The 8th International Academic Congress "Science,

Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa"

(France, Paris. 10-12 April 2018)

'Science, Education and Culture
in Eurasia and Africa'

The 8th International Academic Congress

(France, Paris, 10-12 April 2018)

PAPERS AND COMMENTARIES

VOLUME VIII

Paris University Press

2018
Proceedings of the 8th International Academic Congress 'Science, Education and Culture in
Eurasia and Africa' (France, Paris, 10-12 April 2018). Volume VIII. Paris University Press,
2018. - 272p.

The edition materials are posted in Scopus and Web of Science.

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): 3.326

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): 3.785

Impact factor: 3.957

5-Yr impact factor: 4.205

*2016 Journal Citation Reports®, Thomson Reuters

Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Valerie Martin, D. S. Sc. (France)

Publication Director: Prof. Marie Carney, D. Litt. et Phil.(France)

Technical Editors: Pierre Rene, Vanessa Marseille (France)

ORGANIZATION BOARD OF THE CONGRESS:

Chairman: Prof. Valerie Martin, D. S. Sc. (France)

Secretaries: Prof. Bertrand Giraud, D.Phil. (France)

Prof. Paulo Rubio, D. M. Sc. (Italy)

Members of the Board:

Prof. Jean Lavanan, D. I. T. (France)

Prof. Philippe Moretti, D. Env. (France)

Prof. Jean-Claude Brim, D. E. Sc.(France)

Prof. Anna Maria Galba, D. M. (Spain)

Prof. Michelle Grim, D. C. S. (France)

Prof. Dominique Broonzy, D. Litt. (France)

Prof. Michelle Tirmon, D. B. A. (France)

Prof. Claude Perrault, D. L. S. (France)

Prof. Alexander Byusser, D. Sc. (France)

Prof. Jean-Marie Attalie, D. P. E. (France)

Prof. Jose Alvarez, D. S. Sc. (Spain)

Prof. Frangois Mairesse, D. I. T. (France)

Prof. MichelAttal, D. C. S. (France)

Prof. Erin Robbins, Dr. P. H. (UK)

Prof. Philip Gensac, D.Sc. (France)

Prof. Samuel Raymond, S. J. D. (USA)

Prof. Patrice Lande, D. S. Sc. (France)

Prof. Eva Galan, D.F.A. (France)

Prof. Katherine Lacy, EDM. (France)

Prof Ryan Cooper, D. Sc. V. M. (UK)

Prof. Claude Riviere, D. Litt. (France)

Prof. Emma Allen, Ed.D. (Australia)

Prof. RolandMonnet, Ed.D. (France)

Prof. Leslie Bragg, Psy. D. (Canada)

Prof. Paul Bryant, Psy. D. (UK)

Prof. Gisele Aumont, Psy. D. (France)

ISBN: 978-2-574-96745-8 © Paris University Press, 2018

© Pantheon-Sorbonne University, 2018

© Universite Paris 1 Pantheon — Sorbonne, 2018

 5
'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

CONTENTS

Section 2. Humanities & Social Sciences

Complex Systems: Thoughts on the Causes of Nature
Marcel Lourel, Nicolas Gueguen, Alexandre Pascual 7

Common Sense: Psychosocial and Educational Perspectives

Elena Tiron 17

Elementary Teachers Educational Beliefs and Their Instructional Approaches:

In Search of a Meaningful Relationship
David F. Samuel, Babalola J. Ogunkola 30

Aggression Behaviour of Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Adolescents

K. Shivakumara, Sangeetha R. Mane, M. Ravindra, Ravikanth B. Lamani, Ashok A. Pal 62

Conversation Textbook Assessment: A Critique of Survival English

Yi-chun Pan 76

The International Information Campaign of the Ukrainian Diaspora on Research,

Coverage of the Truth and Commemoration of the Victims of the Holodomor
of 1932-1933 in Ukraine
Yury Neduzhko 86

Management of Functional Training for Highly Qualified Hockey Players

Anton Turmanidze, Anatoliy Fomenko, Valeriy Turmanidze 110

Causes of the Arab-Israeli Conflict in Mandate Palestine

Anna Ivanova, Andrey Ivanov. 121

Substantiation of the Model of Organization of the Analysis of Studies at Higher School

Lyenuza Tarkhan, Mariia Mykhniuk 135

Development of Moral and Physical Qualities of Student Youth by Means of Pedestrian Tourism
Valentina Kurilova, Viktor Diskovsky, Sergey Redko, Sergey Shchastlivy, Nikolay Pilipenko 149

