On 19 Kislev 5708, the Arab Higher Committee's three-day strike against the United Nations partition recommendation began across British-ruled ארץ ישראל EREẒ YISRAʾEL. It was organized opposition to sovereignty by יהודים YEHUDIM in their homeland. The committee also called for an economic boycott of יהודים YEHUDIM; the surviving English-language dispatch establishes that the boycott was publicly reported, while its original Arabic directive has not been inspected.1

What did the committee seek?

The committee's earlier letter to the United States consul in ירושלים YERUŜALAYIM had rejected partition and demanded an Arab democratic state. It said that the committee would not accept a settlement dividing the country. This was a claim to national self-determination that directly rejected the proposed state of יהודים YEHUDIM; it was not merely a dispute about a municipal boundary. The letter speaks for the committee, not every Arab resident of ארץ ישראל EREẒ YISRAʾEL.2

The Arabs of Palestine refuse definitely to acquiesce in any solution entailing the partitioning of Palestine.3

Historian Itamar Radai found that many residents of יפו YAFO obeyed the strike reluctantly. He documents rising food prices, pressure on poorer workers, and local opposition during its final day. A centrally called strike thus had real force without implying unanimous approval of its organizers or methods.4

The first strike day coincided with rioters' attacks on shops owned by יהודים YEHUDIM in ירושלים YERUŜALAYIM. The English Empire's Colonial Secretary reported targeted violence, looting, and arson on 2 December while also calling the disturbances sporadic. His description of the violence does not make the committee's political strike unplanned. The attacks are treated separately in event://5708־09־19־jewish־shops־attacked.5

How is this dated?

The JTA reported on 1 December that the strike was to start the next day. Its 2 December issue says the strike began that day. That civil daytime date converts to 19 Kislev 5708. The date of the committee's original decision remains unresolved; the first JTA publication is already recorded as a separate event at The JTA reported the Arab Higher Committee's call for a general strike..6

Guided reflections

  • How did a boycott of יהודים YEHUDIM as trading partners go beyond a disagreement over the proposed borders?
  • What do the reactions within יפו YAFO reveal about the difference between the committee's authority and Arab residents' own interests?

Footnotes

  1. https://www.jta.org/archive/and-police-alerted-as-arab-strike-begins-today-cunningham-warns-arabs-jews JTA issue dated 2 December 1947; https://www.jta.org/archive/six-jews-killed-as-arabs-react-to-partition-higher-committee-calls-general-strike JTA issue dated 1 December 1947. ↩
  2. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d811 Emil Ghory for the Arab Higher Committee, letter dated 3 October 1947, FRUS 1947 V, document 811. ↩
  3. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1947v05/d811 paragraph 2; source-owned administrative name retained. ↩
  4. https://www.academia.edu/5572551/Jaffa_1948_The_Fall_of_a_City Radai, “Jaffa, 1948: The Fall of a City,” Journal of Israeli History 30, no. 1 (2011), pp. 25–27. ↩
  5. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1947/dec/03/palestine-disturbances statement on 3 December about 2 December, cols. 389–390. ↩
  6. https://www.jta.org/archive/and-police-alerted-as-arab-strike-begins-today-cunningham-warns-arabs-jews; https://www.hebcal.com/converter?cfg=json&g2h=1&gd=2&gm=12&gy=1947 ↩