Palestine – Land of Anti-Imperialist Struggle
By PAUL NOVICK
The Communist, April, 1936
I
Palestine is situated on the Suez Canal, along the “lifeline of the British] Empire”. It is the only section of Arabistan (outside of Syria held by the French) facing the Mediterranean Sea. It is situated along the land route to India. It possesses the harbor of Haifa where the pipeline for Mossul oil, in Iraq (Mesopotamia), terminates. In short, Palestine is a most valuable strategic position. For years German, French, Italian and tsarist imperialism were maneuvering for the possession of this position, operating with “religion”, “traditions”, “culture”, etc. The tiny country of Palestine (one-fifth the size of New York State) is dotted with churches, missions, convents, monaste follows:
“His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by the Jews in any other country.”
The British government promised to turn Palestine into a Jewish national home regardless of its Arab majority, at the same time promising to safeguard the civil rights of this very majority, implying that the Arabs be given some sort of self-government. (At present, there are in Palestine over 900,000 Mohammedan Arabs, over 100,000 Christians, some of them Arabs, and 375,000 Jews.) Consequently, when Zionists object to a Legislative Council for Palestine, the British government points to the latter part of the Declaration. When Arabs object to an appointed Legislative Council, basing their claims on article 22 of the League of Nations mandate, which provides that communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire are to be recognized “provisionally” as independent nations, the British government, holding the League of Nations “mandate” over Palestine, points to the first part of the declaration. When Zionists state that because of this first part Palestine is to become “as Jewish as England is English” (statement by the president of the World Zionist organization, Dr. Ch. Weitzman), the British government turns around and declares that it “would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a home should be founded in Palestine” (Churchill’s White Paper, June, 1922, p. 18).
Ever since 1917 the tricky Balfour Declaration has been used in the dual game the British Colonial Office has been playing between the Arabs and the Zionists. Zionism represents a force necessary for Great Britain to counteract the aspirations of the Arab majority for independence. It is an instrument to prevent the coming into being of an independent Arabistan, including Syria, which would represent a force powerful enough to challenge British rule in the Near East. Great Britain, therefore, is fanning the flames of religious and tribal hatred throughout the peninsula. It keeps the territory split into a dozen “kingdoms” (the upkeep for most of the “kings” being supplied by the Colonial Office in London), while on the strategically most valuable stretch of land facing the inflammable waters of the Mediterranean Sea, British imperialism is using Zionism. It quite openly looks upon the Zionist Halutzim (pioneers) as an armed force for the imperial cause. Because it is now, in addition, engaged in a life-and-death struggle with Italian imperialism, Britain needs this force more than ever.
Mr. Augur, well informed authority on British imperialist policy, stated the case of the Colonial Office in London quite bluntly in a correspondence in The New York Times of January 19, 1936:
“Tension between Great Britain and Italy in the Mediterranean has produced results which will endure. Among these will be the enhanced importance of Palestine in the structure of the British Empire – an importance which may equal that of any one of the great dominions.
“...The air force, even more than the navy, needs solidly established bases. The safety of an air base depends upon its being situated in territory that is completely dominated and that contains a friendly population. These conditions cannot be found in Egypt. In that part of the world they exist only in Palestine.
“Britain governs the country and the Jewish population represents an element which can supply a guarantee of safety for the establishments of the air force. In the sea of the native population of Arabia the Palestinian Jews stand isolated, an outpost of Europe, and, if rightly handled, an element of strength for the empire.
“...Already the possibility is seen that the Jewish population will provide the physical force sufficient not only for its own protection but also for the defense of the Palestinian citadel against any foreseeable attack from outside. Military experts say a Jewish militia of 50,000 men may be a reality tomorrow.” (Emphasis mine – P.N.)
From the words of Mr. Augur it is quite clear that British imperialism is not asleep in Palestine if “a Jewish militia of 50,000 men may be a reality tomorrow”. Naturally, this would not have been possible without the active assistance of Zionist leadership – including the leadership of Labor ‘Zionism, which is the leading force in the world Zionist movement.
II
By “using” imperialism, Zionism became a pawn in a bloody imperialist game in which the lives of hundreds of thousands of Jews are at stake while simultaneously acquiring imperialist ambitions of its own.
Since Palestine is a small, poor and relatively settled country, with considerable stretches of swamps, sand dunes, and barren hills,
Zionist leaders have been eyeing Transjordania and other parts of Arabistan as territory for extending the “National Home” so that it would accommodate the millions of Jews necessary for the “Jewish state” they are aspiring to. But such dreams necessitate the status quo of British domination in the Near East. The policy of Zionism therefore became closely tied to the chariot of British imperialism, so that Zionist offices in Poland and other countries have essentially become recruiting stations for the “Jewish militia” Mr. Augur is speaking of, to make Palestine the haven for British bombers....
The real leader of Zionism, the “Socialist” David Ben Gurion, expressed the imperialist aspirations of the Zionist leadership in his speech at the Nineteenth Zionist World Congress held in Lucerne, Switzerland, on August 20-27, 1935. He stated:
“The borders of Palestine do not extend from Dan to Beersheba, but from at least 250 kilometers farther south. The Red Sea has played a great part in Jewish history. During Solomon’s time the first effort to create a Jewish fleet was made, but not with a Jewish personnel. We must not let ourselves be dominated by present-day conditions, but must hold to the historic line. Our economic structure, husbandry as well as industry, which is principally based on the home market in Erez Israel [the Land of Israel] must seek ä connection with the great hinterland of Palestine, with Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Persia, perhaps even with India. We must be independent of the artificial route of the Suez Canal. We must find our own way toward all the Asiatic countries.” (Kongresszeitung, official organ of the Zionist Congress, No. 3, p. 4.)
The honorary chairman of the Zionist organization of the United States, Mr. Louis Lipsky, member of the Zionist Actions Committee, amplified Mr. Ben Gurion’s statement upon his return from the Lucerne Congress. In an interview published in the Jewish Morning Journal of October 3, 1935, Lipsky stated:
“Jabotinsky boasts that he wants a bigger Erez Israel. He wants an Erez Israel on both sides of the Jordan. But the labor party (Histadruth) through its wonderful leader, Ben Gurion, made it clear that Transjordania is not sufficient, we must also have the neighboring countries for millions of Jews. But whereas Jabotinsky loves to operate with exclamations the labor party wants to secure it all through actual upbuilding.”
Vladimir Jabotinsky is the leader of the brown-shirted Revisionists, the Jewish fascists, brought up inside the Zionist movement and until recently part of it. For years he has been advocating that Transjordania be annexed to Palestine as part of a “bigger Erez Israel”. Now, according to Mr. Ben Gurion (as well as Mr. Lipsky), Zionist aspirations surpass those of the Revisionist fascists in their imperialist scope. But the prerequisite for such aspirations is, again, the continuance of British ride throughout the Near East, including
Egypt. It is because of this that Mr. Ben Gurion stated at the Congress that any opinion not to cooperate with the British government “is an act of treachery against the aspirations and the redemption of the Jewish people.” (Kongresszeitung, No. 5, p. 9.)
Lord Melchett, head of the powerful British chemical trust, who has heavily invested in the Palestine potash concession (Dead Sea) and who is therefore the proper person to head the Zionist British Agency in Great Britain, was forced in these turbulent days to use still more open language. In a letter to the Manchester Guardian he advocated the outright annexation of Palestine for the reason that the “imperial solution of the Palestine problem would provide th>e British Empire with a healthy and intelligent population in the Near East, always ready in the case of necessity to take up arms in an imperial cause”. Lord Melchett added that what Singapore is to the British Empire in the Far East, Palestine could and should become in the Near East.
Dr. J. L. Magnes, head of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who in a letter to the Manchester Guardian took issue with Lord Melchett, remarked: “This poses the question very neatly.”[*] The real question, however, is: How are the Arabs to consider the utterances of the Ben Gurions and the Melchetts who have the effrontery to speak in the name of the Jewish people?