Search of Ways to Increase Mental Working Efficiency of Children of Young School Age
Valentina Kurilova, Lyudmila Tsyukalo, Sergey Redko 154

Formation of Health-Saving Competences in Students of Specialty 'Physical Education'

Valentina Kurilova, Vladimir Brizhaty. 161

Strategies for the Formation of the Readiness to Professional Self-construction

of Future Psychologiosts
I. Demchenko, V. Bilan, N. Piasetska 173

Classification System of Ukrainian Folktales of M. Andreev: Role for the Ukrainian Fairylore
Svitlana Karpenko 188

Oral History About the Everyday Life of Peasant Children

Vladimir Province in the Early Twentieth Century
Sergey Fedotov. 200
 .208

Influence of Bioaerosol Source Location and Ceiling Fan Direction on Eggcrate Upper-room
Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation
Sumayah F. Rahman, Stephen N. Rudnick, Sonya P. Milonova, James J. McDevitt, Edward A. Nardell 219

A Catalyst Method for an Innovative Eco-Design Strategy Using TRIZ Approach

Ahmed Cherifi, Mario Dubois, Mickael Gardoni, Abdelaziz Tairi 225

Distribution of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Heavy Metals in Soils from

Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
J. C. Ifemeje, S. C. Udedi, C. B. Lukong, A. U. Okechukwu, C. Egbuna 244

Technological Supply of Production of Pumpkin Pectin Paste

Vladyslav Dudchenko, Yuriy Sukhenko, Volodymyr Vasiliv, Mikhailo Mushtruk,
Lydia Korec', Natalia Dudchenko 260
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 121

Causes of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

in Mandate Palestine

Anna A. Ivanova,
3-year Student at St. Petersburg School of Social Sciences and Humanities,
National Research University Higher School of Economics - Saint Petersburg,
Russia,
Andrey V. Ivanov,
Ph.D., Sc. D., Professor, Head of Department of German,
Linguistics University Nizhny Novgorod, Russia

The relevance of the reference to British policy on under their mandate Pales-
tinian lands between 1922 and 1948 and the relationship between Palestinian Arabs
and Jewish immigrants entering the Palestinian territory stems from the fact that the
foundations of inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflict in the Holy Land were laid in the
period under review. The conflict involved not only the direct participants themselves-
Arabs and Jews, but also countries whose Middle East policy in one or another way
had to be aimed at preventing the conflict itself. Administrative and political miscalcu-
lations and mistakes in mandated territories monitoring have led to the Arab-Israeli
confrontation, continuing to this day.
1. The emergence of a mandated system as a form of administration of
former colonies. A characteristic feature of the colonial alterations of the twentieth
century was a special form of state dependence of the former colonies on the coun-
tries of Metropolitan areas, which was established by the Versailles and other treaties
and became known as the mandated system.
Art. 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations defined the mandated sys-
tem for the colonies management as follows: "The best method of giving practical ef-
fect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to ad-
vanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geograph-
ical position can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it,
and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the
League" [1].
122 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

The mandate system is formally presented in international acts of that time as

a transitional form of state dependence — from colonies to independent state enti-
ties. The basis of the mandate system was laid at the Paris Peace Conference in
1919, which, following the results of the First World War and taking into account the
defeat of Germany and Turkey, legally consolidated the redistribution of German and
Turkish colonies.
The mandate system owes much of its authorship to a conference delegate
from the South African Union, General Jan Christiaan Smuts, who commanded the
British Armed Forces, which have won two major German colonies, South-West Afri-
ca and East Africa. Smuts' initial draft was amended by Woodrow Wilson, and in this
form the draft was adopted by the Paris Peace Conference, and later became a part
of the Covenant of the League of Nations (Art. 22).
The mandate system consisted of dividing the mandated territories into three
groups: "A" (former Turkish possessions), "B" (Central Africa) and "C" (South-West
Africa and Pacific Islands).
2. The Sykes-Picot Agreement. On May 9, 1916, an agreement was con-
cluded on the division of Asian Turkey, called the Sykes-Picot agreement, even be-
fore the Paris Peace Conference in London between Britain and France (with the
Russia's participation). Under this agreement France received the Syrian coast, the
Aden Vilayet and the territory to the East and North-East of the border of the Russian
Empire. Britain received the southern part of Mesopotamia (including Baghdad), as
well as ports of Haifa and Acre in Palestine. The agreement also provided that the
area between the French and the British territories forms "an independent Arab state
or a confederation of Arab states". With regard to Palestine, it was stated that it will
be separated from Turkey, and a special regime will be established over it, having a
certain subsequent agreement [2].
In accordance with the Sykes-Picot agreement, two zones were established:
the red zone to Britain (southern Mesopotamia with Baghdad) and the blue zone as-
signed to France (the Syrian coast, Cilicia and the territory to the East and North-
East of the Russian border). In these zones, it was planned in the future "to establish
such direct or indirect administration or control as they desire and as they may think
fit to arrange with the Arab state or confederation of Arab states" [2].
Two other zones were established between the zones: "A" (North) and "B"
(South), which were to be "spheres of influence" of France and Britain. The Sykes-
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 123

