But if the British in February 1947 had made up their mind to leave India, then Palestine lost much of its original importance. In May 1947, the UN established the UN Special Committee on Palestine. They too studied the question of Palestine and the majority of the committee suggested partition. The Jews, of course, were elated. They would have their state, but the Arabs who saw the partition as unjust threatened war. What was surprising, but critically important for the Zionist cause in this particular phase was the change in the Soviet position. The Soviet Union came out in support of partition and the creation of a state for the Jews in Palestine. The main motivation of the Soviet Union was the creation of a state for the Jews in Palestine would mean that the British would be kicked out. And it was the removal of the British that motivated them perhaps more than anything else. The Soviet Union were supportive of the Zionist project not only through the decision at the United Nations. Czechoslovakia, no doubt in coordination with the Soviet Union made extremely important critical arms supplies to the Jews in the 1948 war. That were one of the reasons that paved the way for Jewish victory in the 1948 confrontation. In November 1947, two-thirds of the general assembly of the United Nations voted in favor for partition that is the creation of a Jewish and a Arab State in Palestine. The Jews received 55% of Palestine and the Arabs only 45%. Jerusalem was neither in the Arab state nor in the Jewish state, but designated as a separate zone to be under UN control. But the question is asked, the Jew's who are one-third of the population in Palestine got 55%. The Arab's, who were two-thirds of the population in Palestine got only 45%. Why was that so? What was the logic of this division of the land in Palestine? The logic can only be explained through the European context. That is the consideration for the Jewish predicament. The international community at the time was urgently looking for a solution for the Jewish refugees in Europe. And the settlement of these Jewish refugees in Palestine seemed to be the obvious and the right thing to do. And if one looks at the partition resolution, one can see that one of it's components was a demand of the British for an early evacuation of a port area that would allow for rapid Jewish immigration. It is clear that the United Nations or the majority of it, looking at the Jewish predicament in Europe thought it just and required. That a majority of the territory in Palestine be accorded to the Jews, because of the huge expected Jewish immigration. Which, indeed, did follow. And therefore, the Negev, the Southern part of Palestine that which was not given to the Jews in the 1937 partition was accorded to the Jewish state in the 1947 partition. This was all about space for Jewish immigration. This was a United Nations that at the time was predominantly European and Western. And for that kind of United Nations, predominantly European, Western, Christian, a nation state for the Jews seemed to be the right thing to do. The question arises after this long story. How should we summarize the British historical role in Palestine? Was the British role the backbone of the Zionist endeavor? Or did the British betray the Zionist cause? The answer to that is not very simple. One could argue that had it not been for British support for the Zionist enterprise until the White Paper of 1939, Israel would never have come into being. But at the same time, the White Paper of 1939 was a betrayal of the Zionist course. So, in a way one could make both of these contentions and both of them would be right.