It is because Zionism has become an organic part of British imperialism in the Near East that it is rightfully looked upon by the Arab masses as the agency of British imperialism. It is because Zionists who count but several hundred thousand adherents among the Jews throughout the world have put themselves up as the representatives of the Jewish people that the Arabs are misled to believe that all Jews are Zionists and agents of British imperialism. That is why it is so easy for the provocateurs of British imperialism in cooperation with its Arab servants from among the feudalists and the clergy to use the Jews as the scapegoat whenever the struggle for Arab independence rises high.
British imperialism finds itself in a precarious position in the countries of the Near East. In Egypt, to the south of Palestine, the Arabs have forced Great Britain to restore to the country the constitution of 1923. This, of course, is merely a beginning of the struggle for the independence of Egypt. In Syria, to the north of Palestine, the Arabs have forced French imperialism, through general strikes and bloody combat, to relinquish some of its prerogatives. It is clear that the Arabs in Palestine (which is considered Southern Syria) must be filled with unrest and that the general strikes taking place there are part of the anti-imperialist struggle of the over ten million Arabs of Arabistan. No matter what Zionist leaders may be saying, British imperialism certainly recognizes the character of this struggle. The results in Egypt and Syria are striking fear into the Colonial Office in London. The maneuvers of Italian imperialism among the Arabs, the conquest of Ethiopia, make British imperialism increasingly fearful of its hold in the Near East and particularly in Palestine. It is therefore again maneuvering with promises to create a federation of Arab states (promising, of course, Palestine as part of this federation). It is at the same time fomenting race struggles in Palestine in order to prove that neither the Arabs nor the Jews can hold the country and that British force must be maintained for the sake of “peace and order”.
The policy of building a state with the aid of imperialist force led the Zionist leadership to introduce into Palestine racial aggression reminiscent of similar aggression in a certain country in Central Europe.
There is the policy of displacing the Arab tenant farmer after the land is bought from the Effendi (landlord). A variety of denials and innumerable excuses are forwarded by Zionists when this subject is mentioned. But, by a fateful coincidence there appeared on April 14 (two days before the recent outbreaks) an article in the New York pro-Zionist organ of the Socialist Party Old Guard, the Jewish Daily Forward, which, in a most shocking manner, substantiated the accusation against the Zionist leadership. This paper which was most conspicuous (of course!) in the recent Hearstian crusade against the Communists because of what happened in Palestine, printed on that date an article by one of its most prominent contributors abroad, Dr. Max Weinreich (head of the Wilno, Poland, Jewish Scientific Institute) dealing with Arab-Jewish relations. Dr. Weinreich gives the contents of a conversation in Tel Aviv (Palestine), which he visited recently. A leader of Labor Zionism complained that his children are brought up in the Zionist schools with a hatred towards Arabs. Dr. Weinreich continues:
“One of those who conversed with me was a tall young man with burning eyes. He had been a shomer (watchman, guard) for many years. During long years, night in and night out, the gun was his closest friend. He had lived among the Arabs, he spoke their language, he knew them to a nicety. He does not believe that it is possible to have peaceful relations with them.
“ ‘Last week,’ he told me, ‘we had to make sure of a piece of Jewish land. Do you understand what this means? Several years ago a large piece of land not far from Haifa was bought from an Arabian Effendi (noble landlord). The Effendi did not work on the land himself. Poor Arab tenants sat on that land. First they had paid rent to the Effendi, then they began to pay rent to the new owners, the Jews. For them nothing had changed. But now came the moment when, according to the laws of Palestine, the new owner had actually to take over the land, else he would lose his property right. For this reason the tenants had to be driven off.
“ ‘I and a comrade of mine,’ the shomer told me, ‘stood in a hidden place with guns trained, waiting to intervene in case resistance was offered. But there was no resistance. They moved off like sheep, and they remained lying with their poor belongings in the open field, beyond the purchased piece of land. Fortunately, we did not have to make use of our guns. But what are the feelings of the Arabs when they leave this land? The Effendi is dissatisfied because he sold his land eight years ago. Had he kept it until this year he would have received for the land quite a different price. But the tenants did not get anything from the Effendi at that time and now they remain stripped, naked, although their feeling (which is the feeling of all peasants in all countries) tells them that the land on which they lived was their own.’ ” (My emphasis – P.N.)
Dr. Weinreich touched upon a bleeding wound of Palestine – the displacement of Arab tenant farmers through the aggressive policy of Zionist leaders. This, in a country where the agrarian question is on the order of the day! And there is another bleeding wound – the policy of “conquering labor” (which goes hand in hand with the policy of “conquering the soil”).
The Left Poale Zion writer, M. Erem, takes issue with the leaders of Labor Zionism (or of the Histadruth, the Palestine Hebrew trade unions) on their slogan: “Buy Jewish.” He states:
“If it (the slogan) is to serve mere purposes of declamation, then we must consider it as the babblings of provocateurs (even if its authors do not intend that) since it aggravates the already tense atmosphere of national hatred in Palestine, a hatred which may wreak its initial vengeance on the Jewish community....
“Only the blind and naive can make themselves believe that the Arab market will not react, sooner or later, against this ‘noble* slogan. The danger appears ever greater because this reaction will not limit itself to the economic field, but will most definitely have its repercussions in the political alignments in the country. What will happen then? It is not difficult to foresee. Our very existence is charged with explosives, which need but a spark to ignite.” (Proletarische Gedank, Nov. 15-Dec. 1, 1935.)
The testimony of such pro-Zionist writers will suffice to illustrate the criminal racial policies of Zionist leadership in Palestine. As a result, the air is charged with race hatred. Jewish “national” manufacturing establishments are picketed by leaders of Labor Zionism themselves (Katzenelnson, Rubashov, according to the statement of the aforementioned organ of the Left Poale Zion) to bring about the discharge of Arab workers employed there. Unions are maintained along racial lines, the leadership of the Histadruth fearing that the acceptance of Arab workers as members would “legalize” Arab labor in establishments of “national” Jewish capital. The picketing, the slogan “Buy Jewish”, and the displacement of Arab peasants, lead to bloody racial struggles daily. All of which is basically the result of an adventurous policy, of a colonization conducted in a relatively settled colonial country where the peasants are faced with a struggle against feudalism, a struggle for land.
Zionist leadership must adhere to its criminal policies if it is to go on with the adventure of establishing a “Jewish state”. Zionism is forced to oppose, as it does, any attempt on the part of Great Britain to placate the Arabs with some sort, however crippled, of self-government for Palestine. All factions of Zionism without exception came out against any parliament whatever for Palestine (until such time when the Arab population finds itself in a minority). Any attempt of Great Britain to placate the Arab masses by some sort of legislation to protect in the slightest the tenant farmer is met with violent opposition by the Zionist leadership. The following excerpt from the official report submitted by the Zionist Executive Committee to the Sixteenth World Zionist Congress held in Zurich in 1929 openly exposes the Zionist leadership as an enemy of the tenant farmer. It reads (English edition, p. 15):
“A most important agricultural enactment, and one which is bound to affect the whole policy of Zionist agricultural colonization, is the law promulgated in 1928 for the protection of tenants in the event of the land cultivated by them being sold by the landowner. The Zionist Executive submitted certain observations with regard to this law, and these received due attention from the government.” (My emphasis – P.N.)
An open official admission that a law protecting the tenants is “bound to affect the whole policy of Zionist agricultural colonization”! Is any further proof necessary to condemn the Zionist policy towards the peasants? Is it, then, any wonder that the Palestinian air, thickly charged as it is with explosives as a result both of British imperialist policies and policies of Zionism, did explode?
The racial activities of the Zionist leadership played into the hands of Arab reactionaries, feudalists, of Arab servants of British imperialism. They played into the hands of the Revisionists and of the chauvinist ruffians Tel Aviv (all-Jewish city of Palestine) is now openly complaining about. They played into the hands of Nazism, which is attempting to fish in troubled water, inciting Arabs against Jews, notwithstanding the fact that Zionist leadership became the instrument of Nazi export in the Near East.
This brings us to another “glorious” chapter of Zionist policy which (because of limited space) we can touch upon only in passing.