Picot agreement also provided for the establishment of a fifth, brown zone, com-
posed of Palestine, excluding the ports of Haifa and Acre, mentioned above. An in-
ternational administration was to be established in the zone. By the time of the open-
ing of the Paris Peace Conference, this distribution of territories had already been
supported by the deployment of the Anglo-French armed forces.
3. Balfour Declaration. In parallel with the actions resulting from the Sykes-
Picot agreement, Britain, on the one hand, negotiated with the Arabs, guaranteeing
their support for the establishment an independent Arab state within the borders of
370 latitudes in the East and the Indian ocean in the South in exchange for assis-
tance in the war against the Turks, and, on the other hand, agreed with the Jewish
Diaspora to establish a so-called Jewish "national hearth" in Palestine. The active
participation in negotiations with the British Chaim Weizmann, head of the Zionist
Commission in Palestine in 1918, played, who became the first Israel President in
1949. These agreements were enshrined in the Declaration of the British Foreign
Minister Arthur James Balfour on the 2-nd of November 1917, which was included
into the text of the mandate for Palestine [3].
In historiographical literature, there are several explanations for the emer-
gence of Balfour Declaration:
(1) "Zionistic", according to which it is the merit of the British Zionists, led by
Ch. Weizmann, who were able to achieve their plans implementation;
(2) "Propaganda", explaining the Declaration as an attempt by Britain to enlist
the support of the Jewish Diaspora in the United States and Russia;
(3) "British-Imperial", justifying Britain's colonial claim to Palestinian territory;
(4) "Idealistic", which treats the appearance of the Declaration as a British
friendly gesture to the Jews [4, p. 7].
The above-mentioned "explanations" should be evaluated considering the po-
litical and economic objectives of the so-called Middle East settlement project direct
participants and beneficiaries - British people and Palestinian Arabs and Jews. At
the same time, it seems fair to argue that Jewish researchers are characterized by a
clearly expressed anti-Arab position in the Palestinian question, for Arab historians
this position is almost unambiguously anti-Jewish and neither of them is not interest-
ed in the whole set of factors that influenced British policy in the Holy Land.
It is for this reason that the legal status of the Declaration, the need for its
adoption and subsequent inclusion into the mandate of the League of Nations for
124 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

Palestine, and the degree of balance and non-relevance of its language are still con-
tentious among historians. "The international illegality of the adoption of the Balfour
Declaration, < ... > the very mandate, which is a manifestation of "mandate colonial-
ism", thus, led to Arab uprisings in Palestine in 1929 and 1936-1939.These docu-
ments mainly caused the issue of Palestine, and the whole Middle East conflict" [5, p.
287]. As noted by A.V. Shandra, "the future of Palestine since the publication of Bal-
four Declaration <...> finally became associated with the creation and development of
the national home for the Jews" [6, p. 13], however, "while maintaining the rights of
non-Jewish communities in Palestine" [7, p. 17].
4. The demographic, economic and political situation in Palestine during
the early years of the British mandate.
4.1. Demographic situation. The rural population of Palestine in the first dec-
ade after the establishment of the British mandate accounted for about 55 per cent,
urban for 33 per cent and Bedouin for 12 per cent. On a national basis the majority of
the population was Arabs (77%), Jews — about 18%.

