(By Our Palestine Correspondent)
Caution with regard to the French proposal for extending Zionist colonization to Syria is urged by the “Davar,” Palestine Hebrew labor daily, in its issue of July 2.
“The fact that a great interest in Zionism has suddenly arisen in France is somewhat puzzling. One might believe that this or that detail of Palestine work may attract the sympathy of individual idealistic and intellectual Frenchmen, but it is difficult to believe that the ideal of Jewish renaissance has suddenly charmed all French statesmen,” the paper observes.
“However, although we welcome any support from a great power, we think that the specific conditions under which our political work must be carried on command us to adopt a cautious attitude toward such sudden expressions of sympathy. Is it not possible that these sympathies flow from a source which would make common action difficult for us and perhaps entirely impossible? It cannot be just an accident that this change of attitude toward Zionism on the part of France coincides with the period of great confusion and entanglement in the situation of the mandatory power in Syria.
“Matters in the Riff seem to have been arranged satisfactorily, although there are many cares left. However, the situation in Syria does not show any earnest indication of forthcoming relief. The real name for the events in Syria is: continuous rebellion and bloodshed. In the light of this reality, the speech of the French High Commissioner, de Jouvenel, at the Zionist meeting in Paris assumes a different sound. In his address in Paris de Jouvenel said: ‘When I went to Syria I saw Zionism as nothing more than a religious aspiration toward a distant fatherland. However, when I went to Palestine I saw a totally different picture. I saw a people ploughing its land, which had been neglected; I saw a people rising to new life and revitalizing its land with joy and happiness. I then envied Great Britain, the administrator of this land. I know of the Arab opposition, but I also saw around the Jewish colonies a complete understanding between the Jew and the Arab. The community of work made the relations amicable. It is for this reason that I believe in Zionism.’
“In this address there was a sort of invitation to the Jews to begin constructive work in Syria. There are already, perhaps, Zionist circles who dream of extending our work to this neighboring country.
“Is there not apparent in these sympathies a will to employ Jewish power as a means to ends which have no direct connection with Zionist hopes? If this is so, what do these sympathies give us?
“Zionism stands at the beginning of its work in Palestine. It has to do almost everything yet. We wish that it will accomplish in a comparatively short period the task it faces here, overcrowding the internal and external difficulties in Palestine proper. Even the extension of the colonization work to the other part of Palestine-across the Jordan-is not yet the command of the hour, if measured by our means and possibilities. If the obstacles in our own country are yet many and great, they will be much greater in Syria.
“There is a fundamental difference between the colonial systems of England, with whom we are connected in the realization of Zionism, and France. There is a fundamental difference between Palestine and Syria in respect to the Jewish problem. We view Palestine as our fatherland, we are connected with it by unbreakable ties and our entire political work is in essence directed to implanting this consciousness in the minds of our neighbors and in the minds of the political world at large. We do not feel that we have the same right with regard to Syria. This does not mean that Syria is closed to us forever. There is a right of fatherland and there is a right of work. When the two parts of Palestine, on both banks of the Jordan, will in reality be filled by Jewish work, then the problem of colonization in the Near East outside of Palestine may also be placed in the agenda. However, the solution to this problem will be found only then, when we Jews will be a determining factor in Palestine. Then, this solution will be reached, not through one sided negotiations with a power which is foreign to Syria and not just at a time when this foreign power finds itself in a sharp conflict, nay, more than that, in open warfare with the inhabitants of the land.
“Therefore, our opinion is: The Zionist movement welcomes every indication of friendship on the part of anybody, particularly on the part of such a great nation as France. The Zionist movement is confident that this friendship originates, in certain circles, from a pure sentiment and complete understanding. At the same time, the Zionist movement has no reason to enter into any political ties with the present authorities in Syria. It has to guard itself against anything which might throw on it a shadow of suspicion that it is entering into such connections.”
The first annual golf tournament of the Business Men’s Council of the Federation for the Support of Jewish Philanthropic Societies, was held Wednesday at the Fenimore Country Club, White Plains, N. Y.
Low gross scores were turned in by Ira Younker and Ralph E. Samuels, both of whom made 92. The low guest scores were made by E. A. Brown with 87 and H. H. Hirshfield with 90.
A foursome, the winnings of which were donated to the federation, was won by Joe Leblang and Arthur Samuels, who defeated Arthur Lehman and Samuel Lamport.
M. H. Rothschild, with 92, won the Real Estate Club prize for low gross, while the Real Estate Club team prize was won by the team of Rothschild, Julian Kovacs, Henry L. Cooper and David Picker.
Among the members of the Business Men’s Council who played were Solomon Lowenstein, Judge Otto A. Rosalsky, Henry F. Samstag, Fred M. Stein, I. Edwin Goldwasser, Benjamin Levenson, Benjamin Winter and Samuel Lamport.
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.
