Zionist circles here have been greatly stirred by an article in “Unser Werk,” official organ of the Jewish Agency in Germany, written by Dr. Oscar Wasserman, director of the Deutsche Banke, and leader of the Agency forces in Germany, in which he defines his ideas on Zionism. In this article, which has fallen like a bomb-shell in the ranks of the Zionist public, Dr. Wasserman, who is chairman of the Board of Directors of the Keren Hayesod, terms the expression “Jewish National Home” as contained in the Balfour Declaration an unfortunate one because being the basis of the Palestine Mandate it does not permit alteration without great dangers. He rejects the idea that Palestine should be a National Home for Jews, other than those living there as well as the hopes that it will become a cultural and spiritual center for all of the 15,000,000 Jews of the world, and turns down the conception of the Jewish state.
The Zionist “Juedische Rundschau,” which had been inclined to support the program of Dr. Magnes and the Brith Shalom, commenting on Dr. Wasserman’s article says “it will cause surprise and sharp dissension in Zionist circles. At many points Dr. Wasserman’s statements are hardly in cosonance with the opinions he expressed on many former occasions.” The German Radical Zionists through Dr. Max Soloweitschik have termed Dr. Wasserman’s article “disquieting because of his readiness to give up the idea of a Jewish state for a spiritual center Zionism stands and falls as a political movement.”
The anti-Zionist “Juedische Liberal Zeitung” declares “that we fail to see why the elimination of the expression Jewish National Home from the Mandate and the Balfour Declaration should be impossible.”
The text of Dr. Wasserman’s article follows:
“The Administrative Committee of the enlarged Jewish Agency is meeting in London on March 23. Important decisions will have to be made, including the laying down of a policy for the negotiations with regard to the attitude of the Jews towards the Arabs, which takes first place. It is clear that the decision will be largely determined by the point whether it can be regarded as the unanimous decision of all Jewry. It is therefore important, very important, that the meeting of the Administrative Committee should have the sympathy also of those Jews who, for whatever reasons, have hitherto not participated in the Jewish Agency.
“Of the leaders of the Arab opponents to the Jews, the most prominent one, by his declaration that he regards the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” as authentic, and a second one, by his contention that the Palestinian Arabs are the true descendants of the ancient Hebrews while the present-day Jews are only the progeny of the Russian Chazars, have clearly shown their views and their methods of combat. They have certainly gained for us in that way many new adherents for the Jewish Agency.
“If there are still many influential and good Jews standing aside because of their deeply-rooted antagonism to Zionism, the main reason is that there are still misunderstandings which have not been cleared up with regard to the possibility and the extent of collaboration between non-Zionists and Zionists in the Palestine upbuilding work and concerning the form and activity of the enlarged Jewish Agency.
“Palestine has always continued to be to the Jews the land of promise. A return of Jews to Palestine in our day is the fulfillment of ancient Jewish hopes and yearning. The description of the Jewish colonization work as the establishment of a Jewish National Home in the otherwise excellent Balfour Declaration, which as the basis of the Palestine Mandate does not admit of alteration without grave dangers, is from the non-Zionist view not a happy one and may lead to misinterpretations. But unfortunate words should not be a reason for damaging good work. No non-Zionists and very few Zionists would seek to establish the National Home in the form of a Jewish State, even if such an enterprise were not to encounter insurmountable difficulties.
“On the other hand, it is indisputable that very many Zionists, the majority of them, seek to develop the National Home, if not as a political center, then as a cultural center of the Jewish people. The Zionist leaders will therefore consider the selection of settlers and their work in the land primarily from the point of view of imparting to the colonization work a high spiritual level and of maintaining it so. That is how the colonization work in Palestine distinguishes itself from all other colonization.
“How do we non-Zionists stand in this regard? We reject the conception of a Jewish people, in so far as it is bound up with any national or political ideas, as we reject also the inference which follows, that Palestine should be a National Home for other Jews than for those living there. As to how far the spirituality of Palestine will influence our culture and the culture of our environment and of the whole world, depends entirely upon achievements. We cannot, in any case, consider Palestine the cultural center. We retain our duty to continue to develop our cultural wealth, Jewish and non-Jewish, as if Palestine did not exist. It does not appear desirable to us, nor do we regard it as possible, that 15 million Jews should consider themselves, as little in the cultural respect as in the political, as belonging to a national homeland which has room for perhaps half a million Jews.
“On the other hand, we recognize what an immense value it will have
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
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.