Table 1. The population of Palestine (1922-1931)

Year Muslims Christians Jews Total

1922 590890 73024 83794 757182

1927 557649 76643 149554 785666
1929 572443 80225 154330 815516
1931 759952 90607 175006 1035154

The analysis of the data of table [8, p. 69] shows that the population of Pales-
tine over the described period and later grew mainly at the expense of the Arabs and
Jews who immigrated to this territory. The Arabs settled mainly on cross-border lands
between Palestine and Transjordan, where the possibility of crossing the border was
extremely high due to the weak border control.
The immigration of the Jewish population was stimulated by some of the spe-
cific conditions of the mandate that contributed to the establishment of a Jewish "na-
tional hearth" on the Palestinian territory. These conditions were stipulated by the
mandate holder as Britain and the Zionist organizations. The legal basis for Jewish
immigration was Art. 6 of the British mandate, which stated: "The Administration of
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 125

Palestine <...> shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall
encourage <...> close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and
waste lands not required for public purposes" [9].
The flow of Jewish immigrants from Diaspora countries increased in 1924-
1926 and came mostly from Poland, Romania and the Baltic States. The increase in
the number of immigrants is also recorded in 1931-1932 in connection with the global
economic crises and the rise of Nazis' power in Germany. The largest number of im-
migrants was in the last months of the year 1932, among which there were many
Jews with significant capital.
About 35 thousand immigrants entered the country as part of the third aliyah,
then about 85 thousand as part of the fourth aliyah. In 1929 the fifth, the most nu-
merous aliyah began, amounting to about 250 thousand people. Its peak was in the
mid of 30-ies [10, p. 165; 168]. During the third aliyah, the system of Jewish agricul-
tural communes (kibbutz) was actively developed in Palestine.
4.2. The situation in the sphere of land tenure and land use. During the
period of Turkish rule most of the land was owned by large landowners (effendis).
Since the establishment of the mandate, the situation has changed little as landown-
ers have continued to own more than 20,000 hectares of fertile land and have taken
possession of allotments, owned by fellahin. Jewish settlers also participated in the
land ownership redistribution, which led to open clashes between them and local
peasants who in fact were driven from their real lands. The situation was complicated
by the fact that Britain openly supported the Zionists. In 1920 The High Commission-
er of Palestine Sir Herbert Samuel signed the agreement with the Bedouin tribes, that
earmarked for transfer 179,545 dunams of state land to the Bedouin. It facilitated the
purchase of estates of Arab feudal lords by Zionist funds [10, p. 168].
Over the time, the trend towards buying up an agricultural land by the Jewish
national Fund has intensified. In 1930 the Jewish Fund has purchased 16,500 du-
nams of land, while the report by the Commission of Van Rees indicated the figure
24,516 dunams [11, p. 47]. In 1903, targeting to buy the Palestinian lands the Zion-
ists established the Anglo-Palestine Bank, a credit institution, also financing the erec-
tion of Jewish settlements in Palestine. "Land sale narrowed the rental land Fund,
which allowed landowners to create a competitive environment and maintain a high
rent. Due to the temporary nature of the lease, neither the landlord nor the tenant im-
126 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

proved the fertility of the leased land. The tenant also lacked motivation to fight for
higher yields..." [12, pp. 177-178].
The expressed property stratification between Arabs and Jews, as well as
Britain's support for Jewish returnees, largely determined the nature of relations be-
tween the Zionists and the local Arab population.
4.3. Political movements and parties in Palestine. Within the framework of
the mandate, a system of Palestinian national institutions was established by the lo-
cal population. In 20-40 years the Jewish colonization society ("the Yishuv") and its
socio-political structures were formed. The set of these structures became the basis
of the system, called Knesset-Israel. It consisted of the representative body of Asefat
ha-Nivharim (the "National Assembly"), executive body of the ha-Va'ad ha-Le'umi
(the national council or committee) and the Beit Mishpat ha-Shalom ha-Ivri (the He-
brew Court of Peace). A Department of the World Zionist Organization (WZO) also
functioned in Palestine, which functions were transferred to the Jewish Agency in
1929.
In 1930 a new Worker's party of Israel Mapai appeared, and it was led by D.
Ben-Gurion, who in 1935 headed the Jewish Agency, and 13 years later became the
first Prime Minister of the state of Israel proclaimed in 1948. The Religious Zionist
current was presented by the Mizrachi movement in the Yishuv. The Civil bloc Ez-
rahim united small political groups and represented the interests of the middle class.
The Ezrahim bloc more gravitated to the right wing of the movement "General Zion-
ists", which later proclaimed extreme radicalism and intransigence. Headed by V. Ja-
botinsky, the radical revisionists left the WZO in 1933. In 1937, they created an un-
derground national military organization Irgun Tsvai Leumi, which included up to 5
thousand militants.
In addition to the revisionists, the Palestinian Communist Party and the Jewish
religious Orthodoxy Haredim, represented by Agudat Yisrael, were marginalized in
political life.
The General Federation of Jewish workers Histadrut belonged to a number of
social organizations. It was established in 1920 and united in its staff approximately
70% of all employed people. However, this organization, as the researchers note,
paid more attention to party discipline and expansion of its political powers than to
the rights of Jewish workers [13, pp. 198-216].
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 127

