“Near East and India,” a magazine reported to be close to the British Colonial Office, and lately inclined to find all possible excuses for the Arabs, often doing this at the cost of running down Zionism, in an editorial in the current issue emphasizes “the considerable effect” of the Arab boycott, and even goes by intimating and indirectly suggesting that the Arabs should continue the boycott at least until the Inquiry Commission has reported, thus showing that they “have accomplished something that many observers thought was impossible.”
In a second editorial, “Near East and India,” protects the Arab delegation coming to London against the recent charges by Sir Martin Conway who drew attention in a letter in the press to the feuds between the Palestine Arabs and suggested the impossibility of a correct representation of Arab opinion by the announced delegation.
The editorial asks whether the words spoken by Jamal Husseini against Mayor Nashishibi are worse than those of Zionists against non-Zionists on the Jewish Agency. “Neither the Arabs nor the Jews succeed in establishing a completely united front.”
The bad taste of this editorial, which compares the centuries-old blood feuds between Arab families which have often taken on the character of mass murders and wars with the differences in opinion between Zionists and non-Zionists, has caused resentment and disappointment in Zionist circles here with a paper that they considered fair and impartial, if not pro-Zionist.
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.
