Trudy Gold
Churchill, the Jews and Palestine

Trudy Gold | Churchill, the Jews and Palestine | 07.19.21

Visuals displayed throughout the presentation.

- Last week, I looked at Churchill’s involvement, ‘cause remember, William’s been giving brilliant lectures on Churchill, Churchill and his incredible achievements. And I’ve chosen specifically to look at Churchill and the Jews. And in the last session, I looked at his early life and the many Jewish friends he had and also his involvement, particularly in South Manchester when he was MP, beg your pardon, for North Manchester. He had many connections, and he was very much on the side of Zionism.

But he really comes to the test when he is appointed the first minister for the newly appointed Mandates in Palestine and in Mesopotamia for Iraq. And he is confronted with a situation that needs solving because one of the problems, and you will remember that last week, I showed you the Balfour Declaration, the actual text of the Balfour Declaration. And the problem is that it is very ambiguous. “His Majesty’s Government views, with favour, the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. Care to be taken that it doesn’t prejudice the rights of the existing people in Palestine or the rights of Jews outside Palestine.”

Now the latter clause was actually added really by the Anglo-Jewish establishment who were very anti the Balfour Declaration, the majority of them. Now, so the Balfour Declaration is issued in the First World War. Churchill was very much in favour of it, but by the time he becomes the minister for the colonies, there is a problem because between 1918 and 1920, you had a military administration in Palestine. And it has to be said that many of the officers who arrived in Palestine had been in Russia once the revolution occurred and once the war was over. You will recall that the British, the French, and the Americans committed troops to fight the Russians.

So you have many British soldiers who’ve been fighting Bolshevism. Now this was something that Churchill wrote a lot about and in the last session, I spent quite a bit of time with you on his article in the “Illustrated Sunday Herald” about Jews, communism, and Zionism. And basically, he went as far as to say that the Jews who had given so much to the world, they’d given Christ to the world, that’s the expression he used, were now capable of giving the anti-Christ to the world. Churchill always loathed communism. It is one of the main factors in his policies. Now because, and we spent a lot of time on this and I know many of you have thought deeply, one of the riddles of Jewish history, but it isn’t actually, is why so many of the revolutionaries from country to country were of Jewish birth.

Now let me state quite categorically, when a Jew became a communist revolutionary, they had taken on board communist ideology and they’d thrown away their Judaism. But the problem is, it’s not just how you identify yourself, it’s how the world identifies you. So for many people who loathed communism, all Jews were communists. What Churchill did in his brilliant article was to actually put forward the notion that it’s Zionism, that we need to promote Zionism because the Jews are an extraordinary people and that will turn them to a creed that they can really enhance the world with. Either that or they should be nationals of the countries in which they live. And it gives you a taste of just how complex Jewish identity is.

If I was to ask every one of you to give me a definition of what it means to be a Jew, I think we’d have quite a lot of them. And it also has to be said that in this period I’m talking about, 1920 to 1922, many Jews throughout the world were actually hostile to Zionism. You have the establishment in England, the Jewish establishment, never forget the words of Edwin Montagu who had been created secretary of state for India. And he said, “How can you send me to India representing the British government, when you’re telling me my home is at the end of the Eastern Mediterranean? Is it possible for a Jew to be an Englishman and just a Jew by religion?” And that was really what the Anglo-Jewish establishment wanted. In America, it’s more complex because I think hyphenated identity was more acceptable in America.

But the point is, not only do many Jews think that Zionism is a wrong turning, you also have the religious Jews of Eastern Europe who are against Zionism because only the mashiach could lead them back. And I’m going to suggest to you it’s really up until 1945, and I’m really sticking my neck out on this, I mean, we could have a lot of debate on it, I would suggest to you that the majority of Jews worldwide up until 19, sometime between 39 and 49, it shifts, of course it does, 'cause of the Shoah. But let’s say, up until 1939, the majority of Jews were actually not Zionists. And now you have Churchill in Palestine, you have a military administration headed by General Allenby. And as I said, many of the officers were already very violently anti-communist, and they did believe, many of the, because so many of the leadership were Jewish, they saw that as a communist disease.

