The "Inherent Contradiction" of the 1920 British Mandate

Following Ottoman rule of Jerusalem for over 400 years, in 1917 the city was put under British military control following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. According to Karen Armstrong's One City, Three Faiths, this followed a 1915 pledge by Britain to "both the Arabs and the Jews", promising "the future independence of the Arab countries" and "a sovereign Muslim state" while also promising "a national home for the Jewish people" (Armstrong 373) via the Balfour Declaration, which in turn caused rising tensions in Arabs as a result of news leaking and other red flags such as British rule putting J
ewish bureaucrats into power (Armstrong 374). This is, in itself, an inherent contradiction, and this attempt to curry the favor of both sides would ultimately end up backfiring - after the 1920 riots in Jerusalem, it became clear that both sides felt Britain was favoring the other side (Armstrong 375).

Hence, the British Mandate put out later that same year, representing Britain becoming the Mandatory power in Palestine, was a necessary step in order to solidify Britain's position. However, while it certainly solidified Britain's position, it also solidified the contradiction. They did attempt to appeal to Arabs as part of their "dual mandate", following an obligation that they "appeal to both Jews and Arabs" from the League of Nations (Ginat), but this ultimately found itself to be an "inherent contradiction" - and setting up elements such as a Jewish Agency and a Jewish National Home solidified the thought in the minds of most Arabs that the British government was not on their side (Armstrong 375).

As noted by Leena Dallasheh, Palestine historian, "The mandate did not similarly recognize Palestinian organizations or representation. The majority, the Palestinians, were only mentioned in the negative, as 'non-Jewish communities' given civil and religious rights. That meant the Palestinians were trapped, as the Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi says, in an iron cage" (Dallasheh). Ultimately, according to Dallasheh, the Palestinians were given a guarantee of civil and religious rights, but nothing in the way of "national rights or sovereignty" (Dallasheh) - this contradiction (and decision favoring the Jews) is what laid the groundwork for the events of 1948, where Jews received the state they were longing for and Palestinians experienced a "Catastrophe" that led to them being expelled from the region en masse.

Works Cited:

Bazelon, E. (2024, February 1). The road to 1948, and the roots of a perpetual conflict. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/02/01/magazine/israel-founding-palestinian-conflict.html?unlocked_article_code=1.SU0.NypJ.mdcmioqEjWLH&bgrp=c&smid=url-share

Ginat, A. (2018, December 7). British mandate for Palestine. 1914-1918 Online. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/british_mandate_for_palestine#:~:text=The%20British%20army%20ruled%20Palestine,by%20the%20League%20of%20Nations.

Israeli Foreign Ministry. (2006, March 16). British palestine mandate: History & overview. Jewish Virtual Library. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/history-and-overview-of-the-british-palestine-mandate#google_vignette