after
Hitler’s rise to power in 1933.

Consequence: The dramatic increase in Jewish immigration angered the
Arabs who feared they would lose control of Palestine. The Arab Rebellion
between 1936 and 1939 Palestinian took the form of strikes, other forms of
political protest and violence, mainly directed at British troops.

The Arab Rebellion led initially to the Peel Commission partition plan of 1937.
When this failed to quell Arab anger, the 1939 White Paper committed to
limits on Jewish immigration and the formation of an independent, unified
state within 10 years.
Q8) In what fundamental way did the UNSCOP plan for Palestine (Source G)
differ from the recommendations of the 1939 British White Paper? What
explains this change? (3 marks)

The 1939 White paper proposed the formation of a single independent state
within 10 years.
The UNSCOP partition plan proposed the formation of two completely
separate states; an Arab state and a Jewish state.

The White Paper restricted Jewish immigration to 75 000 over the subsequent
five years, limiting the Jewish population to one third of the total. Political
representation proportional to ethnic composition in an independent Palestine
would effectively ensure the end of Jewish immigration.
Under the 1947 partition plan, the Jewish state would be able to determine its
own immigration levels.

The central explanation for the change from the one-state solution proposed
in 1939 to the two-state solution proposed in 1947 is the holocaust. The scale
and cruelty of this mass atrocity horrified the world and led to heartfelt
sympathy for the Jewish people and their desire for safety and security.

Practically speaking, WW2 left many displaced persons who had been
rescued from the concentration camps. It was contended that for many of
these displaced persons, returning home was unpalatable and therefore
pressure grew on the British administration to permit Jewish immigration into
Palestine.

Strategic Zionist campaigning, such as the sailing of the Exodus to Palestine
only to be turned around by the British, increased international pressure.
Zionist terrorism, such as the bombing of the King David Hotel, helped induce
the British to relinquish their mandate over Palestine and to hand the matter
back to the UN.
4
Q9) Given all relevant considerations knowable in 1947, was the
partition of Palestine into an Arab and Jewish state, as per the UNSCOP
partition plan (Source G), the best approach? (6 marks)
5