Daily Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

[The purpose of the Digest is informative: Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does indicate approval–Editor.]

The statement of Michael Kalenin, President of the Union of Soviet Republics, explaining the reasons for the Soviet’s promotion of the Jewish land settlement work in Russia, is commented on widely in the Jewish press.

The Soviet President’s statement, the “Jewish Morning Journal” (July 14) declares, makes clear the friendly attitude of the Soviet Government to the Jewish colonization plan.

“Kalenin thinks that it is necessary to colonize the Jews in Crimea, because it is a practical way of helping them and it is the duty of the government to extend such help to them which they need perhaps more than others. The facts and the arguments are familiar to us: the significance of the statement lies in the fact that the representative of the Soviet Government admits officially that this is the attitude and the purpose of the present government in Russia,” the paper writes.

“The statement confirms that the Soviet Government is sincere in its purpose to assist the Jews through colonization. The dissatisfaction of certain classes of peasants with the colonization of Jews is not denied, but the government does not consider such opinions unless the situation becomes very critical. This, however, is not the case in regard to the Crimean colonization and the fears expressed in this respect are unfounded. The Soviet Government does many things which the population does not like or which it is said the population does not like and wherever the discontent becomes too strong the government steps back. In this case the Soviet Government continues to go on with the work of colonization and this justifies the support which the Jews of America are giving to the plan.”

Four important points have been brought out clearly by the Soviet President, in the opinion of “The Day” (July 14) which, while reaffirming its support of the Jewish land settlement movement, points out that Kalenin’s statement has clarified the situation regarding certain assertions made hitherto in connection with the colonization plan. These four points are, to quote “The Day”:

“First, that the Russian peasants are anti-Semitically inclined against their Jewish neighbors on the land. Kalenin rebukes the peasants, telling them that anti-Semitism is an inheritance from the Czar, and so forth. But the fact of the presence of anti-Semitism remains. Secondly, Kalenin speaks only of 60,000 desiatin land in the Crimea for the settlement of Jews, says this land is poor and that to sink wells there is such an expensive undertaking that only wealthy American Jews are in a position to make possible this work. Third, that the land which is being given to Jews in Russia constitutes less than the land of wealthy Jews which was confiscated by the Soviets; and that the land given them is a substitute for the autonomy which other parts of the population who are settled in compact masses in certain territories have received. Fourth, that the argument to convince the Jewish public that colonization in Russia and its motives are not intended as a competition to the colonization in Palestine, is not true. Kalenin says distinctly: ‘the Jewish Communists living among the Jewish population feel strongly that their people should be settled on the land in Russia rather than become “the tools for capitalist exploitation in Palestine.” The Soviet Government shares this view.’

“The purpose, therefore, is clear; clear for Kalenin and clear for us,” the paper avers. “But is it also clear now to our philanthropists? Do they perceive now for what purposes they are being used?

“but our intention,” the paper says in conclusion, “is not to convince anyone or to argue. We only wish to point out what the true situation is. Whoever will study the facts without prejudice must needs be convinced: that the Jewish colonization in Russia is justified, but only within certain bounds, and minus the idealogy of the Yevsektzia (Jewish section of the Communist Party) …”

A similar attitude is taken by the “Jewish Daily News” which feels that “if Kalenin desired really to help the Jewish colonization work in the Crimea he should have at least remained silent regarding the fact of dissatisfaction among the peasants. This naturally makes the plan weaker, not stronger.”

The Soviet President’s remark regarding the question of competition against Palestine is seen by the paper to be the most unpleasant feature of the statement. “Is this unworthy lace Jewish colonization in Russia in opposition to Palestine still connected with the Jewish colonization plan in Russia?” the paper asks. “Is it, then, impossible to speak of settling a number of Jewish families on the land from the standpoint of practical assistance, without turning it into a sacrilege of that which is held sacred by the Jews?

“Kalenin is very open minded and declares that the land which is given to the Jews in Crimea has no water and that it costs 200 roubles per desiatin to sink wells, something which the peasants are unable to do, but which the peasants are unable to do, but which the Jews, with the assistance of their brethren in other countries, can do. It would appear that Kalenin does not seek to secure Jewish support for the plan, but seeks to persuade the peasant that what is being given to the Jews is not worth much and need not be begrudged, especially since the size of the entire area allotted for the Jews in the Crimea is less than the land formerly belonging to Baron Ginsburg which the Soviets confiscated.”

A different opinion on the subject is entertained by the “Forward” which finds that the chief merit of Kalenin’s statement lies in the fact that he has, once and for all, denied the notion that the Soviet government is planning to create an “independent Jewish Republic” in Russia.

“No Jewish Republic, not even a very large stretch of land for Jewish colonization in Crimea, Kalenin says,” the paper writes, adding, “For this Kalenin deserves credit because his open mindedness on the matter helps to put the Jewish colonization movement in its true light.

“It is a necessary and very useful movement which aims to settle several tens of thousands of Jewish ‘luftmentschen’ on the land and to make them a productive, healthy social element.

“It is necessary, of course, to remember that the land in Crimea is only a part of the land which the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee has at its disposal for the carrying out of its disposal for the carrying out of its historically important work. In so far as Jews are being settled on the land in any considerable numbers, this is being done not in the Crimea, but in the Ukraine and in Southern Russia. Even in White Russia in the districts of Minsk and Homel the Jewish colonization work has a more concrete and successful aspect than in the so-called ‘Crimea Republic,’ ” the paper observes.

Satisfaction with Kalenin’s statement is expressed by the “Freiheit,” Jewish Communist paper of New York. The paper contends that since the complaints on the part of the peasants against the settlement of Jews on the land came from Crimea and not from other territories, they are not of much imporance as “actually Crimea plays a smaller role in the Jewish colonization work that other parts of Russia.

“We do not doubt for one moment,” the paper writes further, “that Kalenin’s answer will satisfy even those who have been grumbling hitherto, that Kalenin’s authority, his just arguments and the fact that the land in Crimea must be improved before it can be worked will allay the few discontented ones. Up to now the new Jewish colonists have lived on excellent terms with their non-Jewish neighbors everywhere and they will continue to do so,” the paper concludes.