The Transfer Agreement (67 page)

This was the moment Revisionists had waited for.
If
famed orator Vladimir Jabotinsky could evoke the passions of the delegates to vote for the minority resolution, that single moment of delegate disobedience would determine the fate of the Jewish war against Hitler. The anti-Nazi boycott was truly desired in the hearts of almost all Zionists; only the marshaling demands of a small group of Mapai-aligned leaders was staying a formal worldwide Zionist commitment to boycott. A Congress resolution would be the justification any Zionist body from Paris to Hong Kong needed to devote its resources to the fight. Of course, leading that worldwide act of Jewish self-defense would be Jabotinsky. This would reestablish the leadership of Revisionism within the movement.

Shortly after the session was gaveled to order, presidium chairman Leo Motzkin told the delegates that the Actions Committee had created a special Commission on German Jews to study the problem and prepare binding resolutions for the Congress.
²
The secretary then read the Mapai-backed majority resolution: "The Eighteenth Zionist Congress . . . considers it to be
its duty to give expression . . . to its consternation at the tragic fate of the German Jews, and its indignation at the discrimination and degradation inflicted upon them. After a century of Jewish emancipation, . . . developments in present-day Germany have gone so far that half a million Jews have been deprived of their elementary human rights, [so far] that through the official sanctioning of racial prejudice the dignity and honor of the Jewish people are insulted, and [so far] that a policy and legislation are enacted whose fundamental principles must destroy the bases of existence of the Jewish people."
³

Words of "consternation" characterized the remainder of the resolution. Soft nouns and verbs together with lofty introductory clauses were present throughout. When the resolution mentioned the "suppression of the rights of the Jews by all the powers of the State, unique in its scope and inconceivable in the twentieth century," it called the persecution a vindication "of the century-old Jewish question as depicted by . . . Theodor Herzl."
⁴

The resolution ended with the sentence "In conjunction with our protests . . . the determined will of the Jewish people to rebuild its National Home . . . will represent the strongest proof of our national solidarity with the Jews of Germany."
⁵

In other words, Hitler would be fought and the rights of the Jewish people would be preserved by one means and one means only: a Jewish State.

On the other hand, the Revisionists' minority resolution was nothing less than a boycott declaration, even though it cleverly avoided using the actual word
boycott
and even abstained from mentioning Germany by name.
If
the Revisionists had wanted a mere symbolic protest, they would have injected far more inflammatory language, but they earnestly wanted their resolution to win. They deliberately avoided trigger words that would make the resolution unacceptable to the average delegate, even the delegates of Mapai. Yet the phrasing conveyed the essence of an unmistakable commitment to economic war.

The Revisionist resolution stated: "The Congress welcomes the decision by the Jewish masses in all countries to use their purchasing power and their economic influence . . . as a factor of world trade for the benefit of the products of only those states which constitutionally recognize the principle of full equality for their Jewish citizens. The Congress is resolved to actively and energetically support the Zionist movement in extending and organizing every serious attempt to implement this just protective measure of the Jewish masses."
⁶

But the Revisionist argument would never be heard. Motzkin announced that after the resolutions were presented, there would be no debate, this by decision of the Mapai-dominated presidium. Revisionist delegate M. Hoffman, founder of Betar, stood and objected. The Revisionists had a minority resolution, and according to the rules, this had to be openly discussed. Radi
cal Zionist Nahum Goldmann answered against debate, asserting that the Commission on German Jews had already debated these resolutions back and forth for days without any progress. He urged that the Congress show unity by considering only the Mapai-based resolution.
⁷
For Goldmann, avoiding the Revisionist boycott declaration also preserved the illusory world boycott premiere that Wise's World Jewish Congress coveted.

Loud protest broke out as the Revisionists demanded a proper debate for their minority resolution. Amid the tumult, Jabotinsky was finally allowed to make a brief statement, actually a plea: Nazism was endangering the "securest foundations of the existence of all Jews the world over. . . . It must be regarded and treated as the affair not only of German Jews but of the entire Jewish people.
It
is therefore the duty of world Jewry to react with all means of just defense . . . against this attempt to destroy the Jewish people."
⁸
Beyond those few words, no other remarks were allowed.

