Responce Paper - the Palestine Royal Commission Report

...

In a practical analysis of this proposition it is important to note that such a lofty state building endeavor would require immense amounts of mediation in its establishment. At the time, the fear of communism was beginning to build in the United States creating a political atmosphere which would have warmly welcomed the idea of the creation of a new democratic state. This would have generated support from the United States who also would have been more than happy to provide the diplomatic support required for the success of this mission.

United States support could have been used as leverage to promote the success of this political arrangement through convincing Zionists that by implementing a system like that of the United States, they could replicate the draw that the United States held to Jewish immigrants worldwide, something that Zionists wanted dearly. While this relationship could be considered positive for Jews, Palestinian Arabs would not have thought kindly of the idea of creating a bigger draw for Jewish immigration. However, balance would still be created because the Arabs had a significantly dominate population, which they would finally be able to fully wield from a political aspect, in an electorate system. The establishment of balance between the political strength of the two parties would have been absolutely necessary and though it would have been difficult, it was entirely possible. With world-wide outside support, the Yashuv had the finances to back their political campaigns, and the Arabs had the majority of internal support. If a balance could be established, the formerly opposing parties would have been forced to work together on some level just in order to accomplish anything, similar to Republicans and Democrats in the US.

From the British perspective, it would have been very important to completely pull all internal political control out of Palestine. This is for two reasons, the first being that in the event of the plan backfiring, Great Britain would not have wanted to be dragged into a civil war. The Second and possibly more legitimate reason is that their presence as political actors in Palestine could have aggravated the political tension that would ultimately accompany a state building mission. This could have proven a good investment. Had they set up a government, possibly with massive US support, the economic benefits derived from trade with Palestine could have proven very profitable.

If there had been a legitimate attempt to build one democratic government in Palestine that incorporated both Zionists and Arabs, it is possible that they would have learned to channel their differing opinions through a political filter rather than through violence. Had Palestine had a real chance at working well, the state could have without doubt become an economic giant, owing their success to world support. However, the decision made by the Peel Commission to partition Palestine proved catastrophic, reaffirming the historical continuance of struggle in the area.