Zionism, because it builds on persecution of Jews in all lands outside of Palestine (since without such persecution as a driving force any considerable emigration into a poor and settled imperialist colony would be unthinkable), in point of fact negotiates and compromises with the persecutors of the Jews. This has become traditional in Zionism. In 1903, immediately after the massacre of Kishinev (at that time, Russia) Dr. Theodore Herzel, father of Political Zionism, went to see the Tsar’s Minister of Interior, Von Plehve, who was guilty of the massacre, to secure his assistance for the cause of Zionism. In 1921, Vladimir Jabotinsky, at that time a spokesman for the World Zionist Executive Committee, concluded a pact with the pogrom leader in the Ukraine, Simeon Petlura. In line with this tradition Zionist leadership in 1933 concluded the infamous Transfer Agreement with Nazi Germany whereby some rich German Jews could transfer part of their wealth to Palestine, in the form of German goods. Simple as this may sound, the Transfer Agreement which in the course of the three years, 1933, ‘34 and ‘35, was made use of by a comparatively insignificant group of rich German Jews (2,640, according to a statement by Berl Locker, leader of Labor Zionism), actually was turned into an instrument to flood Palestine and the entire Near East with Nazi goods; both “transferred” wealth and outright export, thus breaking the anti-Nazi boycott Jews all over the world are conducting. Documents published some time ago (reprinted in the Morning Freiheit, December 17, 1935) show how the Zionist in charge of the Transfer succeeded in obtaining from Berlin the agency for distributing German goods in Egypt, Iraq, and other countries of the Near East, to the detriment of Belgium and similar countries the Jews are trying to enlist in the struggle against Hitler Germany. This (Transfer) phase of Zionist policies is another example showing how the interests of Zionism run counter to the interests of the Jewish people. But it is an irony of fate (and something quite natural) that the Nazis who in Germany are repaying Zionism by allowing it to function organizationally and to issue literature and newspapers, are conducting in Palestine itself anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish agitation in order to win the Arabs for the machinations of Nazi imperialism.
Zionist leadership has played into the hands of Nazi agitators. Primarily, however, it played into the hands of Great Britain at a moment when the latter needed racial blood-letting for its own purposes.
What now?
Eighteen Jews and twelve Arabs were killed during the disturbances in the middle of April. Nearly two hundred were wounded. The majority, or all of them – innocent people, toilers. They were provoked, used as instruments to bolster up British rule. What should be done to prevent such race struggles from recurring? There were race struggles in 1920, 1921, 1929, and now again. What is to be done to do away with such struggles?
These are the questions to be answered, now.
Great Britain wants to go on as it has since 1917, playing Arab against Jew. The Zionist leaders quite openly admit they will go on supporting British imperialism and will continue their dangerous policies. The Zionist organization of the U.S.A. has featured most prominently on its official page in The Day of May 8 the speech delivered by Lord Tweedsmuir, governor-general of Canada, at the opening of the United Zion Appeal in Montreal. The governor-general referred to the Balfour Declaration and to the “honorable obligations of the English people” to establish the Jewish National Home. Immediately, however, he got down from these lofty heights to Realpolitik.
“Palestine,” he stated, “holds the key to the strategical position on the great route between the East and West. The war in Ethiopia has caused most of us to reflect upon the safeguarding of that highroad. To have a strong and contented Palestine will be, in the future, of incalculable value to the British Empire. From this point of view Zionism has never been more important than at this moment to Great Britain.”
Zionist leadership is obviously in full agreement with His Majesty’s representative, the governor-general. A cable by the Zionist propaganda agency, Palcor, stated on May 11 that David Ben Gurion, in a speech delivered in Tel Aviv, had on that day declared: “The Jewish people are strongly in favor of working with the government.” Zionist leadership has the effrontery to speak in the name of the Jewish people, promising cooperation with British imperialism. For Palestine it spells more than racial struggles. For the Jews who are brought over by Zionism from Poland, Rumania, and Germany with the promise of a homey refuge, safety, it means living on a volcano, becoming cannon fodder for British imperial interests. Because reckless Zionist leaders like Ben Gurion continue to speak in their name, the danger becomes ever greater.
Both Jewish and Arab toilers are against a policy of racial struggles and bloodshed. For centuries they have lived in peace. They belong to the same (Semitic) race and have common interests as toilers which dictate a struggle against imperialism and its Zionist and Arab servants. It, therefore, becomes clear that at the present juncture, the Communist Party of Palestine is called upon to play a • leading role in uniting the toilers of both nationalities on a program of national and social liberation.
What is the line of the Communist Party of Palestine? Basically, it cannot be any different in Palestine than it is in other countries, particularly colonial. Everywhere it works for the unity of all toilers in a struggle against all oppressors. Because Palestine represents a colonial country fighting for independence, the Communists are, and must be, active in building a people’s anti-imperialist front in the struggle for national liberation, which is a revolutionary struggle, even though the majority of the elements participating in such front are not (and cannot be in a colonial country) predominantly proletarian. It is a struggle against imperialism.
The policy of the Communist Party of Palestine was lucidly stated in the speech of the Palestinian delegate, Comrade Hadyar, at the Seventh World Congress in Moscow last August. He declared:
“The Arab masses are filled with a burning hatred towards the Arab capitalists, feudalists, towards the Zionist bourgeoisie, who has taken upon itself the gendarme role of imperialist oppression. The struggle against the Zionist bourgeoisie is something which can be directly understood by almost all the oppressed social strata of the Arab people. This struggle is taking place daily, and is basically an anti-imperialist struggle. By supporting this struggle we must lead, extend and direct it along the proper channels – towards the struggle against the main enemy, against imperialism.
“We hate the Jewish Zionist bourgeoisie, but we extend a fraternal hand to the Jewish toilers for a joint struggle against imperialism, against Zionism, against the bitterest enemies of the Arab and Jewish peoples in Palestine. The Communist Party is building the Arab national people’s front against imperialism and against Zionism. It actively works among the Jewish toiling masses in order to liberate them from the influence of the counter-revolutionary party of the Jewish Zionist capitalists, in order to draw the toiling Jews into the national emancipation struggle of the Arab masses. The Jewish national minority in Palestine is faced with great perspectives when the national emancipation movement under the hegemony of the proletariat will be victorious. Our task is to show and convince the Jewish toilers that their class and national interests are linked up with the victory of the national liberation movement of the Arab masses and the democratic transformation of the social system in Palestine. We must work particularly to form the united front between the Arab and Jewish workers.”
A clear-cut Communist line. The unity of Arab and Jewish toilers for national and social liberation. In executing this correct line, in conditions of illegality, with its leaders thrown into the medieval jails, Palestinian Communists in October, 1935, committed a mistake, issuing a leaflet wherein Zionist policy was identified with Jewish policy, thereby unfortunately creating the impression that the dastardly acts committed by Zionist leadership are the fault of all Jews. This mistake was immediately rectified by another leaflet pointing out that it is not a case of Arabs versus Jews but a case of
Arab and Jewish toilers against British imperialism and its Zionist agents. Enemies of Communism in the U.S.A. seized upon the first leaflet, not because it veered from the correct line of the Communist Party, but in order to cover up the dastardly policy of Zionism, which, hand in glove with British imperialism, provoked the present situation.
The recent Red hysteria in New York, joined in by Hearst, proved that. It was raised in connection with a Communist leaflet issued in Tel Aviv calling upon Jewish and Arab youth to unite in the struggle against British imperialism, Zionist aggression, and against Arab feudalists. The leaflet (fully reprinted in the Daily Worker of May 13) opened its appeal as follows:
“Comrades:
“A revolutionary wave is engulfing the country. This is a link in the chain of the upsurge in all Arabian lands which is striving to smash the yoke of imperialism. For Zionism is reaping what it has sown during years of attacks against the Arabian masses on the land: driving the Arabian fellaheen (peasants) from the land, the conquest of work and land, supporting and cooperating with British imperialism for the suppression of the struggle of the Arabian masses for national liberation. The murder near Tul kerm – the responsibility for which lies only on those who perpetrated the act – was transformed into a source of incitement and murderous attacks against the Arabian inhabitants in general by the Zionist press and in the Zionist youth circles. The cup has overflowed and a revolutionary wave has broken out.”
