Newspaper Page Text
Page 5
The Southern Israelite ___
Should IVeizmann Resign?
o
A Fearless Editor Speaks on the Zionist Situation
By HENRY MONTOR
HE MacDonald Letter of Interpretation of Lord
fO Passfield's White Paper still is in the spotlight.
Discussion of whether or not Weizmann should
have expressed himself favorably on the receipt of this
important political document runs rife in Jewish circles.
It is no secret that the American Zionist leadership is
divided on this question and is not agreed on whether
Doctor Weizmann s latest political move is to be
acclaimed or deprecated. From this exclusive interview
with one of the dominant figures of American Zionism
you will learn much of the present quandary — or, at
least, of one side of it. Mr. Fishman, editor of the Jewish
Morning Journal of New York, being a severe critic of
the present administration of the Zionist Organization
of America.—The EDITOR.
“ Weizmann should resign as a mat
ter of practical politics, llis main
ambition in the past year and a half
lias been to restore amity between
Britain and us. He has accomplished
that. Let him step aside. He cannot
possibly continue at this time, when
every effort, covert and overt, is ex
erted to undermine his authority. This
continuous barrage of attacks has
made it impossible for him to carry
on. His withdrawel would, of course,
be a tremendous loss — but it may
make some of his opponents realize
how essential he is to the movement.
I believe that Weizmann has no in
tention of obtruding himself on the
situation any further. That is why
he is going to Palestine and then
coming to the United States. Now
that a spirit of friendliness is re
stored he feels it unnecessary for
him to continue for the second part
ot the negotiations between the Jew-
i'h Agency and the British Govern
ment. Of course he will be there, to
-i'e his advice from the outside, so
to say. But he will let the others,
"ho have vaunted their political sa
gacity, carry on for a while. 1 have
no hesitancy in saying, however, that
"e shall very shortly have to recall
eizniann, even though he should not
be elected President at the Congress
this year.”
Thus Jacob Fishman answered my
luestion: “Should Weizmann resign
cause of the onslaught of criticism
‘de upon him by various factions
the Zionist movement 1”
I he public knows where he stands
Zionist questions. On occasions his
Vs are unpopular, but Time almost
ays corroborates their accuracy.
iere is, at present, a clash of views
American Zionism in regard to the
acDonald Letter explaining the
Passfield White Paper. On the one
side are ranged the intransigennts,
who in public life are known as mem
bers of the Zionist Organization. But
actually they are devotees of the Re
visionist faith. With these Fishman
has no patience, and he says so with
such stinging brilliance that collars
begin to wilt and eyes to glitter.
Was Weizmann justified in issuing
a statement upon receipt of the Pre
mier’s lengthy epistle? The Zionist
leader’s statement said that it offered
“a basis for cooperation”, and a
number of American Zionists, accord
ing to reports in the Yiddish press,
condemned his act as unwarranted
and harmful to Zionist interests.
“It sounds very well to say that
the Zionists should not at this time
express acquiescence to the explana
tion. But MacDonald's letter is not,
by any means, a unilateral document.
It does not represent the unrequested,
undesired opinion of the government.
It is a document whose terms were
arrived at after negotiations with
the Jewish representatives. Everyone
knows that innumerable cables were
exchanged between this country and
London, suggesting changes, elisions,
additions. The mere fact that it was
published indicates a measure of
agreement on the part of the nego
tiators.
“There is no occasion either for
the acceptance or the rejection of the
MacDonald Letter. To try to force
the issue into that character is to
indulge in chicanery. What the Mac
Donald document has done is to re
store amicable relations between the
Jews and the British Government. For
that achievement Weizmann deserves
unstinted credit. He succeeded in
clearing up the bitterness of relation
ship. It restores us to the status quo
ante and makes it possible to deal
with friendliness and good-will with
people with whom we must have daily
contacts. The continuation of the
state of suspicion and hostility was
only undermining our own best in
terests.
“As Zionists we can say that we
are satisfied with the tone of the
document and are content to use it
as a basis for further discussion, for
the formulation of the actual details
of cooperation. Nothing more is in
volved.”
Yet Fishman, who believes that
Weizmann has scored a great political
victory in obtaining the MacDonald
Letter to mark the progress of the
first part of the negotiations, is just
as unequivocal in expressing his opin
ion that Weizmann should step down
from his leadership. The blunt ed
itor, who is a friend of Weizmann’s,
churns with wrath when brought to
the subject of hostility to Weizmann
from certain quarters.
“The question of Weizmann’s con
tinuation in leadership is but a sym
bol of the age-old struggle between
moderation in Jewish politics as
against extremism. Until the Twen
tieth Century, shtadlonuth was the
only instrument for the bolstering of
the Jewish position. A resume of the
past doesn’t indicate that that
method of approach was so bad. But
in recent years, particularly as the
result of the grant of a charter, so
to speak, for the Jewish National
Home, some Zionists have begun to
feel that shtadlonuth should be en
tirely abolished. The demand is
partly right, partly wrong. But it
is clear to every unprejudiced ob
server that nothing has occurred to
our national status yet that would
enable us to follow the aggressive,
militant tactics of an Italy. The
twelve years that Ilerzl led the move
ment were a continuous adventure in
shtadlonullt. The situation which con
fronted him still obtains in many re
spects. Our relations are only with a
disembodied symbol—the League of
Nations. We must maintain contacts
with a great many of the fifty-two
nations comprising the league, includ
ing Great Britain. And what if we
should break off relations with these
(Continued on Page 13)
They Exchanged Letters
DR. CHAIM WEIZMANN
President of Jewish Agency
J. RAMSAY MacDONALD
Premier of Great Britain
Victory or Defeat?
American and European Jewry are still speculating on the effect which the latest
statement of the British Government on its Palestine policy will have on the
future of Palestine and Zionism. Jewish Agency leaders in this country are
satisfied that the MacDonald letter and the Weizmann answer provide the basis
for a renewal of extensive Jewish economic activities in Palestine. I he Zionist-
Revisionists and individual members of the American Zionist Organization insist
that the ill effects of the Passfield White Paper have not been removed by this
exchange of letters which closes the first part of the negotiations between Jewish
and British spokesmen. Will the MacDonald letter be recorded in the annals
of Zionism as a defeat or a victory for Weizmann? The future will tell.