American Press Condemns White Paper, but Sees Britain Without Alternative

A partial survey of editorial opinion of Eastern newspapers revealed today they generally condemn the White Paper on Palestine, express sympathy with the blow to the Zionist cause but, with some exceptions, take the view that Great Britain had no alternative in view of its difficult international situation.

The New York Herald Tribune said was “obviously no justice” in the White Paper, which it branded an “act of power politics” dictated by Britain’s imperial interests, but declared it was “impossible to ask American opinion to interpose to prevent any pragmatic solution when American opinion has neither the wisdom nor the authority to suggest a better one.” It added that survival of the British Empire was” perhaps almost as important to Jewry today as it is to the British.”

A somewhat similar viewpoint was projected by the New York Times yesterday. Declaring there was “no just or acceptable solution of the problem,” the editorial cites the international complications that have change the situation since Britain gave the Arabs and Jews “contradictory promises, “and concluded: ” These are the hard facts. Less than half a million pioneers, builders of a new world that depends on peace, international order and respect for spiritual values are planted on an exposed coast with millions of Arabs in the background and in the foreground a strategic ocean highway coveted by rival imperialisms. In honor, humanity and the defense of its own interests, Great Britain must protect these people to the end. On their part, in the long run, they have not much choice but to employ their proved intelligence and energy, and to cooperate in building up a state wherein they can conserve the wonders they have already wrought.”

Of the New York afternoon newspapers, the Post was the most denunciatory, terming the new British Policy a “shocking betrayal” and predicting that an Arab controlled Palestine would be “a bloody Palestine” and that the White Paper “may be the death warrant for thousands of innocent persons.” The World Telegram, declaring the British “have muddled inexcusably” pointed out, however, that world Jewry, with its troubles in other parts of the world could not afford to attack Britain in Palestine since by doing so would “weaken her in her stand elsewhere for instance against the oppressors of Jewry in Central Europe.” The Sun commented that the omens for peace resulting from the new policy “are scarcely propitious.”

>Following are brief excerpts from out-of-town newspapers

Philadelphia Inquirer:” Admittedly Britain, with the imperative need for placating the Arabs for the protection of her empire, is on a tough spot. But is there no way of accomplishing her aims without making her helpless wards the victims? It should be made clear by our Government that we expect Great Britain to maintain to the letter her promise to the United States and to the Jewish people in Palestine.”

Buffalo Evening News: “Now that Britain proposes virtually to close the doors o Palestine to the Jews, what is to be done with Jewish refugees from Germany, Italy, Poland and other countries which have anti-Semitic policies? The British proposal relieves the British government of a vexatious situation but increases the problems of other nations.”

Washington Post: “The mistakes of 22 years cannot be rectified by renunciation of responsibility. In seeking to cut the Gordian knot of Palestine, Great Britain may only make it tighter, and in the process strangle one of the most idealistic experiments of our times.”

Boston Herald: “A coordinated, well supported, world-wide movement, under the supervision of some such figure as Louis. D. Brandeis, might well achieve something which, in a few years, would make the British White Paper seem the key which opened the doors to new and larger houses of mercy.” (The Herald endorsed the N.Y. Times editorial, which it reprinted in full.)

Cleveland Plain Dealer: “This patchwork is a rather sorry result of the long series of conferences, commissions and reports which Britain has had on Palestine.”

Hartford (Conn.) Courant: “As is natural in the circumstances, the solution decided upon puts their own interests ahead of all others.”

Springfield (Mass.) Union: “This is a sickening prospect in view particularly of the persecution of minorities in Nazi-dominated states of Europe….This settlement….is no real settlement at all.”

Rochester(N.Y.) Democrat:” The easiest solution for Britain is to let the Arabs have their own way at the expense of the Jews.”