You know, even in the Arab Riots of 1921, Jabotinsky, who has many things, but he was never a communist. He was accused of being a communist agitator. And the other point I stressed was the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” Never underestimate the power of that dangerous little book because it spread like wildfire out of Russia. And I talked about how it had hit Britain. And even today, it’s a very, very dangerous book because it comes out of a muddle in Jewish identity. It takes on board that every Jew is in league with every other Jew. And that is why you get to the bizarre Rothschild-Marx conspiracy. There is no rational thought in it. You just have to accept that it’s still a noxious, powerful little book and all these terrible canard. It is published widely today in the Arab world, in South America, in many, many countries of the world. I’ve got three copies.

There are many people who in turn times of economic, social, and political unrest, what do they turn to? They turn to conspiracy theories. And one of the problems for the Jews, I think, is because, certainly in the old world of Christianity, and to a latter extent in the world of Islam, you have this notion that Jews stirs things up. That there is some sort of conspiracy that really does go back to the whole notion of the deicide. So when Churchill becomes minister for the colonies, he’s already facing issues with the British army in Palestine. The Black and Tans have been sent in to help quell unrest. And the Arabs, the Arabs of Palestine were becoming more militant. If I were to ask you, what on earth were British intentions in the Middle East? Why on earth did the British get involved in the Middle East and what were their aims?

That is an incredibly complicated picture. I do believe that Churchill was pro-Zionist, but I believe many individuals were in the Middle East. Let’s talk about British politicians, British military, why were they there? You could make the case that in 1918, America really does emerge as the premier nation in the West. It’s going to take the British a long time to realise that the empire is over. And I would suggest you probably the last flickering of the Imperial Lion was in 1956 at Suez. But for the civil service, for many members of parliament, for the English aristocracy, the English middle classes, it was India, it was empire, and oil is becoming a factor.

And what the British dreamt of within the foreign office and within many parts of British society, there was this dream of an empire, an overland empire that stretched from Egypt all the way to India. And if you’re going to say that that was one of the main aims of the British in the First World War, of course they’ve got to beat the Turks, but what did they really want? They didn’t want the French or the Russians to build empires. Luckily, Russia’s out of it through the revolution. And also, the other point is they made promises to the Arabs. And we discussed this last week, that in 1915, to encourage the Arabs to revolt against the Turks because they were all living under Turkish rule, the British promised the Arabs a homeland based on Damascus.

Now, just a recap because it’s so important. I know many of you know this subject very well, and I’d like to thank Milt Hamberg for sending me his brilliant book on the mandate. And can I just say, at this stage, so many of you sent me letters giving me vital information that isn’t necessarily in the history books about family members’ insights into history. Please don’t stop doing this. It’s absolutely wonderful and it really enriches my love of history. And so, I just want to take that opportunity to thank you all. So a promise is made to the Arabs and at the end of the war, the British have made promises to the Arabs, promises to the Jews, and they’ve done a secret deal with the French when the war wasn’t going too well.

So, basically, it was a mess. The British tried to preempt the whole situation because they had the soldiers on the ground. Having taken Beersheba and then Jerusalem, they marched onto Damascus and at the Gates of Damascus, they allow the emir, Faisal, to enter Damascus at the heads of a victorious Arab army. And he goes in with Lawrence of Arabia. This is unbelievably powerful, because never forget if you want to take the year 1,000 as a random year, Islam was so much in the ascendancy compared with the Christian world. By the time you get to the 15th/16th century, there is a shift. And I know on Wednesday, we are having Niall Ferguson come in and he is absolutely brilliant on the ebb and flow of empires.

And there’s now a shift. The world of Islam is in abeyance, the Turkish empire, the last great empire is the sick man of Europe. And the Ottomans are defeated in the first World War, there’s a carve up. So the British think they’ve done a secret deal with the French, that everything north of Acre will be French. But what if they put their client, Faisal, the son of the most important man in the Arab world into Damascus, then once the war is over, they’ve got their client in Damascus, the Balfour Declaration in Palestine. And this will harness British interests. But it wasn’t quite like that because at the Treaty of Versailles, the French insists the promise’s kept and Faisal is thrown out of Damascus. There are shock waves of nationalism.

