The plan was to divide Palestine into three parts: an Arab State, a Jewish State and the City of Jerusalem. Directly taken from my source: "The proposed Arab State would include the central and part of western Galilee, with the town of Acre, the hill country of Samaria and Judea, an enclave at Jaffa, and the southern coast stretching from north of Isdud (now Ashdod) and encompassing what is now the Gaza Strip, with a section of desert along the Egyptian border. The proposed Jewish State would include the fertile Eastern Galilee, the Coastal Plain, stretching from Haifa to Rehovot and most of the Negev desert, including the southern outpost of Umm Rashrash (now Eilat). The Jerusalem Corpus Separatum included Bethlehem and the surrounding areas."
This resulted in a somewhat interlocking Jewish state and the Arab state as seen here.
What were the reasons for the land to be partitioned in such a particular way that causes the Jewish and Arab states to seemingly have 2 pieces of land each?
Good morning everybody, I have a question for contemplation. Would love to hear some feedback.
My question is, "Why did the United Nations choose the British Mandate of Palestine as the location to make a new Jewish state?"
I believe I know the answer but I want to hear other discussion as well. I cannot find much information for why they choose Palestine. But, according to my knowledge of history, it seems to be because it was their territorial homeland.
The Jewish people trace their heritage back to Abraham and Isaac. And it was Abraham's descendants who conquered the lands of Palestine and established the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel. There were the famous kings of King David and King Solomon.
Eventually, the Babylonians will destroy the Hebrews kingdoms and enslave them and they will be spread throughout the known world.
Then the prophet Muhammad comes into picture and starts Islam and his disciples eventually gain control of Palestine.
Not sure how the British get Palestine but it ends up being their colony.
Then the U.N issued their resolution of Palestine Partition and we are where we are now.
What does everyone have to say on this? Is that the reason the U.N choose Palestine for the Jews or was their some other reason?
Members of UNSC: China, France, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, United States, Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, Netherlands, Poland
The United Kingdom calls for this partition plan to be passed in United Nations Security Council to show that it has worldly support.
Britain cares deeply about the situation in Mandatory Palestine and this partition plan will appease both the Arabs and the Jews who will now have their own separate nations in the holy land. A UN administered Jerusalem will ensure that the holy sites are free from bias and discrimination thus ensuring a peaceful coexistence of the two groups of people now and forever.
We ask members of the UNSC to vote on this matter and to, if necessary, suggest changes for a smoother transition to independence for this mandate.
However, it should be noted that rejecting the plan would cause great issue with the people of Palestine and it should be noted that a two state solution is best in this case.
Should the vote be passed, the independence date will be set as 1st February 1947.
The Jewish community accepted the plan, but the Arabs did not. They soon went to war and lost. If the Arab states had accepted the terms from the start how would the region look today? Would Israel be as strong economical and would their borders be as vast. Would there still be tension to scale seen today or would it be relativity peaceful?
By international city, did the authors of the partition plan mean that it would be administered by the U.N.? How was it supposed to work?
I know it has been asked before, but I hope we could have a bigger discussion than the previous discussion
Wiki. I was wondering how this conflict would look today if the Arab league had respected this proposal (or renegotiated), and we would have had a Palestinian nation with a UN seat.
As I see it, Palestine would be able to prosecute via the International court of justice (and itself be prosecuted), have better foreign policy and even some military to work with.
So... Would Israeli settlements have been so invasive? Would the area be peaceful and how would foreign policy in the Arab league look?
There was a geopolitical reason for that?
hello Palestinians i support Palestine but i have one question why did Palestine reject all 5 partition plans between them and Israel because i cant really find answers when searching them up ?
When you look at the statistics, it is just sounds like an incredibly unfair deal for the Palestinians. The Jews at the time were 30% of the population and owned somewhere around 7% of the land* yet they were awarded 55% of mandatory Palestine. Also in the area allotted for the Jewish state, it had almost as many Palestinians as Jews. How is this in accordance with the right of self determination for Palestinians?
The plan was to divide Palestine into three parts: an Arab State, a Jewish State and the City of Jerusalem. Directly taken from my source: "The proposed Arab State would include the central and part of western Galilee, with the town of Acre, the hill country of Samaria and Judea, an enclave at Jaffa, and the southern coast stretching from north of Isdud (now Ashdod) and encompassing what is now the Gaza Strip, with a section of desert along the Egyptian border. The proposed Jewish State would include the fertile Eastern Galilee, the Coastal Plain, stretching from Haifa to Rehovot and most of the Negev desert, including the southern outpost of Umm Rashrash (now Eilat). The Jerusalem Corpus Separatum included Bethlehem and the surrounding areas."
This resulted in a somewhat interlocking Jewish state and the Arab state as seen here.
What were the reasons for the land to be partitioned in such a particular way that causes the Jewish and Arab states to seemingly have 2 pieces of land each?
