"About the Book When Britain took control of Palestine from the Turkish Ottoman Empire in World War 1, it tried to find a way to gain a legal right both to govern Palestine and to facilitate a Jewish national home there. It never found one. As a result, the changes it brought about in Palestine lack a legal basis. Book Synopsis Britain's role in Palestine has never before been analyzed by close scrutiny of its legal status. Britain's relation to the League of Nations has been analyzed only at a superficial level. Most authors say without proof that Britain was given Palestine by the League of Nations, or that the League of Nations required Britain to implement a Jewish national home. This book is ground-breaking as the first to look deeper into these issues, and to show that the commonly accepted analysis is historically incorrect. This book makes four new points about Britain's role in Palestine. Britain had no legal basis for its tenure in Palestine. No right to self-determination for the Jewish people was recognized by the international community. The mandate document that Britain composed was not legally valid. The League of Nations gave no rights either to Britain or to the Jewish people. The predominant analysis on the period of British control by authors who take a Zionist perspective is that the international community accepted a Jewish entitlement in Palestine. The predominant analysis by authors who take an Arab perspective is that Britain violated Arab rights by not complying with the requirements imposed by the League of Nations. This book challenges both of these approaches, because neither set of authors asks whether what Britain was doing rested on a solid legal foundation. To make its point, the book draws on documentation from the 1920s that others have overlooked, whether they be pro- or anti-Zionist. The most explosive item - one that has hidden in plain view for one hundred years - is a pleading the British Government filed in the Permanent Court of International Justice admitting that it was in Palestine only by dint of military conquest and that it had no other legal basis. Review Quotes ""Quigley's study showing that Britain's Mandate for Palestine, which endorsed the Balfour Declaration, was based on military conquest and not on law or the authorization of the League of Nations raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the State of Israel and the integrity of Britain's continued support for Israel"" --Christopher John Robert Dugard, Professor Emeritus, Leiden University, Netherlands. ""The accepted truisms that Britain obtained legitimacy to establish its mandate over Palestine through the League of Nations in July 1922, that Britain obtained sovereignty over Palestine from Turkey at the end of the Ottoman Empire, that Britain's sovereignty over Palestine was legitimized by the United Nations, and that Israel was granted that sovereignty by the United Nations through the UN Partition Plan are all seriously challenged in John Quigley's book. It is a must-read that debunks the most firmly held (and widely promoted) myths about the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state. It is written for a wide audience and is accessible for readers without a legal background or any knowledge of the Israel-Palestine conflict"" --Susan M. Akram, Clinical Professor and Director, International Human Rights Clinic, Boston University School of Law, USA. ""The book is well organized, with clear arguments that are connected and it has a deep knowledge of the matter, the choice of the material, whether case law, or texts, legal or political, are all well-chosen. It uncovers many of the settled assumptions about that period, the legality of the mandate, and of British stay in Palestine, which will render this book unavoidable"" --Asem Khalil, Dean--Faculty of Graduate Studies, Birzeit University, Palestine. About the Author John Quigley is Professor Emeritus, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University."