• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Assess the success and failures of the British mandates in Palestine

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐JULIANA GALLO Assess the success and failures of the British mandates in Palestine. Britain was a huge empire, one of the biggest in deed. It started approximately in the early 16th century (British Empire, 2012), up until after the Second World War, when they granted independence to most of their colonies all around the world. The mandates imposed in Palestine weren?t an exception to this, but Palestine was a peculiar case. The mandates started the in early1916, and ended the 14th of May 1948. Within this period of time there were many significant events for both the people in the Middle East, and the British Empire. There where some successes and some failures from the British Empire?s side. British power in Palestine was granted when Sharif Hussein accepted the deal in early 1916. The British High Commissioner in Cairo, Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, proposed this deal through letters all along mid 1915 up until mid 1916. In this letters he proposed that if they allied to the triple entente, France, Britain and Russia, during the First World War. They promised to grant them their independence from the Ottoman Empire, which had allied previously with the triple alliance, Germany, Italy and Austria ? Hungary. When Hussein agreed to this, he thought that the land, which was being promised to them, was what later became Syria and Lebanon. What he didn?t know was that there was a controversial exclusion of territory, which obviously included Palestine. ...read more.

Middle

This mandate method supported the self-determination of colonies, but it also supported the French and Britain control over the Middle East. In 1922 they where approved by the League of Nations. Right from the start of the mandates, British had deceived their word, when having the misunderstanding with Hussein. There were a lot of inconvenient because as British had promised Hussein some land, it had also made an agreement, Sykes ? Picot, with France promising Arab land as well. And now with the Balfour declaration it was completely confusing for the Arab Palestinian on which side they where. This caused some violent disturbance within 1920 and 1921. So Britain decided to take action and write a White Paper, created by Winston Churchill, who as the Secretary of State for the Colonies, tried to clear out any doubts caused by the controversy between the Balfour Declaration, their promises to Hussein and their agreement with France. Churchill wrote the White Paper on the 3rd of July 1922, in which he stated that British supported the Jewish having an established piece of land in Palestine, like they had said in the Balfour declaration and then supported in the San Remo conference in April of 1920, and in the Treaty of Sevres. But this didn?t mean that all the Palestinian land was promised to the Zionists, which was how the Jewish had interpreted it. ...read more.

Conclusion

The 14th of May 1948, the British finally gave up on the mandates and resigned the to the UNSCOP, United Nations Special Commission on Palestine. In conclusion the British mandates in Palestine where more a failure than a success. Although the British intentions were good the positive outcomes of the mandates were outweighed by the negative outcomes. There were other factors apart form British intentions that played a part in the mandates result. Britain as an empire had many self-interests, many of the things they did in Palestine, such as getting involved with Arab territory in the first place, was for self-interest and self-benefit. They offered their help to the Arabs because it was beneficial for them. If a non?biased organization had dealt with this territory, many of the clashes that occurred and still today, 50 years later, occur between these two communities wouldn?t have happened in the first place. Britain is not to be blamed for the consequences that these communities are still dealing with today. When the mandates where passed on to the United Nations, they resigned after a while as well, because there was too much tension and resentment between them, and this is the exact reason why Britain is not to be blamed for its failure, because no matter what or who dealt with these territories, there would have still been a big issue between them. They wanted the exact same piece of territory, so there was nothing to do. You can see the effects still today, almost 50 years after the initial clashes there is still problematic between this two countries. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. French Revolution: Success or Failure?

    Moreover, the Representative government was main factor and issue that created the Constitution of 1791 which assisted as well as idealized the French citizens to think about their rights seriously. French Revolution made not only the great impacts on the nationality but also the strong constitution that made France as a democratic country.

  2. Compare and Contrast the Democratic Successes and Failures of Andrew Jackson and Nelson Mandela

    a voice of considerable change within his nation to widen the voting base and integrate a significantly large portion of the population into the democratic process, giving them better say over their government. Although President Jackson brought greater democracy to the United States, he also committed several failures during his

  1. To what extent were the British culpable for the sinking of the Lusitania on ...

    uncovered that the Lusitania in particular would be carrying arms to Britain on her May 1, 1915 voyage8. The sinking of the Lusitania was also partly due to the personality of Walther Schwieger (U-20 commander). Schwieger believed in taking advantage of any opportunities that arise, even if they diverged with orders.

  2. Discuss the successes and failures of Henry I as king of England

    However, he made it, and held onto power. He acted fast, while his brother Robert was still travelling back from the Holy Land, he was annoyed that Henry had taken the throne but did nothing. This might be the ignorance of Robert which should be not never ignore and he should immediately adopt a defensive posture.

  1. Israeli- Palestinian Conflict. I chose this topic due to my personal connection with ...

    The United States (and the United Nations) does not recognize Palestine as a country and the lack of recognition has delegitimized any peace process between Israel and Palestine, as there is a lack of equality.

  2. To what extent is there validity to Ilan Pappes argument that the Palestinians were ...

    "terrorized and further intimidated by explosions set off by the Jewish forces". Even though the Jews offered the Palestinians to stay in the area, "their leaders considered the Jewish offer to stay deceitful and hypocritical." This is where the complication begins as many historians claim that the Arabs were broadcasting to the Palestinians to move out of the country.

  1. Notes on the History and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

    people - The PLO was largely uninvolved - The USA and the USSR played an important role rearming their client states - Israel had been the very obvious victor, once again - The Israeli Labour government was replaced by the Likud coalition government - Israel were shocked back into reality

  2. The Westeinde is one of the higher parts of The Hague, and the story ...

    Gerrit's will invalid, and confirmed the co-lateral heirs of his son Nicolaes as the rightful owners of the van Assendelft titles and properties, including the House of Assendelft. This judgement was confirmed on appeal in 1656, 98 years after old Gerrit's death.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work