After reviewing the strike struggles, the demonstrations, and other struggles of the Arab masses for independence, the leaflet appeals to the Arab and Jewish youth to unite. It particularly appeals to the Jewish youth to form a bloc “in the ranks of the Zionists which will serve as a point of support for the Arabian revolutionary movement, as a basis of co-operation between the Arab and the Jewish youth”. The leaflet, which in several places emphasizes that the struggle must be conducted against the Arab feudalists as well, winds up with the following slogans: “Long live the revolt of the Arabian masses! Down with imperialism, Zionism, and Arabian feudalists! Fight against race propaganda and murder! Long live the national and social liberation of the Arab lands!” (My emphasis – P.N.)
The struggle against the Arab feudalists, alongside with the struggle against imperialism and Zionism, links the fight for national liberation with the fight for social demands, the fight of the peasants for land. This social feature of the struggle of the Arab masses is simultaneously a struggle against Zionism as well, since Zionist leadership obtains most of the land bought for colonization purposes from the landlords (up to 90 per cent, according to the statement of the Zionist authority, Dr. Arthur Rupin, made before the Shaw Investigation Committee in 1929), displacing the peasants by throwing a pittance at them or by force of arms, as seen above.
But it was that correct leaflet which hurt Zionist leaders and their newly acquired ally, William Randolph Hearst, more than that incorrect leaflet, since by calling upon Arab and Jewish toilers to unite, the Communist Party strikes at the roots of racialism which is feeding Zionism and is made use of by British imperialism. Zionist leadership does not want such unity!
During the Zionist chauvinist hysteria of October-December, 1935, the Jewish Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the U.S.A. proposed to the various Jewish leaders the following minimum program for ending racial bloodshed in Palestine. This minimum program printed in the Morning Freiheit, December 15, 1935, put forward the following eight points:
1. All workers, regardless of race and nationality, shall be accepted into the unions of the Histadruth.
2. Likewise, all agricultural workers. Arab tenant farmers should be organized together with Jewish tenant farmers in one body.
3. The Zionist leaders must declare that they are for a truly democratic parliament in Palestine which should safeguard the full equality and all rights for the Jewish minority and its national development.
4. Struggle against British imperialism, for a free Palestine.
5. Free immigration under conditions 1 and 2. (At present there is no free immigration, since immigration is a monopoly of the Zionist organization which selects the immigrants along Zionist lines; only the immigration of Jewish capitalists is free.)
6. No land shall be bought without the previous consent of the peasants working the land.
7. The rule of the church (Mohammedan, Christian, Jewish) to be abolished.
8. The shameful transfer-agreement with the Nazi government, which has turned Zionism into an agency for Nazi export for the entire Near East, to be cancelled.
None of the Zionist leaders, or any other Jewish leaders claiming to represent Jewish mass interests, made any answer to this proposal. They did not formulate any program of their own. They have no program other than that which links them with British imperialism and holds them to a policy of racial discrimination, racial unionism, the displacement of Arab tenant farmers, etc. It is the task of the Communist Parties of Palestine, the United States, and other countries where masses of Jews live to combat the dangerous influence of chauvinism and Zionist adventurism, which is harmful to the population of Palestine, as well as to the Jewish people outside of Palestine.
The interests of the Jewish people, as of all persecuted peoples, lie with the forces fighting imperialism, reaction, fascism, race hatred; with the forces forging the united, front and the people’s front. The example of the Soviet Union where the national problem was solved because of the correct Bolshevik, Leninist-Stalinist line: the solution of the Jewish problem there, the complete abolition of anti-Semitism and discrimination, the upbuilding of Jewish culture, national in form and socialist in content, the establishing of five national Jewish districts in the Ukraine and the Crimea, and the building of the Jewish Soviet Autonomy of Biro-Bidjan, are convincing proof for ever wider circles among the Jewish people that the Communist line is the correct line which alone can bring about solidarity among the toilers of all races and nationalities and achieve their national and social liberation. The Jewish question, which must be answered, can only be aggravated by Zionism. Ever wider circles of Jews realize it. Anti-Semitism, discrimination against Jews must be combated by all toilers and all other progressive elements in the countries where Jews live – and will continue to live. Zionism diverts the attention from this struggle, separates Jews from non-Jews, thereby assisting anti-Semitism. The forces of the Jewish masses alone are not sufficient for a successful struggle against anti-Semitism. The fight against Jewish oppression must be the fight of non- Jews as well, just as the fight for Negro liberation must be the fight of all white progressive elements as well.
The anti-imperialist struggle in Palestine is developing. In spite of the tragic racial riots the anti-imperialist character of the Palestinian unrest is clearly visible. The Arabs conduct strikes, refuse to pay taxes. The Palcor news agency was forced to state on May 5 that Arab leaders declare they are not fighting the Jews but that the independence of Palestine is their main object. No doubt, tremendous pressure from below, particularly from the youth movement, is forcing the present Arab leadership to come out in such clear-cut, anti-imperialist manner. This anti-imperialist struggle which is part of a struggle embracing all Arabs, as well as the peoples in most colonial countries throughout the world, must be supported. The united front and the people’s front of all nationalities must be forged. The masses must be on guard against provocation and betrayal. Anyone who stands in the way of the anti-imperialist and agrarian struggle, who sides with imperialism, can expect no consideration in or outside of Palestine.
Zionist followers, most of whom are sincerely looking for a solution to the Jewish problem, burning with a desire to help the Jews who are being persecuted and pogromized in Germany, Poland, Rumania, and other capitalist countries, must realize that the slogan “Back to Palestine” is a reactionary slogan and that the tiny, poor imperialist colony in the Near East will not provide for even an insignificant minority of these Jews without conflicting with the interests of the local population. The cry of “free immigration” on the part of Zionist leaders is a demagogic cry, since nobody demands free immigration into small poor and settled countries. Such a slogan merely diverts from the campaign that countries like the United States, Canada, Argentina, South Africa, etc., should let down the bars for refugees from Germany, for Polish Jews, etc. This campaign which would really bring some relief (as far as this could be attained in capitalist countries) is harmed by the demagogic slogan of Zionist leadership for “free immigration” to – Palestine (of all countries!). Palestine has its own problem which is first and foremost the problem of driving out imperialism, a problem which is world-wide. Progressive elements among Zionist followers must realize they ought to support this anti-imperialist struggle, just as they must support the struggle of the Chinese, Indian, Cuban and other peoples in their fight against imperialism.ries, foundations, and what-not, created by the various imperialist systems. There are German colonies in Palestine; the inhabitants, of course, were not told that Palestine is needed for the proposed Berlin-Baghdad line but that like good Christians they ought to settle in the land of Jesus Christ. The ex-Kaiser made systematic pilgrimages to Palestine – of course, for the sole purpose of visiting the Sepulchre of Christ.... There is a cluster of Greek Orthodox Russian churches on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem established by the tsarist “Mother Church”, as well as a number of Russian monasteries and other religious institutions scattered over Palestine. Naturally, this was done because of the religious fervor of the tsarist court and not because of the struggle of tsarist imperialism for the possession of the Dardanelles....
If one were to believe the promise given to the Arabs in behalf of His Majesty’s government on October 24, 1915, by the high commissioner for Egypt, Sir Hen McMahon, one would think that the military efforts of Great Britain to conquer Palestine were due to its desire to secure independence for the Arabs. If one were to believe the proclamations showered on the Arab population by British airplanes in 1915-17, these efforts were due solely to the desire of the British General Staff to “preserve the edicts of the Holy Moslem religion from being altered” and to “liberate all Arabs”. Since, however, Great Britain needed Palestine for its own imperialistic interests, it so happened that as soon as the legions of General Allenby marched into Jerusalem, London was confronted with the necessity of safeguarding Palestine for the Empire. Hence the cynical and tricky document, the Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, which was heralded by the leadership of Zionism as the Magna Charta of the Jewish people.