Before that, there had been letters exchanged between Faisal and Weizmann, Faisal and Hussein. Lawrence of Arabia was certainly in favour of Zionism. You know, the notion of antisemitism promoted by the the Protocols. There’s also philosemitism. There was a belief almost in the mystical ability of the Jews. If the Jews come to Palestine, they’re going to make it a great country. And no doubt Churchill also believed this. So anyway, the situation has now occurred where Faisal is evicted from Palestine. A man fighting with him was a man called Haj Amin al-Husseini. And he later becomes mufti of Jerusalem. After the Arabs are defeated in Damascus by a French army, he comes back to Palestine. The dream of greater Syria based on Damascus is over and he becomes a fervent Arab nationalist.

And as far as he’s concerned, the Arabs have lost and the Zionists have won because the British send a commission to Palestine with Chaim Weizmann, I mentioned this last week, and the situation boils. Churchill visits Palestine in 1921 and with him is Sir Herbert Samuel, the first high commissioner to Palestine, a Jew and a Zionist but also an employee of the British Empire. He is representing the British Empire and there’s a terrible tussle of loyalty in him, and of course, Lawrence of Arabia. What the British do, once Faisal is evicted, they give him Iraq, Mesopotamia, they make him emir of Mesopotamia, emir of Iraq, he becomes king of Iraq, and they think they’ve solved the problem.

But the hostilities continue. Churchill had already decided through advice from Lawrence. Lawrence had told him, and he relied very much on Lawrence for advice on Arab affairs, that he’d heard from Faisal that if the Arabs could have power, Faisal could have power in Damascus, Baghdad, beg your pardon, they wanted Damascus, Baghdad, and Amman, but Damascus is out of the question because it’s now under French control. If they can put them in Amman and in Baghdad, then there will be no problems with Palestine. So what Churchill decides to do is to chop off 2/3 of the British mandate on Palestine. Can we see the map again, Judy, if you don’t mind? There’s the one, yeah.

So that is the mandate on Palestine. Please inscribe this in your brains forever, those of you who don’t know it, I’m sure many of you do. You see, the wavy line is what Weizmann was prepared to go for because he wanted land the other side of the Jordan. It must be said there was no Jewish settlement on the other side of the Jordan. But you see that area Transjordan, that is now closed to Jewish settlement. And from now on, it is a separate state. It’s Transjordan under the Emir Abdullah, the younger brother of Faisal. The father, meanwhile, is in the Hejaz where the British preferred to do business with his family than with the Saud family.

The Sauds later on are going to take control of the Hejaz and name it Saudi Arabia. In fact, I’m going to read to you, because Churchill is going to go out to Palestine. He’s going to go to Cairo Conference and he’s going to see Arab delegations, Jewish delegations, and he’s then going to move on to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. When he comes back, this is what he says about The House of Saud. He explains to the House of Commons, this is the 14th of June, 1921, that a large number of the followers of the new Saudi, Abdulaziz Al Saud known as Ibn Saud, belong to a Wahhabi sect, a form of Muhammadanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same relationship to Orthodox Islam as the most militant form of Calvinism would’ve borne to Rome in the fiercest times of the religious wars in Europe, the Wahhabis, Churchill noted, profess a life of exceeding austerity on what they practise themselves, they rigorously enforce on others.

They hold it as an article of duty as well as faith to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for simply appearing in the streets. It is a penal offence to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette. And as for the crime of alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in the country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well-armed, and blood-thirsty in their own regions, the Wahhabis are a distinct factor which now must be taken into account as they have been and still are very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

And of course, later on, they’re going to conquer the family of Abdullah and Faisal and they’re going to take over the Hejaz. And it’s very interesting because, of course, Wahhabism is still an important sect in the Arab world. It sees the west as corrupt. Wahhabism grew out, really, out of the beginnings of colonialism. And it’s fascinating that in Hansard in 1921, you have Churchill’s report on it. Anyway, Churchill travels to Cairo and when he goes through Gaza, he is met with a large number of people. Thank goodness he didn’t speak Arabic because, actually, what they were screaming was kill the Jews, death to the Jews.

