June 14, 2024


We curate, you explore: making sense of global trends.

1937: The Peel Commission Partition Proposal and Its Historical Significance

3 min read


In 1937, the Peel Commission, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry, proposed a significant and contentious plan: the partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. This proposal emerged against a backdrop of rising tensions and conflict in the region under British mandate. This article offers a detailed exploration of the Peel Commission’s partition proposal, examining its context, contents, and the long-lasting effects on the Middle East conflict.

Background: Palestine Under the British Mandate

Rising Tensions in Palestine

By the mid-1930s, Palestine, under British mandate since the San Remo conference of 1920, had become a hotbed of escalating tensions. These tensions were primarily between the Arab majority, who opposed Jewish immigration and land purchases, and the Jewish community, which was growing due to the Zionist movement and the influx of Jewish refugees fleeing European anti-Semitism.

The British Mandate’s Challenges

The British administration faced increasing difficulty in managing these conflicting nationalist aspirations. The situation was further complicated by the British government’s attempts to balance its commitments to the Jewish and Arab populations, as stipulated in the Balfour Declaration and subsequent international agreements.

The Peel Commission: Mandate and Findings

Establishment and Purpose

The Peel Commission was established in 1936 by the British government to investigate the causes of unrest in Palestine and propose solutions.

Findings and Recommendations

After extensive investigation and consultation, the Commission concluded that the mandate was unworkable and recommended partition as the only viable solution to the conflict. The proposal included:

  • Creation of a Jewish State: The Commission suggested the formation of a Jewish state in a part of Palestine.
  • Creation of an Arab State: An Arab state was proposed in another part of Palestine, potentially to be merged with Transjordan.
  • British Enclave: Jerusalem and its surroundings were to remain under British control due to their religious and strategic significance.

The Partition Proposal

Proposed Boundaries

The proposed boundaries were designed to include as many Jews as possible in the Jewish state and as many Arabs in the Arab state, leading to complicated and fragmented territorial divisions.

Reaction and Impact

  • Jewish Response: The Jewish community was divided in its response, with some leaders tentatively accepting the principle of partition while others opposed it.
  • Arab Rejection: The Arab community unanimously rejected the proposal, viewing it as a betrayal of their national rights and a violation of the majority principle.

Long-Term Consequences

The Peel Commission’s proposal was a turning point in the Arab-Jewish conflict. It marked the first official acknowledgment of the incompatibility of the two national movements and set a precedent for the future consideration of partition as a solution.


The Peel Commission’s partition proposal of 1937 was a watershed moment in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although never implemented, it set the stage for future debates and actions regarding the partition of Palestine. The Commission’s findings highlighted the complexities and deep-rooted nature of the conflict in Palestine, reflecting the challenges of colonial governance and the enduring impact of conflicting nationalisms. The Peel Commission’s legacy continues to be felt in the ongoing dialogue and conflict over land, sovereignty, and national identity in the region.

Additional References

For a more comprehensive understanding of this topic, the following sources can be consulted:

Explore Our Series on Middle East Peace Initiatives

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All publications and content on this platform are intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. Trendverce.eu does not provide legal, financial, or professional advice. We work to ensure that all information is accurate and updated to the best of our abilities; however, there may be omissions, errors, or outdated facts. Use our insights at your own discretion and consult with professional advisors for any decisions. Copyright © All rights reserved. | Newsphere by AF themes.