Political authority over the Muslims was concentrated in the hands of the
Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Muhammad Amin al-Husseini, who was elected in
1921, and in a year he headed the Supreme Muslim Council of Palestine, and in
1931, the international Congress of panislamists, gathered in Jerusalem.
Arabs' anti-British and anti-Zionist movement was led by the Arab Palestinian
Congress (APC), and its head Musa Kazim al-Husseini was till 1934.
In general, it should be agreed the Jewish and Arab communities have formed
their political institutions in different ways and with various degree of effectiveness. If
against Arabs it is fair to say that their political activity mostly had religious and na-
tionalist background, restricting the Arabs in the aspect of full-scale construction and
political authorities development, so concerning the Jews of Palestine it is true to
admit the obvious fact that they managed to create both the legislative and executive
bodies acting independently and they did not need guardianship and control exer-
cised by the British administration.
5. The inconsistency of the policy of the mandate and difficulties in ad-
ministration of the mandated territories. On the one hand, difficulties in the admin-
istration of the mandated territories were caused by conflicting provisions, written in
Art. 3 of the Mandate and Art. 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. Accord-
ing to these documents, duties on the guardianship and development of the mandat-
ed territories were imposed on the mandate holders, who had to take into account
the interests of the local Arab population. But, on the other hand, Art. 2 of the Man-
date and the Balfour Declaration supposed the obligations of the mandate holders to
Zionist organizations to have been enshrined, because their main responsibility was
to care for Jewish settlers' interests. Since the Balfour Declaration had in fact recog-
nized Jewish immigrants, including future immigrants, as the indigenous population
of Palestine, the Arabs had been placed in the position of people, whose rights to
Palestinian land had been extremely violated. In the current situation, the British ad-
ministration actually had to express the interests of the "absent", i.e. not yet repatriat-
ed to Palestine Jewish population. However, this case did not prevent the British ad-
ministration from providing support to the emerging Arab national liberation move-
ment [7, p.18]. With a similar interpretation of the official political course of Britain,
conducted by it on the mandated territory, the opinion of a number of Israeli re-
searchers correlates, who disagree with the thesis that the British helped the Jews to
128 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

oust the local Arab population of Palestine and allowed the Jews to flood Palestine
[14, pp. 26-27].
However, Britain is known to have never attached much importance to its obli-
gations against the Arabs, though over time it was forced increasingly to act as "arbi-
trator for the two is fundamentally incompatible and politically uncompromising na-
tional movements" [15, p. 168]. A telegram of the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sir Ed-
ward Grey on September, 21 1916 to the British Ambassador in Rome Sir J. Rodd
can serve as a proof to the fact, that Britain was ready to recognize an independent
Arab state, if the Arabs succeeded in establishing their independence, and the only
promise that was made was to maintain independent Muslim control over the Holy
places of Islam [4, p. 22]. However, Arab leaders often compromised with the British
authorities in unjustified hoping to enlist their support in the fight against the Zionists
[16, p. 90].
During state-building on the mandated territory, including the formation of a lo-
cal government, there was a clear imbalance in the Arabs' and Jews' admission of
the country management in favor of the latter. This suggests the separation of the
entity indirect colonial control for the Arab and Jewish parts of the population. Jewish
settlers' interests were certain to have been represented not only by the British ad-
ministration, but also by the Jewish organizations themselves: the "moderate" Zionist
wing, which advocated the gradual economic and cultural development of Palestine,
that is, shared the provisions of the Balfour Declaration, as well as "irreconcilable" led
by V. Jabotinsky, who did not recognize compromises with the Arabs and aimed to
create a monoethnic Jewish state on Palestinian lands.
The British administration's support for Jewish immigrants and Jewish organi-
zations in Palestine had led the Arab and Jewish sides to have adopted irreconcilable
positions against each other, preventing the conflict resolution. At the very beginning
of the mandate, there had already been clashes between the Arab and Jewish popu-
lations in Palestine, accompanied by violence, scuffles and massacres.
6. The events of 1929. The conclusions and recommendations of the
commissions of W. Shaw and H. Simpson. A particularly bloody uprising was in
Jerusalem in 1929, known as the Events of 1929 (Western Wall Uprising, the Buraq
Uprising). The peasant Arab population took an active part in the uprising. During the
rebellion, which spread to Nablus, Haifa, Akka and Jaffa, according to official data of
the British authorities, 196 people were killed, 109 of them were Jews and 87 Arabs,
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 129