The Balfour Declaration, which is at the base of the racial struggles in Palestine, is worth citing. It reads as
The Communist, April, 1936
I
Palestine is situated on the Suez Canal, along the “lifeline of the British] Empire”. It is the only section of Arabistan (outside of Syria held by the French) facing the Mediterranean Sea. It is situated along the land route to India. It possesses the harbor of Haifa where the pipeline for Mossul oil, in Iraq (Mesopotamia), terminates. In short, Palestine is a most valuable strategic position. For years German, French, Italian and tsarist imperialism were maneuvering for the possession of this position, operating with “religion”, “traditions”, “culture”, etc. The tiny country of Palestine (one-fifth the size of New York State) is dotted with churches, missions, convents, monaste follows:
“His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by the Jews in any other country.”
The British government promised to turn Palestine into a Jewish national home regardless of its Arab majority, at the same time promising to safeguard the civil rights of this very majority, implying that the Arabs be given some sort of self-government. (At present, there are in Palestine over 900,000 Mohammedan Arabs, over 100,000 Christians, some of them Arabs, and 375,000 Jews.) Consequently, when Zionists object to a Legislative Council for Palestine, the British government points to the latter part of the Declaration. When Arabs object to an appointed Legislative Council, basing their claims on article 22 of the League of Nations mandate, which provides that communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire are to be recognized “provisionally” as independent nations, the British government, holding the League of Nations “mandate” over Palestine, points to the first part of the declaration. When Zionists state that because of this first part Palestine is to become “as Jewish as England is English” (statement by the president of the World Zionist organization, Dr. Ch. Weitzman), the British government turns around and declares that it “would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a home should be founded in Palestine” (Churchill’s White Paper, June, 1922, p. 18).
Ever since 1917 the tricky Balfour Declaration has been used in the dual game the British Colonial Office has been playing between the Arabs and the Zionists. Zionism represents a force necessary for Great Britain to counteract the aspirations of the Arab majority for independence. It is an instrument to prevent the coming into being of an independent Arabistan, including Syria, which would represent a force powerful enough to challenge British rule in the Near East. Great Britain, therefore, is fanning the flames of religious and tribal hatred throughout the peninsula. It keeps the territory split into a dozen “kingdoms” (the upkeep for most of the “kings” being supplied by the Colonial Office in London), while on the strategically most valuable stretch of land facing the inflammable waters of the Mediterranean Sea, British imperialism is using Zionism. It quite openly looks upon the Zionist Halutzim (pioneers) as an armed force for the imperial cause. Because it is now, in addition, engaged in a life-and-death struggle with Italian imperialism, Britain needs this force more than ever.
Mr. Augur, well informed authority on British imperialist policy, stated the case of the Colonial Office in London quite bluntly in a correspondence in The New York Times of January 19, 1936:
“Tension between Great Britain and Italy in the Mediterranean has produced results which will endure. Among these will be the enhanced importance of Palestine in the structure of the British Empire – an importance which may equal that of any one of the great dominions.
“...The air force, even more than the navy, needs solidly established bases. The safety of an air base depends upon its being situated in territory that is completely dominated and that contains a friendly population. These conditions cannot be found in Egypt. In that part of the world they exist only in Palestine.
“Britain governs the country and the Jewish population represents an element which can supply a guarantee of safety for the establishments of the air force. In the sea of the native population of Arabia the Palestinian Jews stand isolated, an outpost of Europe, and, if rightly handled, an element of strength for the empire.
“...Already the possibility is seen that the Jewish population will provide the physical force sufficient not only for its own protection but also for the defense of the Palestinian citadel against any foreseeable attack from outside. Military experts say a Jewish militia of 50,000 men may be a reality tomorrow.” (Emphasis mine – P.N.)
From the words of Mr. Augur it is quite clear that British imperialism is not asleep in Palestine if “a Jewish militia of 50,000 men may be a reality tomorrow”. Naturally, this would not have been possible without the active assistance of Zionist leadership – including the leadership of Labor ‘Zionism, which is the leading force in the world Zionist movement.
II
By “using” imperialism, Zionism became a pawn in a bloody imperialist game in which the lives of hundreds of thousands of Jews are at stake while simultaneously acquiring imperialist ambitions of its own.
Since Palestine is a small, poor and relatively settled country, with considerable stretches of swamps, sand dunes, and barren hills,
Zionist leaders have been eyeing Transjordania and other parts of Arabistan as territory for extending the “National Home” so that it would accommodate the millions of Jews necessary for the “Jewish state” they are aspiring to. But such dreams necessitate the status quo of British domination in the Near East. The policy of Zionism therefore became closely tied to the chariot of British imperialism, so that Zionist offices in Poland and other countries have essentially become recruiting stations for the “Jewish militia” Mr. Augur is speaking of, to make Palestine the haven for British bombers....
The real leader of Zionism, the “Socialist” David Ben Gurion, expressed the imperialist aspirations of the Zionist leadership in his speech at the Nineteenth Zionist World Congress held in Lucerne, Switzerland, on August 20-27, 1935. He stated:
“The borders of Palestine do not extend from Dan to Beersheba, but from at least 250 kilometers farther south. The Red Sea has played a great part in Jewish history. During Solomon’s time the first effort to create a Jewish fleet was made, but not with a Jewish personnel. We must not let ourselves be dominated by present-day conditions, but must hold to the historic line. Our economic structure, husbandry as well as industry, which is principally based on the home market in Erez Israel [the Land of Israel] must seek ä connection with the great hinterland of Palestine, with Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Persia, perhaps even with India. We must be independent of the artificial route of the Suez Canal. We must find our own way toward all the Asiatic countries.” (Kongresszeitung, official organ of the Zionist Congress, No. 3, p. 4.)
The honorary chairman of the Zionist organization of the United States, Mr. Louis Lipsky, member of the Zionist Actions Committee, amplified Mr. Ben Gurion’s statement upon his return from the Lucerne Congress. In an interview published in the Jewish Morning Journal of October 3, 1935, Lipsky stated:
“Jabotinsky boasts that he wants a bigger Erez Israel. He wants an Erez Israel on both sides of the Jordan. But the labor party (Histadruth) through its wonderful leader, Ben Gurion, made it clear that Transjordania is not sufficient, we must also have the neighboring countries for millions of Jews. But whereas Jabotinsky loves to operate with exclamations the labor party wants to secure it all through actual upbuilding.”
Vladimir Jabotinsky is the leader of the brown-shirted Revisionists, the Jewish fascists, brought up inside the Zionist movement and until recently part of it. For years he has been advocating that Transjordania be annexed to Palestine as part of a “bigger Erez Israel”. Now, according to Mr. Ben Gurion (as well as Mr. Lipsky), Zionist aspirations surpass those of the Revisionist fascists in their imperialist scope. But the prerequisite for such aspirations is, again, the continuance of British ride throughout the Near East, including
Egypt. It is because of this that Mr. Ben Gurion stated at the Congress that any opinion not to cooperate with the British government “is an act of treachery against the aspirations and the redemption of the Jewish people.” (Kongresszeitung, No. 5, p. 9.)
Lord Melchett, head of the powerful British chemical trust, who has heavily invested in the Palestine potash concession (Dead Sea) and who is therefore the proper person to head the Zionist British Agency in Great Britain, was forced in these turbulent days to use still more open language. In a letter to the Manchester Guardian he advocated the outright annexation of Palestine for the reason that the “imperial solution of the Palestine problem would provide th>e British Empire with a healthy and intelligent population in the Near East, always ready in the case of necessity to take up arms in an imperial cause”. Lord Melchett added that what Singapore is to the British Empire in the Far East, Palestine could and should become in the Near East.
Dr. J. L. Magnes, head of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who in a letter to the Manchester Guardian took issue with Lord Melchett, remarked: “This poses the question very neatly.”[*] The real question, however, is: How are the Arabs to consider the utterances of the Ben Gurions and the Melchetts who have the effrontery to speak in the name of the Jewish people?
It is because Zionism has become an organic part of British imperialism in the Near East that it is rightfully looked upon by the Arab masses as the agency of British imperialism. It is because Zionists who count but several hundred thousand adherents among the Jews throughout the world have put themselves up as the representatives of the Jewish people that the Arabs are misled to believe that all Jews are Zionists and agents of British imperialism. That is why it is so easy for the provocateurs of British imperialism in cooperation with its Arab servants from among the feudalists and the clergy to use the Jews as the scapegoat whenever the struggle for Arab independence rises high.
