Jabotinsky Denies Revisionist Demands Cause for Outbreak of Arabs

Exception to statements in the English press to the effect that the demands of the Zionists Revisionists are in part responsible for the Arab outbreaks in Palestine is taken by Vladimir Jabotinsky, head of the Zionist Revisionst Party, in a letter addressed to the London “Times” in which he also states the Revisionist demands for carrying out the Mandate. The letter declares:

“In connection with the Palestine disorders the English press including the ‘Times’ has been mentioning the Revisionists, including myself, as the exponents of Zionist extremists. The ‘Times’ published a Jerusalem despatch to the effect that ‘the present outbreak is also due to the open demands of Jabotinsky and the Revisionists for more than the Mandate promised.’ It is unjust and easy to say that an outbreak of such a character has been due or is also due to that particular expression of Jewish will or thought.

“The paper ‘Near East and India’ sees provocation to the Arabs in the solemnities which attended the enlargement of the Jewish Agency at Zurich. Another paper mentions the Dead Sea concession as provocative. Scores of papers say the Jews provoked the Arabs claiming the right to pray at the Wailing Wall. Jewish immigration is alleged to have provoked the riots in Jaffa in 1921.

“At this speed and this sweep the fact that Jews breathe in Palestine may soon be classed as a provocation. I refuse to discuss this point seriously. My opinion is that the chief provocation consisted in the absence of visible government forces fit to cope with any serious riot.

“At three consecutive Zionist Congresses in 1925, 1927, 1929, the Revisionist spokesmen denounced the policy of the Administration as bound to lead to disaster and bloodshed. At the same time the Revisionists always emphasized confidence in the British nation as a whole. Many leading Revisionists adhere to the Wedgewood idea of Palestine’s future as a British Dominion, and only a week ago, in fact, our Executive reconfirmed its trust in the British nation’s sense of justice and farsighted statesmanship.

“Yet I did not intend to devote this letter either to recriminations against local bureaucracy and the defects of which have now become evident to all or to reassertions of belief in England which are now for England to corroborate or discourage by deeds. It is more essential for me to state what Revisionism considers as ways and means to insure carrying out the Mandate.

“It is untrue to say that Revisionism demands more than the Mandate promised. The Mandate promised the Jewish people a Home. To any person, home is a place where he can go to live if he feels homeless abroad. It we cannot be accommodated immediately because the country is economically undeveloped, the promise to build a home implies the obligation to let us and help us develop in order to accommodate us later. All the Revisionist demands are nothing more than the logical implication of this principle. The Mandate means a large scale immigration of Jews for a sufficient period to build up a Jewish country. Our main point is that large scale immigration is the State’s business not private. Its success depends on the administration more than on the quality of the settlers, or their capital.

“Revisionism demands radical reform of the present system of government; establishment of a Palestine colonization regime which is a statement of the policy of the imperial government; making the chief task of the Administration to work in co-operation with Zionist Jewry; the opening of the Transjordan to Jewish colonization; making the waste lands under state control as land reserve; customs tariffs, etc. Also the inclusion of Palestine in any scheme of imperial co-operation; the protection of the Jewish settlements by Jewish military and Jewish constabulary, governmentally controlled; no parliamentary institution until the Jews and the Arabs jointly demand its introduction. These in our opinion are

(Continued on Page 4)

(Continued from Page 3) the fundamental features of a colonization regime.

“The demands arising out of the recent outbreaks, such as the restoration of the destroyed property, etc., are now self evident.

“Whether this is extreme Zionism let others judge. It seems to me that this is an honest attempt to specify the inevitable implications of the Zionist policy provided the British and the Jews mean this policy to be taken earnestly and leading not to a new ghetto but to a homeland where the Jews, after a generation, may be able to carry on, on their own.”