Rehovot
After the adjournment until December of the Palestine Conference in London, representatives of the Jewish Agency entered into “unofficial” discussions with members of the British government in an attempt to establish conditions that would permit the Agency to participate in the Conference when its sessions are resumed. Besides demanding the release of the interned Agency leaders as a preliminary condition [already achieved], the Agency apparently also demands that Jewish immigration into Palestine be allowed on a larger scale, and that Britain promise full political independence to Palestine Jewry. The British government, on its part, requests, first of all, that the Agency cooperate to the full in stamping out terrorism in Palestine.
Meanwhile, the date of the twenty-second Zionist Congress has definitely been fixed, and the election of delegates to the Congress has already taken place. It is this Congress, starting on the 9th of December, that will decide whether or not Zionists will participate in the London Conference.
The highest authority of the Zionist Organization between Congresses is the Inner Zionist Committee, and this body, in a session held in Jerusalem the morning after the Congress elections, strongly denounced the terrorist outrages, and again declared by a large majority of votes that the only solution of the Zionist problem would be political independence for Palestine Jewry. But in “reply” to the Committee’s expression of disapproval, there came on that very same day an intensified renewal of terrorism, and innocent blood was shed like water.
Such has been the course of political events in Palestine on the eve of the Zionist Congress; and were it not for the light radiated on the Yishuv by the recent creation of fifteen new agricultural settlements, these days would have been very dark ones for us indeed.
_____________
What are the fundamental problems that the coming Zionist Congress will have to decide and take a definite stand on? They are: (1) future political policy, which involves the decision whether or not to participate in the London Conference; (z) policy on colonization; (3) the immigration and land question. The Zionist achievement so far can be divided into two essentials, one political, the other colonizational. On the eve of the impending Congress, we can say without hesitation or reservation that as far as the political sphere is concerned Zionism has met with complete failure—whereas in that of colonization it has achieved great successes.
The balance sheet in brief of our political achievement is as follows: the widening and deepening of the Jewish-Arab chasm; strained relations between the Zionist administration and the mandatory government, which have resulted in a tension that has the character almost of mutual animosity; and the present reign of Jewish terror in Palestine.
The balance sheet of Zionist colonizational activity is: a population of 600,000; 2 million dunams of land; 315 agricultural settlements; a great host of workers in city and country; the creation of an industry; and a record of production that by 1945 had reached the value of hundreds of millions of English pounds.
The Jewish-Arab quarrel was not brought about by the Zionists alone. The Arabs started it out of envy and primitive ultranationalism, and under incitement from abroad, an incitement greatly intensified after 1935 by the agents of Fascism and Nazism, who succeeded in turning the conflict into something like prolonged warfare. Nevertheless, the leaders of Zionism have a big share in the responsibility for the increased dimensions of the quarrel—not so much in a positive as in a negative way. For they have made no effort to settle the quarrel and have not utilized the good opportunities given them for that end.
In 1935, before the outbreak of the Arab disturbances, such an opportunity was provided by High Commissioner Sir Arthur Wauchope’s proposal to found Jewish-Arab independence in Palestine on the basis of equality. But the Zionist administration turned the proposition down. In 1936, at the very beginning of the disturbances, another opportunity was provided for a settlement by the understanding arrived at between Dr. Judah Magnes and his associates on the one side and responsible and influential Arab leaders on the other. But the Zionist administration also turned that down.
Then, upon the publication of the Royal Commission’s proposal for partition, Arab leaders showed a sincere readiness to liquidate Jewish-Arab differences; but the Zionist Administration, which knew about this desire, let the opportunity drop. On the very eve of the calamity that befell us at the Biltmore Hotel in New York in the adoption of the resolution demanding a Jewish state immediately, another good opportunity arose for a fair compromise, but it was again not taken advantage of. With the Biltmore resolution pouring oil on the flames of the Jewish-Arab dissension, direct Jewish-Arab pourparlers for a peaceful settlement of differences became almost impossible.
Now, all these failures befell us because we shut our eyes to reality—because in the Zionist offices in Rehavia, Tel Aviv, and New York, and among the broad masses of the Zionist public, people did not allow themselves a fair picture of Arab strength and greatly exaggerated our own.
_____________
It was likewise not the Zionists who began the Jewish-British conflict, but, unquestionably, the British. It was the British who drew up the White Paper, one of the most disgraceful documents of the period of “appeasement.” But the Zionist leaders committed themselves to a fatal error by believing that they could break the White Paper by other means than peaceful political campaigning and the continuation of creative Zionist effort. They issued a call for “war,” and appealed to physical “force”; they trained and incited Jewish youth in this country for these ends.
