« ПретходнаНастави »
"Judenstaat," in which he argued for a definite and certain home and for a closer formation of the Jews in order to prepare that home for its future denizens. Herzl's personality and his clarity of argument carried conviction. He was able to place his plan of constructive Jewish politics before a number of European governments; and while no definite and distinct promise was made, certain bonds were forged which in time are bound to result in good understanding. His attempts, however, to come to some agreement with the ruler at Constantinople failed because the price demanded was disloyalty to European civilization. The first Zionist Congress sat in Basel during August, 1897. It formulated the socalled Basel Program which proclaimed that Zionists strive to "create for the Jewish people a home in Palestine secured by public law," and that they purpose to work for the agricultural and industrial colonization of the land, the binding together of the whole of Jewry by means of institutions, but always "in accordance with the laws of each country," and especially to attain this aim by gaining in all cases the necessary "government consent." It was a declaration made with every circumstance of frankness, a condition that has remained fundamental to the Zionist position, from that year to this. Between the years 1897 and 1913 eleven Congress meetings were held. Parties were developed as the movement represented by the Congress gained momentum; but never did the absolutely democratic spirit that informed it lose its force. It was a democracy informed by perfect loyalty, on the part of those who labored for its attainment, to the states in which they dwelled. Palestine is small in extent, however generously its bounds may be set. It cannot contain more than 3,500,000 to 4,000,000 inhabitants; and place must be left for the Syrians and Arabs living there or wishing to settle within its borders. At the present moment, the population of Jews is far below that of other racial contingents. This, of course, is due to the drastic Turkish laws that, in the past, prevented the settlement of Jews there in any large numbers and even encouraged the decadent character of the life there. When the Jewish state is firmly established the position of those Jews not living there will in no way differ from that of other men and women living away from their national or racial home. The rebirth of Greece was effected without any strain upon the patriotic affiliations of those Greeks living in other places than in the Peninsula; and the same has been true of the Italians at the moment when their self-assertion demanded recognition. At the time of this writing the movements for Armenian and Albanian independence, for the reintegration of these lands into the community of statehood, and for the return of those of their nationals as desire it to the land of their spiritual if not actual birth, certainly is not misinterpreted as a slur or as a blot upon the patriotism of those that remain. And in like measure, the virility of Jewish sentiment at this present reassertion of Jewish political consciousness can only be misunderstood by an anemic and neurotic sense of the real duties and obligations of citizenship.
On Monday, December 10, 1917, General Allenby, at the head of British troops, though flanked by an Italian and a French officer, marched into the city of Jerusalem, and the beginning was made to wrest Palestine from the heavy hand of the Turk. But prior to that, on November 2, Arthur J. Balfour, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in Great Britain, had written to Lord Rothschild the statement now become famous:
"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 and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
And long before that date, English statesmen had commenced to see the depth and importance of the problem, which the world with them might be called upon to solve; an indication that the statement of Mr. Balfour was something more than verbal exuberance. In 1916 Lord Cromer had written that one of the consequences of the war will almost certainly be that the whole Jewish question will in the future have to be approached under auspices which differ widely from those which have hitherto obtained. He added that "although possibly the Jewish question will not mature quite so quickly as some of the more enthusiastic Zionists consider probable, it is rapidly becoming a practical issue, and before long politicians will be unable to brush it aside as the fantastic dream of a few idealists." As early as April, 1917, General Sir Archibald Murray, who led the British troops up to the gates of Gaza, had said in a proclamation, "What shall we do with Palestine, this country liberated from the century-old Turkish grip? There can be little doubt that we should revive the Jewish Palestine of old, and allow the Jews to realize their dreams of Zion in their homeland. All the Jews will not return to Palestine, but many will do so. . . . The Jews would at least have a homeland and a nationality of their own. The national dream that has sustained them for a score of centuries will have been fulfilled". That such is not merely an expression of the misguided passion of a few in Great Britain or an attempt to make the sympathies of a race dance to the tune of their own political needs is in evidence from the pronouncement of the British workingmen that "The British Labor Movement further expresses the hope that it may be practicable by agreement among all the nations to set free Palestine from the harsh and aggressive government of the Turk, in order that the country may form a free state, under international guaranties, to which such of the Jewish people as desire to do so may return and may work out their salvation, free from interference by those of alien race or religion." That the sentiment in this direction runs as strong on this side of the ocean as on the other is seen in resolutions of a like tenor passed not only by the United Hebrew Trades of New York, but also by the American Federation of Labor.
Other governments or their representatives have given adherence to the sentiment that is back of the British presentment. The Marquis Imperiali (Italian Ambassador in London) has declared that his Government identifies itself with the policy of the British Government "in regard to the establishment of a national home for the Jewish People in Palestine." M. Pichon (French Minister of Foreign Affairs) "was pleased to confirm that there was complete agreement between the French and the British governments concerning the question of a Jewish 'etablissement' in Palestine." Indorsements have come also from Serbia, from Greece, Holland, Siam, China, and Japan; and when Dr.Weissmann laid the foundation for the Jewish University in Jerusalem, a certain number of professors at eight Spanish seats of learning sent him a message of sympathy. But the indorsement that is especially dear to us is from the President of the United States of America which says in part, "I have watched with deep and sincere interest the reconstructive work which the Weissmann Commission hasdone in Palestine at the instance of the British Government, and I welcome an opportunity to express the satisfaction I have felt in the progress of the Zionist movement in the United States and in the Allied countries since the declaration by Mr. Balfour on behalf of the British Government of Great Britain's approval of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and his promise that the British Government would use its best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of that object, with the understanding that nothing would be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish people in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in other countries."
It is evident, therefore, that a new factor has cut in amid the racial and political rearrangements of the nearer Orient. It is perhaps too early to predict the exact form to be taken on by the Jewish Palestine. Is it to be an independent free state; is it to be a crown colony of Great Britain; is it to rest for a while under the protecting guidance of some one power or under the especial tutelage of some League of Nations?—these questions all lie on the knees of the gods. But one or two conditions seem even at the