Peel Commission

The Peel Commission, officially known as the Palestine Royal Commission, was a British investigatory commission established in 1936 to examine the causes of unrest in Mandatory Palestine and to propose solutions for resolving the growing conflict between Jews and Arabs in the region. Chaired by Lord William Wellesley Peel, the commission’s findings marked the first formal suggestion of partitioning Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, a proposal that profoundly influenced later developments in Middle Eastern politics.

Background

Following the end of the First World War, the League of Nations granted Britain the Mandate for Palestine in 1922, entrusting it with the administration of the territory that had formerly been part of the Ottoman Empire. The terms of the Mandate incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which expressed British support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, while also emphasising that the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities should not be infringed.
Tensions between Jewish immigrants and the Arab population steadily grew throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Large waves of Jewish immigration, driven by European anti-Semitism and supported by the Zionist movement, caused increasing anxiety among the Arab inhabitants who feared dispossession and loss of political control.
By 1936, these tensions culminated in the Arab Revolt, a widespread uprising by Palestinian Arabs against British rule and Jewish immigration. The revolt, which included strikes, demonstrations, and violent clashes, prompted the British Government to appoint the Peel Commission to investigate the underlying causes and recommend a long-term solution.

Composition of the Commission

The Peel Commission was chaired by Lord Peel, a former Secretary of State for India. The other members included Sir Horace Rumbold, Sir Laurie Hammond, Sir Harold Morris, Sir Morris Carter, and Professor Reginald Coupland. The commission arrived in Palestine in November 1936, conducted extensive hearings and investigations, and submitted its report to the British Government in July 1937.

Objectives of the Commission

The main objectives of the Peel Commission were:

• To investigate the causes of the 1936 Arab disturbances and assess the political, economic, and social conditions in Palestine.
• To determine whether the terms of the British Mandate were still practicable.
• To recommend measures that could ensure peace and stability in the region and reconcile the conflicting national aspirations of Jews and Arabs.

Findings of the Commission

After examining a vast body of evidence and conducting interviews with both Jewish and Arab representatives, the Peel Commission reached several key conclusions:

• Irreconcilable Aspirations: The commission concluded that the national aspirations of Jews and Arabs in Palestine were fundamentally incompatible. The Jewish community sought a national home, while the Arab population demanded independence and the cessation of Jewish immigration.
• Failure of the Mandate System: The Mandate, designed to accommodate both groups under one administration, had become unworkable. The British policy of balancing these competing interests had failed to maintain order and harmony.
• Proposal for Partition: The commission proposed that the only practical solution was the partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with a continuing British mandate over certain key areas.

The Partition Plan of 1937

The Peel Commission’s proposed partition plan was the first formal recommendation to divide Palestine into two distinct political entities:

• Jewish State: The Jewish state was to include the coastal plain stretching from Tel Aviv to Haifa and the fertile northern region of Galilee. This area was relatively small, comprising about 20% of the total land area of Palestine.
• Arab State: The Arab state was to be merged with Transjordan (now Jordan) and include the hill country of Judea and Samaria, as well as the southern region.
• British Mandate Enclave: Britain would retain control over a corridor including Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and a strip to the port of Jaffa, given their religious and strategic significance.

The commission also proposed a transfer of populations — suggesting that some Arabs living in the proposed Jewish areas and some Jews in the proposed Arab areas might be relocated, similar to the population exchange between Greece and Turkey after the First World War. This proposal, though theoretically voluntary, implied large-scale movement of people.

Reactions to the Peel Report

The report generated intense and divergent reactions from both sides:

• Zionist Response: The Jewish Agency and Zionist leadership accepted the principle of partition in theory but objected to the limited size of the proposed Jewish state. Leaders like Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion viewed it as a potential stepping stone toward greater territorial expansion in the future.
• Arab Response: The Arab Higher Committee rejected the plan outright, refusing to concede any part of Palestine to the Jews. Arab leaders insisted on an independent Arab state encompassing all of Palestine and demanded an immediate end to Jewish immigration.
• British Government: The British Cabinet initially welcomed the Peel Report as a bold and pragmatic proposal. However, faced with Arab resistance and the logistical challenges of partition, Britain ultimately abandoned the plan in early 1938.

Subsequent Developments

Although the Peel Commission’s partition proposal was never implemented, it set a precedent for later political thinking about the future of Palestine. The British Government appointed another committee, the Woodhead Commission (1938), to examine the practicalities of implementing partition. The Woodhead Commission concluded that the Peel plan was impracticable due to geographical and demographic complexities.
In 1939, Britain issued the White Paper of 1939, which rejected partition and instead proposed a unified Palestine with limited Jewish immigration — a reversal of the earlier policy. This new approach was met with strong opposition from the Jewish community, particularly on the eve of the Second World War and the Holocaust.
The idea of partition resurfaced after the war, culminating in the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947 (Resolution 181), which closely mirrored the Peel Commission’s conceptual framework. The UN plan ultimately led to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent Arab-Israeli conflict.

Significance

The Peel Commission holds a pivotal place in the history of the Palestine question for several reasons:

• It was the first official acknowledgment by Britain that the Mandate was unworkable and that partition might be the only viable solution.
• It introduced the two-state concept, which later became central to international diplomatic efforts in the region.
• It highlighted the deep-seated incompatibility of Jewish and Arab nationalisms within a single political framework.
• The commission’s emphasis on population transfer foreshadowed the massive displacements that occurred during the 1948 Arab–Israeli war.

Criticism and Limitations

The Peel Commission has been criticised on several grounds:

• The proposal underestimated the complex intermixing of Jewish and Arab populations, making partition impractical.
• Its suggestion of population transfers was controversial and seen as unethical by many observers.
• Arabs viewed it as a betrayal of Britain’s earlier promises of self-determination and independence.
• The commission did not fully appreciate the religious and emotional significance of the land to both communities, particularly Jerusalem.

Legacy

The legacy of the Peel Commission lies in its lasting influence on Middle Eastern geopolitics. It marked a decisive shift from Britain’s earlier policy of dual obligation under the Mandate to an acknowledgment that partition might be inevitable. The report’s framework became a reference point for all subsequent peace proposals and negotiations concerning Palestine.