What had happened was, it’s 1921, we’ve already had the Nebi Musa riots for which Jabotinsky was imprisoned and the Haganah was founded. The tension in the area was really boiling. So Churchill realises he’s got very volatile situation, but he does believe that if he puts Abdullah in Amman, he’s assured by Lawrence that that white area that you see, it will be okay for Jewish settlement. He then travels. So he’s met with all sorts of Arab delegations and they say, basically, that the Jews have no place in Palestine. They are an international people, they’re a religious grouping and that we are the indigenous population.

And it’s fascinating because he, Churchill, he doesn’t give up his Zionism. And what is also, he goes to Tel Aviv, but first of all, he goes to Mount Scopus and in Mount Scopus, he makes a wonderful speech. He says this, let me just find it for you. Oh. Sorry. This is the speech he makes. “There was no reason why Palestine should not support a large number of people than it does at the present. The task before the Zionist is one of extraordinary difficulty. All of us here today will have passed away from the earth, now children and children before it’s achieved. I think you’ll be wise to give the Arabs your help and your aid and encourage them in their difficulties. If you will share the blessings throughout cooperation, a bright and tranquil future lies before the country. The earth is a generous mother.”

He then says this to the Jewish deputation. “The Jewish people returning after 2,000 years of exile and persecution to its own homeland cannot suffer the suspicion that it wishes deny another nation its rights. The Jewish people have full understanding of the aspirations of the Arabs with regards to a national revival. But we know that our efforts to rebuild the Jewish national home in Palestine, which is but small, are in comparison with all the Arab lands. We did not deprive them of their legitimate rights. On the contrary, we are convinced that the Jewish renaissance.”

This is key that a Jewish to understanding Churchill’s thoughts. “A Jewish renaissance in this country can only have a strong and invigorating influence upon the Arab nation. Our kinship in language, race, character, and history gives the assurance we shall in due course come to a complete understanding.” And when he was at Mount Scopus, the site of the Hebrew University, he said, “I am perfectly convinced that the cause of Zionism is one that will bring good for the whole world. And I’m not only for the Jewish people, but it will bring with it prosperity, contentment, advancement to the Arab population.”

He stated, “The great event was taking place without injury or injustice to anyone. It’s transforming waste places into fertile. It is planting trees and developing agriculture in desert lands. It makes for an increase in wealth and cultivation. It makes two blades of grass grow where one grew before. And the people of the country who are the majority are deriving great benefit, sharing in the general improvement and advancement. The Jews who are being brought from Europe and elsewhere are worthy representatives of Jewry. So the cause of Zionism and the Zionist are taking every step to ensure it should be so.”

And Dr. Ruppin, who was the founder of the Kibbutz movement, that Churchill’s remarks made an absolute impression on everyone. And it’s important to remember, I mean, Churchill’s only going to be colonial secretary for just over a year, but by the time you get to 1921, the Histadrut had been founded in 1920. The Haganah had been founded, but the Histadrut was almost creating the whole infrastructure of a state. And of course, the dream of the Hebrew University. You already had the university in Haifa. Ironically, when that university was created, there was a debate which language should it be. Should it be in German? Because German is the language of science. On the contrary, it had to be the language of Hebrew and the Habima Theatre Company.

That’s what really impressed Churchill when he was in Palestine, what the Jews actually were doing. Now, so he comes back to Palestine having chopped the mandate in half. And it has to be said that Weizmann and the Zionist executive reluctantly exceeded to his demands. Well, he didn’t really have any choice. Jabotinsky is totally disillusioned. It had been Jabotinsky who’d fought for the British, remember. He’d created the Zion Mule Corps, he’d created the 38th and 39th Royal Fusiliers. And he was Lieutenant Jabotinsky, MBE. He’d been in prison. Let out when Herbert Samuel came to Palestine. He’d been accused of being a communist agitator. He, really, from then on, he remains on the Zionist executive till 1923.

