▫This decision is regarded as one of the most consequential developments of its era, shaping the historical geography of land, real estate, urban division, agricultural territory, industrial regions, coastal zones and the boundaries that connected transport routes across the region.

▫The refusal to accept this resolution has shaped the Palestinian experience ever since.

On 29 November 1947, during its second session, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution one hundred and eighty one, known internationally as the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. Through this resolution, the Assembly recommended the division of British administered Palestine into two separate states, one Jewish and one Arab. The plan also proposed that Jerusalem and Bethlehem be placed under an International Trusteeship in recognition of their religious significance and administrative sensitivity, thereby placing them under international supervision.

The resolution received thirty three votes in favour, thirteen against, while ten states abstained.

The plan was presented to the General Assembly by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, established in May nineteen forty seven. The committee consisted of eleven neutral countries and was mandated to recommend an international solution for the political future of Palestine following the end of the British Mandate. Over several months, the committee conducted extensive field visits, hearings and inquiries across Palestine, and eventually submitted its final report. The report included maps, boundary lines, the proposed division of the territory, and detailed allocations of agricultural land, industrial areas, coastal regions and transport corridors. It is considered one of the most comprehensively documented land division plans of the modern century and represented the first time that the future territorial shape of a region was determined through an international vote.

The plan, however, was never implemented. The Arab states and the Palestinian leadership rejected it as unjust, and following the war of nineteen forty eight, Israel took control of far more territory than had been assigned under the resolution.

In the years that followed, the nineteen forty nine Green Line, the nineteen sixty seven war, subsequent military occupations, political negotiations and the Oslo process created the borders and administrative arrangements that exist today. These territorial realities do not follow the lines proposed in Resolution one hundred and eighty one.

For Palestine, the rejection of the resolution resulted in the loss of the state envisaged for it. The wars of nineteen forty eight and nineteen sixty seven deepened this loss. Almost all land allocated to the Arab state came under Israeli control. The nineteen forty nine Green Line further confined Palestinian territory, while the post nineteen sixty seven arrangements fragmented Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem into separate and often disconnected zones. The vision of a unified and sovereign Palestinian state remained limited to documents and maps.

In the present moment, after the most prolonged and destructive conflict of recent history, from twenty twenty three to twenty twenty five, both Palestine and Israel stand in a state of devastation. The coastal territory of Gaza has been almost entirely destroyed. It is this shattered landscape that the President of the United States, Donald Trump, has spoken of transforming into a Riviera once the war has ended.

(Official records of the United Nations, the General Assembly archives, Encyclopaedia Britannica, BBC Archives and the Al Jazeera Timeline all confirm this event as taking place on twenty nine November nineteen forty seven.)