Motzkin then read the Mapai resolution once more. His elocution was so stilted and so artificially exalted that Jabotinsky openly mocked him by caricaturing the words even as Motzkin spoke. At one point, in an exaggerated inflection, Jabotinsky recited a famous Latin quotation:
«Quousque tandem, Cati/ina, abutere patientia nostra?"
The quotation referred to Cicero's complaint against a noisome speech in the Senate by Roman archcriminal and conspirator Catiline-"Oh, please, Catiline, tell me how long you will continue to abuse our patience!"
⁹

Motzkin ignored Jabotinsky's ridicule, completed his reading, and then ordered the assembly to vote. The Revisionists demonstratively refused to participate. In the uproar, perhaps just to achieve some sort of decision, all the weary non-Revisionist delegates—including Mizrachi—voted for the majority resolution—265 votes. Because the Revisionists refused to vote, no nays were registered.
¹⁰

When the Revisionists then demanded that their minority resolution at least be put to vote, Motzkin and the presidium denied that motion as well.
¹¹
This crushed the last Revisionist hope that perhaps both the innocuous majority resolution and the minority boycott resolution might both be adopted. At this the Congress lapsed into utter pandemonium.

The Revisionists in a group began a disruptive walkout. Threats and insults were shouted as the Mapai and Revisionist forces faced off. Ushers trying to intervene were themselves manhandled by angry Betarim. Jabotin sky and his wife were suddenly surrounded by a band of Mapai ruffians. One jostled Mrs. Jabotinsky, which brought a cadre of Betarim running. The battle was on, with shouts of scorn and praise for Jabotinsky flying as fast as punches and jabs. Only a squadron of police could separate the combatants. Both sides were ousted from the hall, and the doors locked. Jabotinsky was invited to press charges, but declined.
¹²

In that hour of supreme opportunity, neither fist nor voice was raised to Hitler.
It
was so much easier to fight each other. And so the moment of consolidation slipped past.

The Zionist Organization had failed. But the question remained: Would the Zionist
movement
—the men and women around the world who believed in the righteousness of both the Jewish nation and Jewish defense—would these people accept that failure? There was a time to be a Zionist, and there was a time to be a Jew. Only one issue could make any of them understand the difference. That issue was the recently revealed, but little understood, Transfer Agreement.

G
ERMANY
liked what happened in Prague on August
24.
Before the end of the day, the six-month suspension of the ZVfD's
Juedische Rundschau
had been lifted without explanation. As if to vindicate itself, the
Rundschau
quickly printed Congress coverage that explained, "Within the Congress it was of course only the small, but very militant Revisionist group which wanted to convert the Zionist Organization into a sort of fighting unit. This group ... [proposed] a boycott resolution .... The Congress defeated this motion by a vast majority whereupon turbulent scenes ensued .... The Congress ... clearly demonstrated that Zionism does not fight with weapons of that sort."
¹

Der Deutsche,
the newspaper of the Nazi Labor Front, devoted most of its August 25 front page to a positive reaction to Dr. Ruppin's emigration plan. "The view of the Zionist Congress represents a proposal which is acceptable and interesting,"
Der Deutsche
said. "Without doubt, Jews living in Germany have all kinds of opportunities to get along in the world, even outside Palestine .... The emigration of a large part of the Jews from Germany would, aside from other things, provide room for German unemployed."
Der Deutsche
added, however, that the question of just how much in Jewish assets could be transferred was still in debate.
²

German newspapers took care to continue their scintillating leaks about the Transfer Agreement.
³
Many Jews around the world were beginning to understand what this Transfer Agreement was all about.
It
was more than just an assets transfer. It was an assets transfer
in exchange
for a merchandise market in Palestine.

Holders of German bonds, loans, and investments around the world, had all been implored to forgo the material gain of trafficking in Nazi wares to alleviate losses should the Reich economy collapse. But now the Zionist Organization was willing to betray the boycott in exchange for the same economic stimulus many in the world were being urged to relinquish. In the minds of boycotting Jews, the Transfer Agreement was an unthinkable breach of the boycott-dressed up with emigration, rationalized by the urgent need to develop Palestine, but nonetheless a great breach of the boycott.

