The statement of Zionist policy in relation to the Mandatory and toward the Arabs as enunciated by Dr. Selig Brodetsky, member of the World Zionist Executive in London, in charge of political affairs, aroused considerable discussion at the sessions of the Actions Committee, which will shortly conclude its deliberations here.
In my opinion, Dr. Brodetsky said, there are two possible and distinct lines of policy—the present policy of the Organization as adopted by the last Congress, and the policy enunciated with remarkable clarity by the leader of the Revisionists. At the Permanenz-Ausschuss last year I was asked whether there isn’t a third line of policy in between. My answer then was: No! And it is my answer still.
The question is whether, in the face of the still unsatisfactory political position, we shall adopt the line of hard, steady and daily labor, or the line of political adventure. You may ask: What is political adventure? If Revisionists in China go to Lord Lytton and present him with a petition that Great Britain should leave Palestine, it is political adventure. If young Jews are led to believe that the salvation of their people will be secured by their living in camps with offensive and defensive arms, including gas-masks, it is a wild adventure. If so-called leaders go around the Jewish towns declaring that the salvation of Jewry is to be awaited from the approaching World War, and that we must be ready to take the side against Great Britain, in this world struggle, it is criminal adventure. If the leader of a Zionist Party announces that since Great Britain’s financial stability has been shaken, she is no longer a useful ally of the Jewish people, and we must look for more useful and more powerful allies, it is political adventure. If from a villa at Geneva a leader of a Zionist Party announces in a mock solemn fashion that Great Britain must go out of Palestine, it is political adventure.
We need not be concerned about the honor or political interests of Great Britain, who can look after herself. One of the most interesting phenomena of recent years has been the way that Englishmen have understood that Jews can and must fight for their rights, even against the British Government. What matters is the honor of Jewry and our national future. This care for the future of our people leads me to the conviction that political adventure is the worst possible road for our national salvation.
We must do all in our power to strengthen our position in the world on international politics, at Geneva as well as in all the important centres of political influence. We are continually working at this. But it is one thing to work calmly and deliberately, and to exert every ounce of strength in order to fortify our position; and it is another thing to run round offering Palestine to any bidder, in the expectation that Great Britain will take fright and run away.
Much has been said recently about various lines of action proposed in order to influence Great Britain, either to implement the Mandate or to vacate Palestine. The idea of a petition is not a new one. It has taken various forms. One is a petition to Great Britain direct. Another is a petition to the League of Nations, asking the League to ensure that our justified expectations are realized, and in particular, it is suggested that the Jewish youth should approach the League and explain their tragic position in the ocean of anti-Semitism which has covered Europe and other parts of the world. A third is a petition from the
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