A year ago the Labor government proposed, as a temporary solution, to grant us x,500 immigration certificates per month, and it seemed almost certain that it was prepared to increase them to 2,500 per month, and that it was also willing to instruct local authorities to relax the restrictions on Jewish purchases of land.
This was an intimation or hint of the eventual abolition of the White Paper. Who knows? Perhaps if we had not disdained this “hint” and not reacted against it by blowing up railways and bridges, and had not perpetrated the crime at the King David Hotel—in which some of our best men perished, as well as some of our best British and Arab friends—who knows but that we might have been now standing on the threshold of that temporary solution, safe from the danger threatening us at present? The Zionist leaders let drop all the opportunities to settle the Jewish-Arab conflict, and turned down the first offer of a compromise in the quarrel with the British simply because they hoped to grasp the maximum—but they have failed in that, too.
_____________
The sources of our success in colonization are not far to seek. They are to be found in the more traditional Zionist policy of constant creation and construction. This tradition can be traced without interruption from the days of Bilu down to the last aliya to the Negev; that policy was, is, and will be the backbone of the Zionist movement.
I do not know what the composition of the Diaspora representation and, particularly, of the American delegation at the Congress will be. But the composition of the delegation elected in Palestine does not promise any change for the better in our policy. The “war” cry had greater influence over the electorate than the admonition to patience, the call to constructive and creative effort, the traditional laborious road of the Zionist movement. However, should there be no change, should we continue to tread the tortuous path of “warfare,” we shall—Heaven forbid—go from bad to worse. A Jewish “state” will not be our immediate lot, but utter ruin and destruction. For we are indeed quite likely to arrive at a state of real war on two fronts.
The fact that after a thirteen years’ absence, the Revisionists are again returning to the Zionist Congress with their “war cry”—which in the interim has become the slogan of many-this fact promises nothing good.
Simply to insist on political sovereignty for a population that constitutes a minority in the country connotes in itself the rule of might. And one sin is sure to bring another in its train. Our present terrorists are the disciples of those who twenty years ago demanded “a state immediately.” The results of the Congress elections in Palestine offer no hope of a change in this policy, but they do at least give hope that our present settlement policy will be maintained—provided, however, that our “foreign” policy does not bring about its ruination.
_____________
Zionist settlement policy has given preference so far to agricultural colonization, that is, to the extent that the investment of Zionist funds is concerned. But private funds and means have always followed the line of least resistance, which is urban settlement. Of late, demands have been heard for a change of policy in the investment of the funds of the Zionist Organization; it is being asked that these, too, be diverted to the easier course and spent on urban development. “Industrialization” has now become the stirring slogan.
In spite of the great positive advantages of industrialization, especially in enhancing the Yishuv’s absorptive capacity, let us not lose sight of present realities in Palestine.
Notwithstanding our great efforts in agriculture and the satisfactory results obtained, that department of our economy is still quite far from fulfilling all its functions and duties. By now it supplies the Yishuv with most of its primary necessities in food: milk, eggs, vegetables, and fruits. Nevertheless, it does not as yet provide even one-fifth of the bread, meat, oil, and fats we consume. These we must still obtain from abroad, from neighboring countries, or from afar. And whenever bread, meat, or oil does not arrive on time, the Yishuv is seized with the dread of hunger. This is a quite impossible situation, and it has to be radically changed. For the time being, the principal Zionist funds must still be poured into agricultural colonization. For private money will in any case not go to the country.
The Palestinian delegates to the Congress, 60 per cent of whom come from the ranks of labor, will doubtless support the policy of rural settlement regardless of variant political views. An appreciable portion of the so-called “middle-class” delegates, barring Revisionists and their “shield-bearers,” will also vote for this policy.
It is unquestionably incumbent upon us to develop our industry, and especially to assure markets for it, so as to prevent the dreadful eventuality of having production exceed demand. Private initiative, however, should and doubtless would care for that. Public initiative must as before direct itself principally towards the land.
_____________
About immigration there is no difference of opinion in the Yishuv or in the Zionist Organization at large. The British government has indeed sinned greatly by closing the gates of our country to us. It should be admitted, however, that the problem of immigration is not an easy one under present conditions. For while the forebodings we had about the transition from wartime to peacetime conditions have fortunately only been confirmed in part—and even that part is being compensated for in some measure by the pronounced gains made in the citrus industry—nevertheless, what happened to our metal trades with the close of the war, and to the diamond industry more recently, may happen any day to our other industries.