Anti-transfer telegrams began arriving in Prague by Friday morning, August 25.
Paris:
"DEEPLY SURPRISED AT NEWS ABOUT RUPPIN'S NEGOTIATIONS WITH NAZI GOVERNMENT RE EXPORT CAPITAL JEWISH EMIGRANTS IN THE FORM OF NAZI GOODS STOP ... AGREEMENT IS INADMISSIBLE BECAUSE IT COUNTERACTS THE BOYCOTT MOVEMENT AND IS IMMORAL FOR JEWS STOP. .. WE ASK YOU TO DISAPPROVE THESE NEGOTIATIONS STOP ...
signed
DEFENSE COMMITTEE FOR PERSECUTED GERMAN JEWS."
⁴

Warsaw
: "WE HAVE LEARNED ABOUT RUPPIN'S STATEMENT RE AGREEMENT ALLEGEDLY CONCLUDED WITH GERMAN GOVERNMENT CONCERNING EMIGRATION GERMAN JEWS STOP WE REJECT CATEGORICALLY IDEA OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH NAZI GOVERNMENT STOP SHOULD SUCH NEGOTIATIONS AND AGREEMENT REALLY HAVE TAKEN PLACE THE UNDER-SIGNED ORGANIZATIONS PROTEST IN THE NAME OF MANY MILLIONS OF POLISH JEWS STOP ... OUR PROTEST ALL THE MORE VIGOROUS SINCE THIS AGREEMENT WAS CONCLUDED ON EVE OF WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS IN GENEVA
signed
CENTRAL UNION OF MERCHANTS CENTRAL UNION OF JEWISH CRAFTSMEN CENTRAL UNION OF RETAILERS."
⁵

New York
: "SOME DAYS AGO I SENT LIPSKY LONG CABLE URGING BOYCOTT RESOLUTION . . . ASKING IT TO BE READ TO CONVENTION ON WHICH I RESPECTFULLY INSIST STOP FEEL CONVENTION SHOULD ALSO VOTE ON BOYCOTT RESOLUTION REGARDLESS
signed
UNTERMYER."
⁶

Telegrams from important members of the Zionist community did not dissuade Mapai forces from enacting their program. The Friday-morning August 25 session began with an announcement by Ben-Gurion that henceforth
halutzim
must be accorded precedence for labor immigration certificates to Palestine.
⁷
Halutzim were the young pioneers of the Zionist movement. Idealistic youths would enter the program, then move on to training camps known as
hachsharah
to learn the manual and agricultural skills as well as philosophical insights needed to become leaders in Eretz Ysrael. When Jewish Palestine had a place, selected halutzim immigrated, and assumed key positions in the labor force and on kibbutzim. By
I933,
more than half the Jewish Palestinian work force and about
80
percent of the kibbutzniks were halutzim. The vast majority of this Zionist vanguard were steeped in European socialist thought and were active members of Mapai.
⁸

But in Germany, there were fewer than 3,000 halutzim,
⁹
and many of those were non-Germans residing in the Reich. Clearly the pauperized German Jewish masses-traditionally not involved in Zionist youth training-would have great difficulty being selected for entry to Palestine. However, Mapai wanted the worker immigrant quota filled not so much by German halutzim as by halutzim from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Rumania, and other nations. Dr. Ruppin had in fact hinted that the great Palestinian structure to be yielded by the German crisis would have to serve the needs of Jewish communities throughout Europe, and not just Germany.
¹⁰

Halutzim of course were far better prepared for the rugged living and working conditions in Palestine. Many a middle-class immigrant, similar to the German Jews, had failed in Palestine for lack of the necessary manual or agricultural training. But Ben-Gurion drove home his ideological priorities when he told the Congress that Friday morning why halutzim should be taken first:
"If
this is a class war, we shall carry it on. But the problem between capital and labor cannot be decided at the Zionist Congress .... The Zionist Congress is concerned only with the most rapid building up of Palestine." Nor was Ben-Gurion interested in widening the halutz program to encompass those who were not true believers of the Mapai mold.In fact, he had every intention of keeping undesirable elements out, including the Revisionists.
¹¹
The result would be a Jewish State cast in the image of Mapai.