more than 500 people were injured. The Arabs staged fighting in Hebron, Zefat, Na-
blus, Ramallah, Jenin and Gaza. The revolt was suppressed by the British Armed
Forces and made the League of Nations convene the special mandate Commission
in 1930, which dealt with the causes of the conflict and noted in its conclusions that
the Arabs' uprising was mostly directed against Britain, primarily against their inter-
ests on the mandated territory, while the Jewish population was only indirectly in-
volved in the bloodshed. This, at least, was the Vice-Chairman of the Mandate
Commission van Rees' opinion, voiced by him at the meeting of the XII session of the
Commission [11] and further confirmed by the boycott announced by the Arabs to the
British authorities.
The mandate holder himself established a commission, which gathered evi-
dence from both sides, to investigate the circumstances of the Arab unrest in 1929
under the leadership of Sir Walter Shaw [17]. The Shaw Commission concluded that
one of the causes of the unrest and violence was Palestinian discontent with the
mandate holder's Pro-Zionist policies. The Commission recommended the deletion of
the Balfour Declaration from the mandate, the restriction of Jewish immigration and
the purchase of land by Jews. The Minister of colonies, Lord Passfield included these
recommendations in the second White paper issued by the British government [16, p.
92].
In addition to the Shaw Commission in Palestine, there was also the British
Commission headed by Sir Hope Simpson, which published its report in 1930.
The Simpson Commission, noting that the British authorities had done their
utmost to prevent the unrest, indicated as the reasons for the latter: the increased
Jewish repatriation and acquisition of agricultural land by Jews, the expulsion from
the lands of the Arab fellas, which led to the emergence of the class of "landless" Ar-
abs, the rise of land value, the inability to lease these lands and carry out agricultural
activities on them Arabs, based on the position of the Jewish national Fund, the un-
employment growth among the Arab population, largely due to the refusal of Jewish
enterprises to employ Arab workers and artisans.
The Commission recommended limiting the Jewish immigration, stopping the
practice of buying up Arab lands by the Jews, the creation of a Palestinian legislature
with the Arab majority, increasing the number of mandatory armed forces, limiting the
power of Zionist organizations [18].
130 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

The conclusions and recommendations did not lead to significant changes in

the situation in Palestine, as they have not been implemented in practice. The British
administration proposed the convening of a Legislative Council with the final word for
Britain, but the proposal was rejected by both Arabs and Jews.
On April 25, 1931, the leading Arab political parties formed the so-called Su-
preme Arab Committee (WAC), which called for an end to Jewish immigration, a ban
on the land sale by Jews, the convening of a Legislative Assembly and a general
strike for a month.
By mid-may 1931 Britain imposed martial law in Palestine and promised to re-
strict Jewish immigration to 4,500 people for the next six months. WAC did not ac-
cept these proposals from the mandate holder, and he called for a continuation of the
uprising.
7. The continuation of the uprising. The conclusions and recommenda-
tions of the Lord W. R. Peel and G. Woodhead's commissions. The disorder on
the mandated Palestinian lands has continued for several years. In May 1936, the
WAC announced a general strike and organized a nationwide demonstration. In Je-
rusalem only, more than 2,000 Arabs took to the streets. And in Jaffa, three weeks
later, British police were forced to open fire on demonstrators in the escalation of vio-
lence [16, p. 105]. By late summer 1936, the unrest has spread to a significant part of
the countryside. In October 1936 The WAC has offered to establish a truce in con-
nection with the arrival in Palestine of a fee of Lord W. R. Peel.
Having studied on the spot the situation and heard more than 130 witnesses
from both sides, the Commission called as the principal reason of the Arab uprising the
rejection of the idea of Jewish "national home" by the Arabs. The Commission pro-
posed replacing the mandate with a system of agreements between the British admin-
istration, the Arabs and the Zionists, and the creation of two States, one - for Arabs,
comprising the Eastern part of Transjordan and most of Palestine, and the other - for
Jews on the remaining part of the Palestinian territory.
The agreement also provided strict guarantees of the security of ethnic minori-
ties in both states, the appearance of land, naval and air forces, the preservation of
civil and industrial infrastructure (roads, ports, oil pipelines, etc.), the creation of the
third zone, including Jerusalem and Bethlehem, which was to remain as a mandated
territory, the payment of compensation fees by Jews in favor of the Arabs for the loss
of the latter part of their territory [19].
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 131

