The issuance of Balfour declaration in November 1917 is considered to be the greatest achievement of the Zionist movement during the First World War. Much is known about the opposition it met in the Arab world as well as in Europe, Yet little is known about Jewish opposition to it within Palestine. In this paper, we will present Sephardi (Mizrahi) Jewish voices - of Yosef Kastel of Hebron & Jerusalem and Hayyim Ben Kiki of Tiberias - who analysed the destructive ramifications of the Declaration on Arab-Jewish relations in Palestine. Based on the concept of Palestine as a “shared homeland” of all of its inhabitants, these Sephardi writers suggested alternative ways to deal with the “Arab Question”, indeed, with the issue of Arab vis a vis Jewish rights on the land. .Ben Kiki focused on the need of Zionist project to integrate with the local Arab population rather than seek their domination, while Kastel suggested demanding from Britain to issue a new Balfour declaration in which the national rights of the Arabs – rather than only their civil ones - would be acknowledged. The latter, who served as media officer in the Zionist Executive, was among the first Zionists to acknowledge Palestinian-Arab national rights in Palestine. A comparison of the Jewish internal debate after the Balfour Declaration with the current debate in Israel enables us to see the changes in the spectrum of suggested ‘solutions’ to the Zionist-Palestinian conflict. The idea of partitioning Palestine between Jews and Arabs was not part of the political imagination of post-World War I, and mainstream Zionism advocated Jewish-Zionist national home in all of Palestine in which the Arabs would be granted civil and religious rights only. One can see the similarities between this ideology and the current Israeli policy. Oppositional figures – Kastel but also Brith Shalom – proposed a bi-national state all over Palestine but thought of the Jewish element within this state as a European state. The one-statists of today follow, in many ways, this tradition. Ben-Kiki’s approach was much more radical from Zionist perspective in that it rejected the hegemony of the Eurocentric Zionist movement altogether and argued that Jews who want to come to Palestine should Arabize themselves and be part of the “Orient” (without giving up their Jewish identity). This option was rejected by most if not all Zionist and disappeared from Jewish discourse.