[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR, —The " pros "
and " cons '! of the " Balfour Declara- tion," and the whole question of Zionism, have been so continuously discussed during the past seven years that one is the more surprised to read letters displaying such ignorance of the subject as that from Mr. Goldberg, published in your paper of the 18th inst. It is quite apparent to anyone who had spoken to Arabs in Palestine that your correspondent bases his extraordinary statements on anything but know- ledge of the conditions in that country, or of the feelings of both Christians and Mohammedans out there. His assertion that the Jews " could make an entente to-morrow with the Arabs" if they (the Jews) were to join in the agitation against the Mandatory Power is merely ludicrous, and demands no discussion.
It will be sufficient to say here that the Christian and Mohammedan communities of Palestine have united against the threat of large Jewish immigration, that this union has been formed directly against the Jews, and that the antipathy to the Jews has existed amongst the Arabs in that country for many generations back. . .
The question of the Mandatory Power would always have arisen, whatever that Power had been. There will never lack individuals who will be willing to utilize such agitations for their own purposes.
Mr. Goldberg's statements become wilder as he approaches the conclusion of his letter. • In mentioning the years 1917-18 • lie writes, " We then had a more firm offer with regard to Palestine from Germany." It seems difficult to understand to whom he refers when he speaks of " we." Does he mean the Jewish conununity then resident in Germany ? And, in any case, does he still seriously consider this offer on the part of our late enemy as genuine?
Finally, by his last paragraph, Mr. Goldberg shows that either he has deliberately set out to misunderstand the entire spirit of the " Balfour Declaration," or else he again displays his ignorance of the subject under discussion.
As you, Sir, state in your footnote to his letter, the Declara- tion expressly provided for the preservation of the rights of the Arabs. Under no conditions was Palestine to be other than a national home for the Jews—a country in which they • may, once more, .renew their national life.
To threaten the existence on that soil of the Arabs—who
It appears to us a short-sighted view to forecast their eventual extinction. For example, the blacksmiths and wheelwrights need not necessarily die out because horses and horse-vehicles are used much less than they were. Smiths remember that they are traditionally mechanics and metal workers, and many of them, equipped with simple but modern implements and small power units, are doing repairs to farm lived there long before the wanderings of the ancient liebicws tools and machinery with as much or Ereater efficiency and
brought them to the Promised Land—would be more than unfair ; it would be crass folly.
It would seem that Mr. Goldberg must " still stick to Dr. Herzl's policy," and to his pennies. After all, it demands more than mere remembrance to build again Jerusalem, and one must honour those who, in the face of difficulties, are proving to the whole world the unquenchable spirit of Judaism.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