Although the proposed plan was not accepted by both conflicting parties, in
September 13, 1937, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Britain, Anthony Eden still pre-
sented the League of Nations a project for the partition of Palestine and proposed to
send a technical Committee to develop a detailed plan section. The implementation
of this plan was postponed because of the Arab and Jewish position. Despite the fact
that the held the same year Zionist Congress in Basel endorsed the idea of partition,
the Jews did not support Lord Peel's plan due to "the hostility of the Arabs" [15, p.
164].
In 1938, to identify the possibility of implementing Lord Peel's plan, the Com-
mission of Sir John Woodhead was accepted, which was to formulate recommenda-
tions on the establishment the borders of the Arab and Jewish states, the degree of
their economic independence, ethnic population composition, etc. Sir J. Woodhead
and his Commission concluded that it was impossible to implement Lord Peel's plan
in practice in the current conditions and taking into account the positions of the con-
flicting parties.
By 1939, fighting between the Jewish and Arab Palestinian communities had
ceased, and during the World War II Britain had to postpone the process of their terri-
torial separation.
8. The final period of the British mandate and the division of Palestine.
During the World War II the Arab liberation movement was divided. The Grand Mufti
escaped and openly joined the German Nazis. In 1944, the political Arab factions,
forced to unite by Syrian Prime Minister Jamil Mardam, nominated Musa Al-Alami as
a delegate to the Alexandria Conference on the establishment of the League of Arab
States (LAS). In 1945 Jamil Mardam contributed to the revival of the WAC, and Al-
Alami organized a Palestinian Bureau abroad with the help to the LAS to combat
against Zionist colonization.
In the wartime, the British Palestinian authorities expressed their support for
the Zionists, believing them allies in the war against Nazis Germany. 18,800 Palestin-
ian Jews served in the British Army. They subsequently formed the nucleus of the
Israeli Army after 1948, the mandatory power tried to prevent the resettlement of Eu-
ropean Jewish refugees, survivors of the war and genocide by all means. Realizing it,
the Yishuv resisted both Arabs and the British administration, increasingly resorting
to terrorist acts. D. Ben-Gurion noted in his diaries that the Jews' repatriation and
132 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

their resettlement in Palestine contributed to the implementation of the Zionist plans

[16, p. 93].
Arabs, yielding in organizational and military-technical terms to the Yishuv,
were more eager to maintain their positions in Britain, but often they were the object
of political manipulation on its part. This circumstance, coupled with weak political,
social and military organization of the Palestinian Arabs did not allow them to create
their own independent state.
Zionists, however, managed to solve the problem of state registration accord-
ing to their interests. The UN General Assembly, which discussed the recommenda-
tions of the Palestinian partition Commission, adopted a resolution on the partition of
Palestine on November 29, 1947. On May 14, 1948, after the end of the British man-
date, the state of Israel was proclaimed on Palestinian lands. British troops have left
Palestinian territory.
9. Conclusions. The analysis of the political and economic situation allows to
identify the following causes contributing to the still ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict: (1)
the dual character of the policies of the mandate-holder who is not interested in the
creation of an independent Arab state in Palestine; (2) the growing economic de-
pendence and impoverishment of Palestinian Arabs against the background of unlim-
ited buying up the agricultural lands by the Zionist funds; (3) political disorganization
and disunity of the Arab population, the absence of formed political forces able to de-
fend the interests of the Arab people of Palestine; (4) the increasing influence of Zi-
onists and of their organizations in Palestine; (5) a growing number of Jewish immi-
grants and the intensive erection of Jewish settlements in the territories belonging to
the Palestinian Arabs.