British imperialism finds itself in a precarious position in the countries of the Near East. In Egypt, to the south of Palestine, the Arabs have forced Great Britain to restore to the country the constitution of 1923. This, of course, is merely a beginning of the struggle for the independence of Egypt. In Syria, to the north of Palestine, the Arabs have forced French imperialism, through general strikes and bloody combat, to relinquish some of its prerogatives. It is clear that the Arabs in Palestine (which is considered Southern Syria) must be filled with unrest and that the general strikes taking place there are part of the anti-imperialist struggle of the over ten million Arabs of Arabistan. No matter what Zionist leaders may be saying, British imperialism certainly recognizes the character of this struggle. The results in Egypt and Syria are striking fear into the Colonial Office in London. The maneuvers of Italian imperialism among the Arabs, the conquest of Ethiopia, make British imperialism increasingly fearful of its hold in the Near East and particularly in Palestine. It is therefore again maneuvering with promises to create a federation of Arab states (promising, of course, Palestine as part of this federation). It is at the same time fomenting race struggles in Palestine in order to prove that neither the Arabs nor the Jews can hold the country and that British force must be maintained for the sake of “peace and order”.
The policy of building a state with the aid of imperialist force led the Zionist leadership to introduce into Palestine racial aggression reminiscent of similar aggression in a certain country in Central Europe.
There is the policy of displacing the Arab tenant farmer after the land is bought from the Effendi (landlord). A variety of denials and innumerable excuses are forwarded by Zionists when this subject is mentioned. But, by a fateful coincidence there appeared on April 14 (two days before the recent outbreaks) an article in the New York pro-Zionist organ of the Socialist Party Old Guard, the Jewish Daily Forward, which, in a most shocking manner, substantiated the accusation against the Zionist leadership. This paper which was most conspicuous (of course!) in the recent Hearstian crusade against the Communists because of what happened in Palestine, printed on that date an article by one of its most prominent contributors abroad, Dr. Max Weinreich (head of the Wilno, Poland, Jewish Scientific Institute) dealing with Arab-Jewish relations. Dr. Weinreich gives the contents of a conversation in Tel Aviv (Palestine), which he visited recently. A leader of Labor Zionism complained that his children are brought up in the Zionist schools with a hatred towards Arabs. Dr. Weinreich continues:
“One of those who conversed with me was a tall young man with burning eyes. He had been a shomer (watchman, guard) for many years. During long years, night in and night out, the gun was his closest friend. He had lived among the Arabs, he spoke their language, he knew them to a nicety. He does not believe that it is possible to have peaceful relations with them.
“ ‘Last week,’ he told me, ‘we had to make sure of a piece of Jewish land. Do you understand what this means? Several years ago a large piece of land not far from Haifa was bought from an Arabian Effendi (noble landlord). The Effendi did not work on the land himself. Poor Arab tenants sat on that land. First they had paid rent to the Effendi, then they began to pay rent to the new owners, the Jews. For them nothing had changed. But now came the moment when, according to the laws of Palestine, the new owner had actually to take over the land, else he would lose his property right. For this reason the tenants had to be driven off.
“ ‘I and a comrade of mine,’ the shomer told me, ‘stood in a hidden place with guns trained, waiting to intervene in case resistance was offered. But there was no resistance. They moved off like sheep, and they remained lying with their poor belongings in the open field, beyond the purchased piece of land. Fortunately, we did not have to make use of our guns. But what are the feelings of the Arabs when they leave this land? The Effendi is dissatisfied because he sold his land eight years ago. Had he kept it until this year he would have received for the land quite a different price. But the tenants did not get anything from the Effendi at that time and now they remain stripped, naked, although their feeling (which is the feeling of all peasants in all countries) tells them that the land on which they lived was their own.’ ” (My emphasis – P.N.)
Dr. Weinreich touched upon a bleeding wound of Palestine – the displacement of Arab tenant farmers through the aggressive policy of Zionist leaders. This, in a country where the agrarian question is on the order of the day! And there is another bleeding wound – the policy of “conquering labor” (which goes hand in hand with the policy of “conquering the soil”).
The Left Poale Zion writer, M. Erem, takes issue with the leaders of Labor Zionism (or of the Histadruth, the Palestine Hebrew trade unions) on their slogan: “Buy Jewish.” He states:
“If it (the slogan) is to serve mere purposes of declamation, then we must consider it as the babblings of provocateurs (even if its authors do not intend that) since it aggravates the already tense atmosphere of national hatred in Palestine, a hatred which may wreak its initial vengeance on the Jewish community....
“Only the blind and naive can make themselves believe that the Arab market will not react, sooner or later, against this ‘noble* slogan. The danger appears ever greater because this reaction will not limit itself to the economic field, but will most definitely have its repercussions in the political alignments in the country. What will happen then? It is not difficult to foresee. Our very existence is charged with explosives, which need but a spark to ignite.” (Proletarische Gedank, Nov. 15-Dec. 1, 1935.)
The testimony of such pro-Zionist writers will suffice to illustrate the criminal racial policies of Zionist leadership in Palestine. As a result, the air is charged with race hatred. Jewish “national” manufacturing establishments are picketed by leaders of Labor Zionism themselves (Katzenelnson, Rubashov, according to the statement of the aforementioned organ of the Left Poale Zion) to bring about the discharge of Arab workers employed there. Unions are maintained along racial lines, the leadership of the Histadruth fearing that the acceptance of Arab workers as members would “legalize” Arab labor in establishments of “national” Jewish capital. The picketing, the slogan “Buy Jewish”, and the displacement of Arab peasants, lead to bloody racial struggles daily. All of which is basically the result of an adventurous policy, of a colonization conducted in a relatively settled colonial country where the peasants are faced with a struggle against feudalism, a struggle for land.
Zionist leadership must adhere to its criminal policies if it is to go on with the adventure of establishing a “Jewish state”. Zionism is forced to oppose, as it does, any attempt on the part of Great Britain to placate the Arabs with some sort, however crippled, of self-government for Palestine. All factions of Zionism without exception came out against any parliament whatever for Palestine (until such time when the Arab population finds itself in a minority). Any attempt of Great Britain to placate the Arab masses by some sort of legislation to protect in the slightest the tenant farmer is met with violent opposition by the Zionist leadership. The following excerpt from the official report submitted by the Zionist Executive Committee to the Sixteenth World Zionist Congress held in Zurich in 1929 openly exposes the Zionist leadership as an enemy of the tenant farmer. It reads (English edition, p. 15):
“A most important agricultural enactment, and one which is bound to affect the whole policy of Zionist agricultural colonization, is the law promulgated in 1928 for the protection of tenants in the event of the land cultivated by them being sold by the landowner. The Zionist Executive submitted certain observations with regard to this law, and these received due attention from the government.” (My emphasis – P.N.)
An open official admission that a law protecting the tenants is “bound to affect the whole policy of Zionist agricultural colonization”! Is any further proof necessary to condemn the Zionist policy towards the peasants? Is it, then, any wonder that the Palestinian air, thickly charged as it is with explosives as a result both of British imperialist policies and policies of Zionism, did explode?
The racial activities of the Zionist leadership played into the hands of Arab reactionaries, feudalists, of Arab servants of British imperialism. They played into the hands of the Revisionists and of the chauvinist ruffians Tel Aviv (all-Jewish city of Palestine) is now openly complaining about. They played into the hands of Nazism, which is attempting to fish in troubled water, inciting Arabs against Jews, notwithstanding the fact that Zionist leadership became the instrument of Nazi export in the Near East.
This brings us to another “glorious” chapter of Zionist policy which (because of limited space) we can touch upon only in passing.
