alone can develop the country adequately and that these immigrants help, rather than injure, the Arab population.

For the United States, as for other Members of the United Nations, these rival claims-each based upon historical, political, and legal arguments have created a dilemma of infinite complexity. Few issues in modern times have taxed statesmanship so heavily; few have offered a greater challenge to an international organization.

SPECIAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The question of Palestine was brought before the United Nations by the Government of the United Kingdom in a letter to the SecretaryGeneral dated April 2, 1947, which requested the Secretary-General to place the question of Palestine on the agenda of the General Assembly at its next regular session. The British Government stated that it would ask the Assembly to make recommendations under article 10 of the Charter concerning the future government of Palestine. It requested the Secretary-General to summon a special session of the General Assembly for the purpose of constituting and instructing a special committee to prepare for the consideration of the problem. The Special Session convened on April 28, 1947. The United States was represented by Ambassador Warren R. Austin, as Chairman of the Delegation, and Ambassador Herschel V. Johnson as Alternate Representative. Oswaldo Aranha (Brazil) was elected President. Lester B. Pearson (Canada) was elected Chairman of the Political and Security Committee, in which most of the debates took place.

The adoption of the agenda provoked an initial controversy, but on May 1 the General Assembly adopted without a record vote the item proposed by the United Kingdom. It rejected, by a vote of 15 for. 24 against, and 10 abstentions, the item proposed by the five Arab states (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia)1 for "termination of the mandate over Palestine and the declaration of its independence".

A major procedural problem arose over the request of many nongovernmental organizations to be heard during the Special Session. Certain of these organizations requested that their representatives be allowed full rights of participation, except for the right to vote, in the deliberations. These requests involved considerations of general principle, quite apart from the Palestine problem, and the decision might have set important precedents for the future work of the Assembly. The United States Representative took the position that full rights of participation in the General Assembly are limited to representatives

1Yemen, the sixth Arab state now a Member of the United Nations, was admitted by decision later in the year.

of Members of the United Nations. The Members of the United Nations are states, and states only. Furthermore, he argued, the Special Session had been convened to constitute and instruct a committee of inquiry, not to discuss the substance of the Palestine question.

The Assembly ultimately adopted two resolutions authorizing the First Committee to grant hearings to the Jewish Agency for Palestine and the Arab Higher Committee and to decide upon other requests of a similar character from the Palestinian population. The First Committee subsequently agreed to hear representatives of only those two nongovernmental organizations. The appearances of the representatives were “hearings" of the type familiar in the practice followed by the United States Congress; that is, the representatives appeared under arrangements effected by the Chairman of the Committee, made statements on the matter before the Committee, and answered questions.

CREATION OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON PALESTINE

At the outset the First Committee had before it draft resolutions submitted by Argentina and the United States, proposing the establishment of a committee of inquiry with broad powers, but diverging fundamentally on the question of membership of the committee. The Argentine resolution proposed a committee composed of the Five Powers and six other states. The United States resolution premised that the Five Powers should be excluded and that the Special Committee should consist of a small number of states not directly interested in the Palestine problem.

Those supporting the Argentine proposal felt that the Five Powers should be given responsibility from the very outset of the work on Palestine and that failure to include them on the Committee might result in a prolonged discussion of the Palestine problem at the regular session of the Assembly. The Soviet Union alone of the great powers themselves proposed that these powers should be included. Those favoring the United States proposal suggested that disagreement among the Five Powers might result in failure of the Special Committee to make agreed recommendations. It was generally felt, moreover, that, if it were not appropriate for one of the Five Powers-the United Kingdom-to serve on the Committee, none of the five should. On the basis of an Australian proposal, the First Committee decided that the Special Committee should consist of 11, not including any permanent members of the Security Council. The draft resolution submitted by the United States had named seven states: Canada, Czechoslovakia, Iran, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, and Uruguay. Two additional states, Guatemala and Yugoslavia, were suggested by the Chilean Delegation. The First Committee elected these nine in a

group, and the tenth and eleventh members in a manner designed to preserve proper geographic representation: Australia from the South Pacific area and India from Asia. This composition of the Special Committee was approved by 39 votes in favor, 3 against, with 10 abstentions.

The terms of reference as set forth in the final resolution contained but a single specific instruction to the Special Committee, namely, to "give most careful consideration to the religious interests in Palestine of Islam, Judaism and Christianity". The Committee was assigned "the widest powers to ascertain and record facts, and to investigate any questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine" and was instructed "to submit such proposals as it may consider appropriate for the solution of the problem of Palestine".

The General Assembly adopted the report of the First Committee by a vote of 45 for, 7 against, and one abstention. The Representatives of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Syria formally reserved the positions of their respective Governments.

The Assembly unanimously adopted a second resolution calling upon all governments and peoples, and particularly on the inhabitants of Palestine, to refrain from the threat or use of force or any other action which might create an atmosphere prejudicial to an early settlement of the question.

UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON PALESTINE

For over three months after the adjournment of the Special Session of the General Assembly the Palestine problem was considered by the Special Committee (familiarly known as UNSCOP), which held its first meeting at Lake Success on May 26 and signed its report at Geneva, Switzerland, on August 31. The Committee elected Justice Emil Sandstrom (Sweden) and Dr. Alberto Ulloa (Peru) Chairman and Vice Chairman, respectively. The Secretary-General designated a secretariat of 57 members, headed by Dr. Victor Hoo, Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations in charge of trusteeship and information from non-self-governing territories.

The Committee spent six weeks of investigation in the Holy Land. Although the Arab Higher Committee decided to abstain from collaboration with the Committee, representatives of the Arab states presented their views to the Committee in Beirut. Several members of the Committee also visited displaced-persons camps in Germany and Austria. After a month of final consideration in Geneva the Committee submitted its report to the General Assembly. The report contained 11 general principles unanimously agreed upon by the Committee, a majority plan for partition of Palestine, and a minority

plan for a federal state. The Representative of Australia did not sign either plan.

MAJORITY PLAN: PARTITION WITH ECONOMIC UNION

The majority plan was signed by representatives of seven of the eleven members-Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, and Uruguay. It proposed a partition of Palestine with economic union, effective after a transitional period of two years beginning September 1, 1947. Independence would be granted each state upon the adoption of a constitution, the making of a declaration to the United Nations guaranteeing the Holy Places and religious and minority rights, and the signing of a treaty establishing an economic union. During this transitional period the United Kingdom (with the assistance of one or more Members of the United Nations, if so desired) would carry on the administration of Palestine under the auspices of the United Nations on such conditions and under such supervision as the United Kingdom and the United Nations might agree upon. The proposed boundaries would establish an Arab state, a Jewish state, and a City of Jerusalem which would be placed under international trusteeship. During the two-year transitional period 150,000 Jewish immigrants would be admitted into the Jewish state. If the transitional period should continue for more than two years, Jewish immigrants would be allowed at the rate of 60,000 a year. Existing restrictions on the transfer of land would not apply in the proposed Jewish state during the transitional period. The economic union of the two states would include a customs union, a common currency, operation in the common interest of transportation and communication facilities and the ports of Haifa and Jaffa, and a joint development program. The economic union would be administered by a Joint Economic Board, consisting of three representatives of each of the two states and three foreign members appointed by the Economic and Social Council. Between 5 and 10 percent of the customs revenues would be allocated to the City of Jerusalem; the remainder would be divided equally between the two states.

MINORITY PLAN: A FEDERAL STATE

The minority plan, signed by representatives of India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, provided for the creation of an independent federal state of Palestine following a transitional period of not more than three years. Independence of Palestine would be declared by the General Assembly upon the adoption of a constitution containing provisions specified in the plan. The General Assembly would determine what authority would administer Palestine during the transitional period.

The proposed boundaries would establish an Arab state and a Jewish state within the federal state. Each of these two local states would be divided into two noncontiguous sections. Jewish immigration would be permitted into the Jewish state for a period of three years to the extent compatible with its absorptive capacity as determined by an international commission. Thereafter, immigration would be regulated by legislation enacted by the federal government. Under the constitutional arrangements specified in the minority plan there would be established a bicameral federal legislature, one house elected on the basis of proportional representation of the population as a whole and the other on the basis of equal representation of Arabs and Jews. In the event the two houses could not agree, the issue would be submitted to an arbitral body of five members which, under the constitutional provisions as drawn, would undoubtedly consist of three Arabs and two Jews. The head of the federal state would be elected by majority vote of a joint meeting of the two houses of the legislature. The federal court the final court of appeal in all constitutional matters, including cases involving the constitutional validity of state and federal legislation would be similarly elected by a joint session of the legislature and would have a minimum membership of four Arabs and three Jews.

DECISION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN ANNUAL SESSION

The importance and complexity of the Palestine problem was recognized at the outset of the second annual session of the General Assembly, which relieved the overburdened First Committee by creating an Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian question. To this Committee were referred three items: the question of the future status of Palestine proposed by the United Kingdom; the UNSCOP report; and an item proposed by Saudi Arabia and Iraq entitled "termination of the mandate over Palestine and the recognition of its independence as one State." The Committee elected Dr. Herbert V. Evatt (Australia) Chairman, Prince Subha Svasti (Siam) Vice Chairman, and Mr. Thor Thors (Iceland) Rapporteur. The Committee was authorized to hear representatives of the Arab Higher Committee and the Jewish Agency for Palestine.

The position of the United States Delegation was stated in general terms by Secretary Marshall in his address in the plenary meeting on September 17. The Secretary declared that the United States "intends to do everything in its power. .. to assist in finding a solution for this difficult problem which has stirred up such violent passions, and which is now resulting in the shedding of blood and in great mental and moral anguish". After commending UNSCOP for its contribution, Secretary Marshall said that the United States "gives great weight