Meanwhile, the high cost of production, deriving from the high cost of living, weighs heavily upon us. And the high cost of living derives in turn from the shortcomings of our rural colonization and from our low efficiency.
Another limiting factor upon Jewish immigration to Palestine is the rather low capacity for work manifested so far by the new immigrants, obviously due to their life during their exile in the “camps” of devastated Europe.
All this must not be lost sight of, and we must prepare for every eventuality. Nevertheless, the recommendation of the Anglo-American Committee that hundreds of thousands of refugees be admitted to Palestine still stands in full force as something that ought to be complied with. To be sure, it is not practicable to do this at one stroke, as certain individuals propose. It can only be achieved gradually, in the course of a year or a year and a half. The thousands of refugee children, however, could all come at once, for the Yishuv can absorb and assimilate them with little difficulty
Immigration from the “camps,” however, is not enough in itself for the building up of the Yishuv. To absorb and assimilate these immigrants, the Yishuv must have reinforcements from countries that were not seriously devastated by the war. This means America in particular. This immigration must be composed of halutzim and also of capital. Unless such immigration takes place, the Yishuv will find it very hard to stand the strain and carry on.
With respect to the land problem, there are likewise no divergences of opinion in the Zionist camp the world over. Land is, was, and will always be the very soul of the Zionist movement. The British government took upon itself a heavy sin indeed by establishing the “Land Law,” which smacks of the Nuremberg Laws because it distinguishes between two brother peoples living in one and the same country. We Jews do not wish to be endowed with superior rights in our country, nor do we want the privilege of domination. On the other hand, we certainly do refuse to be relegated to inferiority.
Equality between the two peoples of Palestine with respect to all their rights, political, social, or economic, and only equality will free us from distress and put us upon the broad and open highway of salvation and redemption.
_____________
Is It possible or permissible, when every thing is so fraught with danger, to delay a settlement with the British and Arabs and hold out for an iota of “prestige”?
I do not by any means speak of a final settlement or solution. That is impossible under present circumstances, with neither the situation nor the generation—Jewish and Arab alike—trained or educated for it. Nor is the required training and education a thing to be effected by the stroke of a magic wand. It is just here that the heaviest guilt of the Jewish Agency lies—in striving for a final settlement at this precise and particular hour.
But a temporary solution must be at the top of the agenda. It is absolutely indispensable. For we cannot go on without a solution that will turn us from the paths of adventurism and restore the life of creative labor that made the Yishuv grow, and which can alone offer Zionism the balm of life.
The Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry worked out a desirable solution, but all parties concerned spurned it because of the narrowness of their conceptions, the wildness of their imaginations, and the vanity of their ambitions.
But even before this Committee was brought into being, the Labor government had guardedly suggested its provisional solution—a solution not so good or so complete as that of the Anglo-American Committee, but nevertheless a kind of beginning. We in our impatience kicked it overboard.
Late as the hour is, it is not altogether too late. Let us not chase after the wind in the fields; let us not seek the unrealizable and the excessive; let us content ourselves with less than the maximum: and let us save all that can be saved.
For that “basis”—a Jewish “statelette” established by partition—to which the Jewish Agency aspires, and which constitutes the rock of dissension between it and the British government, is not viable. Partition with its “statelette” is opposed by considerable sections of all Zionist parties and the Yishuv—possibly by a majority of the Jews of Palestine. And it is opposed by all the Arabs of Palestine.
_____________
No, this is not the time for a final solution; we must strive with all our strength toward a merely temporary one. Let us seek this: the continuation of the British Mandate; freedom of acquisition of land by Jews throughout Palestine, along with the strict protection of the fellah’s and tenant’s small but adequate holdings; gradual but steady development and enlargement of self-government in towns, settlements, and villages; expansion of the system of government committees on which Jews, Arabs, and British would serve in common, to the legislative as well as the economic sphere; increasing participation of Jews and Arabs in the administration of the country, from the lowest to the highest offices.
This temporary solution is possible right now, and it palpably offers benefits and blessings to all concerned. If we seek it, we shall attain it. As for the final solution, let us leave that to the future and to a generation educated for it. It is with the training and education of such a generation that we must concern and occupy ourselves from this very moment.