Zionism, because it builds on persecution of Jews in all lands outside of Palestine (since without such persecution as a driving force any considerable emigration into a poor and settled imperialist colony would be unthinkable), in point of fact negotiates and compromises with the persecutors of the Jews. This has become traditional in Zionism. In 1903, immediately after the massacre of Kishinev (at that time, Russia) Dr. Theodore Herzel, father of Political Zionism, went to see the Tsar’s Minister of Interior, Von Plehve, who was guilty of the massacre, to secure his assistance for the cause of Zionism. In 1921, Vladimir Jabotinsky, at that time a spokesman for the World Zionist Executive Committee, concluded a pact with the pogrom leader in the Ukraine, Simeon Petlura. In line with this tradition Zionist leadership in 1933 concluded the infamous Transfer Agreement with Nazi Germany whereby some rich German Jews could transfer part of their wealth to Palestine, in the form of German goods. Simple as this may sound, the Transfer Agreement which in the course of the three years, 1933, ‘34 and ‘35, was made use of by a comparatively insignificant group of rich German Jews (2,640, according to a statement by Berl Locker, leader of Labor Zionism), actually was turned into an instrument to flood Palestine and the entire Near East with Nazi goods; both “transferred” wealth and outright export, thus breaking the anti-Nazi boycott Jews all over the world are conducting. Documents published some time ago (reprinted in the Morning Freiheit, December 17, 1935) show how the Zionist in charge of the Transfer succeeded in obtaining from Berlin the agency for distributing German goods in Egypt, Iraq, and other countries of the Near East, to the detriment of Belgium and similar countries the Jews are trying to enlist in the struggle against Hitler Germany. This (Transfer) phase of Zionist policies is another example showing how the interests of Zionism run counter to the interests of the Jewish people. But it is an irony of fate (and something quite natural) that the Nazis who in Germany are repaying Zionism by allowing it to function organizationally and to issue literature and newspapers, are conducting in Palestine itself anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish agitation in order to win the Arabs for the machinations of Nazi imperialism.
Zionist leadership has played into the hands of Nazi agitators. Primarily, however, it played into the hands of Great Britain at a moment when the latter needed racial blood-letting for its own purposes.
What now?
Eighteen Jews and twelve Arabs were killed during the disturbances in the middle of April. Nearly two hundred were wounded. The majority, or all of them – innocent people, toilers. They were provoked, used as instruments to bolster up British rule. What should be done to prevent such race struggles from recurring? There were race struggles in 1920, 1921, 1929, and now again. What is to be done to do away with such struggles?
These are the questions to be answered, now.
Great Britain wants to go on as it has since 1917, playing Arab against Jew. The Zionist leaders quite openly admit they will go on supporting British imperialism and will continue their dangerous policies. The Zionist organization of the U.S.A. has featured most prominently on its official page in The Day of May 8 the speech delivered by Lord Tweedsmuir, governor-general of Canada, at the opening of the United Zion Appeal in Montreal. The governor-general referred to the Balfour Declaration and to the “honorable obligations of the English people” to establish the Jewish National Home. Immediately, however, he got down from these lofty heights to Realpolitik.
“Palestine,” he stated, “holds the key to the strategical position on the great route between the East and West. The war in Ethiopia has caused most of us to reflect upon the safeguarding of that highroad. To have a strong and contented Palestine will be, in the future, of incalculable value to the British Empire. From this point of view Zionism has never been more important than at this moment to Great Britain.”
Zionist leadership is obviously in full agreement with His Majesty’s representative, the governor-general. A cable by the Zionist propaganda agency, Palcor, stated on May 11 that David Ben Gurion, in a speech delivered in Tel Aviv, had on that day declared: “The Jewish people are strongly in favor of working with the government.” Zionist leadership has the effrontery to speak in the name of the Jewish people, promising cooperation with British imperialism. For Palestine it spells more than racial struggles. For the Jews who are brought over by Zionism from Poland, Rumania, and Germany with the promise of a homey refuge, safety, it means living on a volcano, becoming cannon fodder for British imperial interests. Because reckless Zionist leaders like Ben Gurion continue to speak in their name, the danger becomes ever greater.
Both Jewish and Arab toilers are against a policy of racial struggles and bloodshed. For centuries they have lived in peace. They belong to the same (Semitic) race and have common interests as toilers which dictate a struggle against imperialism and its Zionist and Arab servants. It, therefore, becomes clear that at the present juncture, the Communist Party of Palestine is called upon to play a • leading role in uniting the toilers of both nationalities on a program of national and social liberation.
What is the line of the Communist Party of Palestine? Basically, it cannot be any different in Palestine than it is in other countries, particularly colonial. Everywhere it works for the unity of all toilers in a struggle against all oppressors. Because Palestine represents a colonial country fighting for independence, the Communists are, and must be, active in building a people’s anti-imperialist front in the struggle for national liberation, which is a revolutionary struggle, even though the majority of the elements participating in such front are not (and cannot be in a colonial country) predominantly proletarian. It is a struggle against imperialism.
The policy of the Communist Party of Palestine was lucidly stated in the speech of the Palestinian delegate, Comrade Hadyar, at the Seventh World Congress in Moscow last August. He declared:
“The Arab masses are filled with a burning hatred towards the Arab capitalists, feudalists, towards the Zionist bourgeoisie, who has taken upon itself the gendarme role of imperialist oppression. The struggle against the Zionist bourgeoisie is something which can be directly understood by almost all the oppressed social strata of the Arab people. This struggle is taking place daily, and is basically an anti-imperialist struggle. By supporting this struggle we must lead, extend and direct it along the proper channels – towards the struggle against the main enemy, against imperialism.
“We hate the Jewish Zionist bourgeoisie, but we extend a fraternal hand to the Jewish toilers for a joint struggle against imperialism, against Zionism, against the bitterest enemies of the Arab and Jewish peoples in Palestine. The Communist Party is building the Arab national people’s front against imperialism and against Zionism. It actively works among the Jewish toiling masses in order to liberate them from the influence of the counter-revolutionary party of the Jewish Zionist capitalists, in order to draw the toiling Jews into the national emancipation struggle of the Arab masses. The Jewish national minority in Palestine is faced with great perspectives when the national emancipation movement under the hegemony of the proletariat will be victorious. Our task is to show and convince the Jewish toilers that their class and national interests are linked up with the victory of the national liberation movement of the Arab masses and the democratic transformation of the social system in Palestine. We must work particularly to form the united front between the Arab and Jewish workers.”
A clear-cut Communist line. The unity of Arab and Jewish toilers for national and social liberation. In executing this correct line, in conditions of illegality, with its leaders thrown into the medieval jails, Palestinian Communists in October, 1935, committed a mistake, issuing a leaflet wherein Zionist policy was identified with Jewish policy, thereby unfortunately creating the impression that the dastardly acts committed by Zionist leadership are the fault of all Jews. This mistake was immediately rectified by another leaflet pointing out that it is not a case of Arabs versus Jews but a case of
Arab and Jewish toilers against British imperialism and its Zionist agents. Enemies of Communism in the U.S.A. seized upon the first leaflet, not because it veered from the correct line of the Communist Party, but in order to cover up the dastardly policy of Zionism, which, hand in glove with British imperialism, provoked the present situation.
The recent Red hysteria in New York, joined in by Hearst, proved that. It was raised in connection with a Communist leaflet issued in Tel Aviv calling upon Jewish and Arab youth to unite in the struggle against British imperialism, Zionist aggression, and against Arab feudalists. The leaflet (fully reprinted in the Daily Worker of May 13) opened its appeal as follows:
“Comrades:
“A revolutionary wave is engulfing the country. This is a link in the chain of the upsurge in all Arabian lands which is striving to smash the yoke of imperialism. For Zionism is reaping what it has sown during years of attacks against the Arabian masses on the land: driving the Arabian fellaheen (peasants) from the land, the conquest of work and land, supporting and cooperating with British imperialism for the suppression of the struggle of the Arabian masses for national liberation. The murder near Tul kerm – the responsibility for which lies only on those who perpetrated the act – was transformed into a source of incitement and murderous attacks against the Arabian inhabitants in general by the Zionist press and in the Zionist youth circles. The cup has overflowed and a revolutionary wave has broken out.”