References:
1. The Covenant of the League of Nations. URL: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/
Covenant_of_the_League_of_Nations#Article_22. (accessed 27.03.2018).
2. Pre-State Israel: The Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916). URL: http://www. jewishvir-
tuallibrary.org/jsource/History/sykes_pico.html (accessed 05.12. 2017).
3. Pre-State Israel: The Balfour Declaration (November 1917). URL: http://www.
jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/baltoc.html (accessed 05.12.2017).
 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa' 133

4. Samarskaya L.M. Deklaratsiya Bal'fura v kontekste anglo-sionistskoy diplomatii v

period Pervoy mirovoy voyny [The Balfour Declaration in the context of the An-
glo-Zionist diplomacy during the First World War]. Moscow, 2016. 84 p.
5. Karrash Kh. Prinyatiye Ligoy Natsiy mandata na Palestinu I ego vliyaniye na
vozniknoveniye palestinskoy problemy v 30-40-e gody XX v. [The Adoption of
Mandate for Palestine by the League of Nations, and Its Influence on the Emer-
gence of the Palestinian Problem in 1930s-90s of the 20 th cent.] // Uchenye
zapiski Tavricheskogo Natsional'nogo universiteta imeni V.I. Vernadskogo —
Scientific Notes of Taurida National University named after V.I. Vernadskiy, 2006,
Series «Low sciences», vol. 20 (59), no. 2, pp. 281-288.
6. Shandra A.V. Deyatel'nost' britanskikh organov upravleniya Palestinoy v 1917-
1939 gg. [The activity of the British Authorities in Palestine 1917-1939]. Abstract
of thesis kand. of hist. Sc. Rostov-on-Don, 2010. 24 p.
7. Tsvetyanskiy A.V. Blizhniy Vostok v politike Velikobritanii v 1914-1923 gg. [The
Middle East in British Politics from 1914 till 1923]. Abstract of thesis kand. of hist.
Sc. Nizhny Novgorod, 2007. 26 p.
8. Aleksandrov B.A. Kolonialnye mandaty [The Colonial Mandates]. Moscow, 1934.
176 p.
9. British Palestine Mandate: Text of the Mandate (July 24, 1922). URL: http://www.
jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Palestine_Mandate.html (accessed 05.12.
2017).
10. Landa R.G., Usova V.N. Palestina i Transiordaniya: slozhnosti politicheskikh
sudeb [Palestine and Transjordan: the complexity of the political destinies]. Histo-
ry of the East, vol. 5. East in Modern Times (1914-1945). Moscow, 2006, pp.
159-174.
11. League of Nations. Permanent Mandates Commission. Minutes of the Twentieth
Session. Held of Geneva from June 9 th to June 24th, 1931. URL:
http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0Z6BB46BF1877EEB1405256616005E1FF2
(accessed 05.12.2017).
12. Ranchinskiy V.P. Reforma pozemel'nykh otnosheniy v podmandatnoy Sirii [The
Reform of Land Relations in Mandatory Syria]. Vestnik Bryanskogo GU — Bry-
ansk State University Bulletin, 2012, no. 2, pp. 172-178.
13. Sternhell Z. The Founding Myths of Israel: Nationalism, Socialism, and the Mak-
ing of the Jewish State. Princeton, 1999. 464 p.
134 'Science, Education and Culture in Eurasia and Africa'

14. Bard M. Mify i fakty, Putevoditel' po arabo-izrail'skomu konfliktu [Myths and

Facts. A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict]. Moscow, 2007. 480 p.
15. Epstein A.D., Kozheurov S.A., Fadeyev I. A. Posledneye gosudarstvo
krestonostsev: britanskoye mandatnoye pravleniye v Palestine v zerkale za-
rubeshnoy istoriografii [The Last Crusader State: the British Mandate Rule in
Palestine in the Mirror of Foreign Historiography]. Ural'skoye vostokovedeniye —
The Ural Oriental studies, 2011, vol. 4, pp. 162-180.
16. Pappe I. A history of modern Palestine: one land, two peoples. 2 nd ed. Cam-
bridge, 2006. 378 p.
17. Shaw W., Sir. Commission on the Palestine Disturbances of August 1929. —
London, H.M. Stationery Off., 1930. Pp. 150-157.
18. Palestine. Report on Immigration, Land Settlement and Development. By Sir
John Hope Simpson, C.I.E. (October 1930). URL: http://archive.li/3cekZ (ac-
cessed 05.12.2017).
19. British Palestine Mandate: Text of the Peel Commission Report (July 1937). URL:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/peel1.html (accessed 05.12.
2017).
I

'Science, Education and Culture

in Eurasia and Africa'

The 8th International Academic Congress

(France, Paris, 10-12 April 2018)

PAPERS AND COMMENTARIES

VOLUME VIII