In 1938, Those Rebel Bands

From the British Report to the Mandates Commission (*):

(we now know them as "militants")

M. RAPPARD commended the painstaking chronological account given in the report of the disturbed situation during 1938. But he was more interested still in what was not expounded in the report. He would be grateful to be informed on such more general topics as the strategy, technical equipment, state of mind, organisation and composition of the Arab rebel bands. Could the accredited representative not give the Commission a fuller explanation of the position in those respects?

Mr. KIRKBRIDE explained that, according to the information in the possession of the authorities, the country was divided up into areas under commanders who, in turn, had under their orders sub-commanders with gangs of twelve to twenty-five men. The co-ordination of activities in an area was usually good, from the rebel point of view, but the co-ordination between one area commander and another was much less perfect. There had been several commanders-in-chief who claimed to be in charge of rebel activities all over Palestine, but each area commander had decided for himself which chief he would obey. Over and above the field organisation in Palestine itself thus outlined, there was a higher organisation, the Committee for the Defence of Palestine, which had its headquarters in Damascus and from which the various leaders derived their authority.

In 1937, the majority of the members of the armed bands were Arabs from neighbouring countries who had been recruited and despatched to Palestine. In 1938, however, 99% of the rebels were Palestine villagers recruited by the sub-commanders from villages in the area under their command. There might be a few individuals who, as Mlle. Dannevig had suggested, were reluctant recruits, but, as the resistance offered to Government troops showed, most of the members of the bands were believers in their cause.

The position as regards equipment and arms was that large quantities of these must have been accumulated secretly before the troubles began. Since that date, there had also been a traffic in contraband arms over the frontier against which all possible measures had and were being taken. At the Commission's last session 2/ he had said that most of the arms and ammunition used by the rebels were of war-time date and pattern. That statement was still true, though small quantities of more modern types of ammunition had been found recently.

As they enjoyed such widespread public support, the armed bands could dispense with large financial resources; funds were, however, received from Damascus and contributions were levied locally, mainly from the inhabitants of towns who took a less active part in the fighting.

M. RAPPARD said he had been struck by the references in the accredited representative's replies to a central organisation with headquarters in a neighbouring territory under the mandate of a friendly Power. It was surely a curiously tolerant attitude on the part of the latter to allow a body resident in the territory under mandate to foment sedition across the frontier, particularly when, as would be generally recollected, the same authorities had ten years previously criticised the Palestine Government in connection with the rising in Syria. Had no efforts been made by the Palestine authorities to secure French co-operation?

Mr. KIRKBRIDE had no authority to speak for the mandatory authorities in Syria, but he could confirm that close touch was maintained between the local administrative officers on the Palestine and the Syrian and Lebanese sides of the frontier respectively. Valuable assistance had been given in checking the smuggling of arms and in preventing individuals from crossing to and from Palestine. All available information on current events was mutually communicated.

As regards the immunity enjoyed by the Committee in Damascus, he imagined that it was difficult to bring any overt offence against Syrian laws to its door; it was notoriously an easy matter to foment disorder from across a neighbouring country's frontier. In this case, the interception of messages and supplies was extremely difficult because of the broken nature of the country through which the frontier line ran and the sympathy shown to the rebels by the Lebanese and Syrian populations.

Mr. MOODY confirmed that the French central and local authorities had done everything possible in a difficult situation to help the Palestine administration.

The CHAIRMAN asked what was the membership of the Central Committee in Damascus.

Mr. KIRKBRIDE said that the Committee was composed of Palestinian and Syrian Arabs.

M. RAPPARD inferred, from the accredited representative's answers, that most of the arms and ammunition used by the Palestine rebels had been in the country since the war. In view, however, of the duration of the uprising, such reserves must surely have been exhausted, particularly in the case of ammunition, which was highly perishable. It would appear from Press reports that the rebels were now using bombs and grenades. Were those war stocks also? The general impression gained was that regular supplies were being received from some source or other.

Mr. KIRKBRIDE reiterated that a large part of the arms and ammunition used had been accumulated before the disturbances began, and that further quantities had since been smuggled over the frontier.

The CHAIRMAN reverted to the question of the impunity enjoyed by the Central Defence Committee in Damascus. It was admitted that no civilised Government could tolerate that shelter should openly be given on its territory to a terrorist organisation operating in any other country. Two years previously a Conference, at which France and the United Kingdom in particular had been represented, had sat in Geneva to discuss and draft an international Convention for the prevention and punishment of terrorism. It was true that no Convention had yet entered into force, but the fact that this Conference had been held showed that the prevention of terrorism was a reciprocal moral obligation upon Governments.

Mlle. DANNEVIG also found it difficult to understand how war stocks of arms and ammunition could still be in use after disturbances of such long duration. Were the arms and ammunition captured from the rebels examined in order to ascertain their exact origin?

Mr. KIRKBRIDE could add nothing to his previous answers which had been to the effect that most of the captured arms and ammunition dated from the period of the recent war and were of German make.

Lord HANKEY thought the last point important, as it was persistently reported that most of the arms used by the rebels came from Germany and Italy.

Mr. KIRKBRIDE confirmed that practically all the arms were of German origin and dated from the time of the recent war. He recollected having stated in 1938 3/ that some French arms dating from 1924 and 1925 and a small quantity of modern German ammunition had been captured; these, however, were exceptions to the rule. There were, in addition, small numbers of war-time British rifles captured from time to time, together with British rifles
which had been lost recently by the police.

Mlle. DANNEVIG still failed to understand how the supply of weapons could be maintained unless, possibly, old types of arms were being smuggled into the country so as to be indistinguishable from local stocks.

M. RAPPARD suggested that most of the rifles might possibly be twenty-five years old as the accredited representative affirmed, but that the ammunition was more likely to be of recent manufacture.

Mr. KIRKBRIDE maintained his point that most of the ammunition was not of recent origin. Some cartridge cases had certainly been recapped and refilled with black powder locally, but did not constitute effective ammunition. The bombs were of a home-made variety, prepared with gelignite and dynamite, which had been smuggled over the frontier notwithstanding the strict supervision maintained by the Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian authorities.

(*)

LEAGUE OF NATIONS, PERMANENT MANDATES COMMISSION, MINUTES OF THE THIRTY-SIXTH SESSION Held at Geneva from June 8th to 29th, 1939, including the REPORT OF THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL EIGHTH MEETING Held at Geneva on June 13th, 1939, at 10.30 a.m.