After reviewing the strike struggles, the demonstrations, and other struggles of the Arab masses for independence, the leaflet appeals to the Arab and Jewish youth to unite. It particularly appeals to the Jewish youth to form a bloc “in the ranks of the Zionists which will serve as a point of support for the Arabian revolutionary movement, as a basis of co-operation between the Arab and the Jewish youth”. The leaflet, which in several places emphasizes that the struggle must be conducted against the Arab feudalists as well, winds up with the following slogans: “Long live the revolt of the Arabian masses! Down with imperialism, Zionism, and Arabian feudalists! Fight against race propaganda and murder! Long live the national and social liberation of the Arab lands!” (My emphasis – P.N.)
The struggle against the Arab feudalists, alongside with the struggle against imperialism and Zionism, links the fight for national liberation with the fight for social demands, the fight of the peasants for land. This social feature of the struggle of the Arab masses is simultaneously a struggle against Zionism as well, since Zionist leadership obtains most of the land bought for colonization purposes from the landlords (up to 90 per cent, according to the statement of the Zionist authority, Dr. Arthur Rupin, made before the Shaw Investigation Committee in 1929), displacing the peasants by throwing a pittance at them or by force of arms, as seen above.
But it was that correct leaflet which hurt Zionist leaders and their newly acquired ally, William Randolph Hearst, more than that incorrect leaflet, since by calling upon Arab and Jewish toilers to unite, the Communist Party strikes at the roots of racialism which is feeding Zionism and is made use of by British imperialism. Zionist leadership does not want such unity!
During the Zionist chauvinist hysteria of October-December, 1935, the Jewish Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the U.S.A. proposed to the various Jewish leaders the following minimum program for ending racial bloodshed in Palestine. This minimum program printed in the Morning Freiheit, December 15, 1935, put forward the following eight points:
1. All workers, regardless of race and nationality, shall be accepted into the unions of the Histadruth.
2. Likewise, all agricultural workers. Arab tenant farmers should be organized together with Jewish tenant farmers in one body.
3. The Zionist leaders must declare that they are for a truly democratic parliament in Palestine which should safeguard the full equality and all rights for the Jewish minority and its national development.
4. Struggle against British imperialism, for a free Palestine.
5. Free immigration under conditions 1 and 2. (At present there is no free immigration, since immigration is a monopoly of the Zionist organization which selects the immigrants along Zionist lines; only the immigration of Jewish capitalists is free.)
6. No land shall be bought without the previous consent of the peasants working the land.
7. The rule of the church (Mohammedan, Christian, Jewish) to be abolished.
8. The shameful transfer-agreement with the Nazi government, which has turned Zionism into an agency for Nazi export for the entire Near East, to be cancelled.
None of the Zionist leaders, or any other Jewish leaders claiming to represent Jewish mass interests, made any answer to this proposal. They did not formulate any program of their own. They have no program other than that which links them with British imperialism and holds them to a policy of racial discrimination, racial unionism, the displacement of Arab tenant farmers, etc. It is the task of the Communist Parties of Palestine, the United States, and other countries where masses of Jews live to combat the dangerous influence of chauvinism and Zionist adventurism, which is harmful to the population of Palestine, as well as to the Jewish people outside of Palestine.
The interests of the Jewish people, as of all persecuted peoples, lie with the forces fighting imperialism, reaction, fascism, race hatred; with the forces forging the united, front and the people’s front. The example of the Soviet Union where the national problem was solved because of the correct Bolshevik, Leninist-Stalinist line: the solution of the Jewish problem there, the complete abolition of anti-Semitism and discrimination, the upbuilding of Jewish culture, national in form and socialist in content, the establishing of five national Jewish districts in the Ukraine and the Crimea, and the building of the Jewish Soviet Autonomy of Biro-Bidjan, are convincing proof for ever wider circles among the Jewish people that the Communist line is the correct line which alone can bring about solidarity among the toilers of all races and nationalities and achieve their national and social liberation. The Jewish question, which must be answered, can only be aggravated by Zionism. Ever wider circles of Jews realize it. Anti-Semitism, discrimination against Jews must be combated by all toilers and all other progressive elements in the countries where Jews live – and will continue to live. Zionism diverts the attention from this struggle, separates Jews from non-Jews, thereby assisting anti-Semitism. The forces of the Jewish masses alone are not sufficient for a successful struggle against anti-Semitism. The fight against Jewish oppression must be the fight of non- Jews as well, just as the fight for Negro liberation must be the fight of all white progressive elements as well.
The anti-imperialist struggle in Palestine is developing. In spite of the tragic racial riots the anti-imperialist character of the Palestinian unrest is clearly visible. The Arabs conduct strikes, refuse to pay taxes. The Palcor news agency was forced to state on May 5 that Arab leaders declare they are not fighting the Jews but that the independence of Palestine is their main object. No doubt, tremendous pressure from below, particularly from the youth movement, is forcing the present Arab leadership to come out in such clear-cut, anti-imperialist manner. This anti-imperialist struggle which is part of a struggle embracing all Arabs, as well as the peoples in most colonial countries throughout the world, must be supported. The united front and the people’s front of all nationalities must be forged. The masses must be on guard against provocation and betrayal. Anyone who stands in the way of the anti-imperialist and agrarian struggle, who sides with imperialism, can expect no consideration in or outside of Palestine.
Zionist followers, most of whom are sincerely looking for a solution to the Jewish problem, burning with a desire to help the Jews who are being persecuted and pogromized in Germany, Poland, Rumania, and other capitalist countries, must realize that the slogan “Back to Palestine” is a reactionary slogan and that the tiny, poor imperialist colony in the Near East will not provide for even an insignificant minority of these Jews without conflicting with the interests of the local population. The cry of “free immigration” on the part of Zionist leaders is a demagogic cry, since nobody demands free immigration into small poor and settled countries. Such a slogan merely diverts from the campaign that countries like the United States, Canada, Argentina, South Africa, etc., should let down the bars for refugees from Germany, for Polish Jews, etc. This campaign which would really bring some relief (as far as this could be attained in capitalist countries) is harmed by the demagogic slogan of Zionist leadership for “free immigration” to – Palestine (of all countries!). Palestine has its own problem which is first and foremost the problem of driving out imperialism, a problem which is world-wide. Progressive elements among Zionist followers must realize they ought to support this anti-imperialist struggle, just as they must support the struggle of the Chinese, Indian, Cuban and other peoples in their fight against imperialism.ries, foundations, and what-not, created by the various imperialist systems. There are German colonies in Palestine; the inhabitants, of course, were not told that Palestine is needed for the proposed Berlin-Baghdad line but that like good Christians they ought to settle in the land of Jesus Christ. The ex-Kaiser made systematic pilgrimages to Palestine – of course, for the sole purpose of visiting the Sepulchre of Christ.... There is a cluster of Greek Orthodox Russian churches on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem established by the tsarist “Mother Church”, as well as a number of Russian monasteries and other religious institutions scattered over Palestine. Naturally, this was done because of the religious fervor of the tsarist court and not because of the struggle of tsarist imperialism for the possession of the Dardanelles....
If one were to believe the promise given to the Arabs in behalf of His Majesty’s government on October 24, 1915, by the high commissioner for Egypt, Sir Hen McMahon, one would think that the military efforts of Great Britain to conquer Palestine were due to its desire to secure independence for the Arabs. If one were to believe the proclamations showered on the Arab population by British airplanes in 1915-17, these efforts were due solely to the desire of the British General Staff to “preserve the edicts of the Holy Moslem religion from being altered” and to “liberate all Arabs”. Since, however, Great Britain needed Palestine for its own imperialistic interests, it so happened that as soon as the legions of General Allenby marched into Jerusalem, London was confronted with the necessity of safeguarding Palestine for the Empire. Hence the cynical and tricky document, the Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, which was heralded by the leadership of Zionism as the Magna Charta of the Jewish people.
The Balfour Declaration, which is at the base of the racial struggles in Palestine, is worth citing. It reads as
[Note: More about Palestine, Zionism and the Jewish question
can be found in the two pamphlets issued by the Jewish Bureau of the Central
Committee of the Communist Party of the United States, Zionism Today (10 cents) and Palestine: The Communist Position (5 cents), both by Paul
Novick, to be obtained at all Workers’ Bookshops. – Ed.]
[*] The
Magnes letter with Melchett’s quotations was reprinted in the Philadelphia Jewish World, Dec. 17,
1935.
.jpg)
