Jabotinsky Quits Executive and Zionist Organization

Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of the Jewish Legion and for three years member of the Executive Committee of Zionist Organization, resigned from the leadership as well as membership of the Organization at the last session of the meeting of the Greater Actions Committee Thursday.

Mr. Jabotinsky communicated has resignation to a special committee before which he was to explain the nature of the negotiations he had with agents of Petlura, the Ukrainian insurrectionary. The committee is said to have passed an adverse vote on his connection with the Petlura-Slavinsky affair. Simultaneously, a letter from Jabotinsky was read by Deputy Gruenbaun of Warsaw, who presided, in which he declared that the Executive Committee, having decided in favor of identical action on the part of all members, he felt it was best for him to resign and reserve for himself freedom of action and criticism of the Zionist leaders’ policies.

Mr. Jabotinsky’s resignation has not come as a surprise to circles acquainted with the internal events of the Zionist Organization. There has been a serious conflict between Dr. Weizmann and Mr. Jabotinsky ever since the former accepted, on behalf of the Zionist Organization, Winston Churchill’s interpretation of the Balfour Declaration, as set forth in the white Paper of June 1920.

Jabotinsky has been demanding a free hand in the political negotiations, without being bound in each case by the majority vote of the Executive. Particularly, Jabotinsky desired changes in the Palestine Administration, a firmer attitude towards the British Government and different dealings with the Arab leaders. Above all, he favored that the Zionist leaders should put forth the greatest effort to secure the establishment of a Jewish Legion as part of the Palestine Garrison. Dr. Weizmann did not support heartily Mr. Jabotinsky in any of these demands.

While friends and opponents ###ke consider that it had become impossible for Jabotinsky to remain on the Executive, they regard it as a grave mistake on his part to have left the Organization entirely. It is maintained that by withdrawing from membership in the Zionist Organization he vitiated whatever changes he might have had for constructive criticism, had he remained a soldier in the Zionist ranks.