But from then on, he realises that you’re going to have to take a more militant line. On the other hand, Chaim Weizmann, who was so at home with Churchill. He saw him as a Hebrew prophet by the way, Churchill. His son records this in his autobiography. It’s important to remember that at this stage, there were many supporters of Zionism, but Jabotinsky is disillusioned. And this is really the beginning. And I suppose the question you have to ask yourselves, and I have no answer to it, was the problem always irreconcilable? If Faisal had had his home in Damascus and the Arabs had felt satisfied, would it had worked? It’s the big question mark. One of the, you know, the ifs and buts of history, this is one of the ifs and buts.

So the mandate is chopped in half by Churchill. He doesn’t go back to the League of Nations for approval because, you know, one of the issues of international bodies, what power do they really have? And it’s in 1922, he goes back to London. But Samuel, the high commissioner, is more and more pressed. And he’s also aware that many of the Zionists coming into Palestine are very left wing. He’s violently anti-Bolshevik. And what kind of settlers are coming into Palestine? And he’s a representative of the British crown. How can he cope with this incredibly difficult situation? So he asks for clarity. Now what then happens is that, in London, there are Arab deputations who come having visited Rome.

The Archbishop of Canterbury wrote to Churchill, his name was Randall Davidson, “I should remonstrate against undue development of the Zionist policy in Palestine, especially in purchase of land. The stories were going round that our Jews were taking arable land from the Arabs.” And Churchill was satisfied by all sorts of evidence that, in fact, they were paying for wasteland and swamps. Now, there was a big meeting in July, in London, Churchill, Lloyd George, and Balfour at Balfour’s London house with Chaim Weizmann. And Weizmann actually says the Balfour Declaration is being whittled away. And that Herbert Samuel was causing problems now. And Weizmann stated, “The Balfour Declaration meant an ultimate Jewish majority.”

Now Churchill actually demurred at this interpretation of the speech while Lloyd George and Balfour, who were very, very Zionist. Remember, they both came from minority peoples. Balfour was an austere Scot and Lloyd George, not austere, but he came from Wales. He had a Baptist background, the people of the book. And both, according to the minutes of the meeting, ‘cause it was a government meeting, Balfour and Lloyd George agreed that they always meant an eventual Jewish state. Whereas Churchill is demurring. You see, what on earth does the Balfour Declaration mean? The word state is not used and the borders are not drawn in the Balfour Declaration. “His Majesty’s Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”

Now by the 5th of August, Sir John Schuckburgh, who is the head of the Civil Service dealing with the Colonial Office saying that Herbert Samuel’s under incredible pressure, not only from the Arabs, but also from British officials who are not sympathetic to Zionism. Samuel writes to Weizmann five days later, and this is what he writes, “The Arabs, including the educated classes, believe that Zionism means overwhelming them by immigrant Jews.” And again, in August, Churchill receives another Arab delegation. This is what they say to him. “The Jews are scattered all over the world, this country where they have great.” And Churchill then says to them, “Palestine is a country where they have great historic traditions. And you cannot brush that aside. They were there many 100 years ago. They’ve done a great deal for the country. It is to them a sacred place.”

Again on November, 1921, Samuel writes to Churchill saying that the Arabs were provoked to riot by hardcore Jewish communists. He’s referring to the Nebi Musa riots. And Churchill writes back, “It’s Samuel’s responsibility to purge the Jewish colonies of communist elements and have all the guilty of subversive agitation expelled from the country.” Remember, that is pressing Churchill’s button, the word communist. But this is also the letter. He’s more angered by the Arab attempt to use violence in the hope of frightening us out of a Zionist policy. And then on the 1st of February, 1922, in the House of Commons, at question time, a conservative member of Parliament, Sir William Joynson-Hicks asks the prime minister to explain the reason why the government have promised the Jewish people a national home, quote, “In a country which is already a national home for the Arabs.”

And this is when the Middle East Department, under Churchill, now has to actually determine what it means by the Balfour Declaration. And this is the preamble. “It is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world in order that become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take pride on the grounds of religion and race and take an interest.” Now, again, the Arabs come back, there’s a meeting at the Hyde Park Hotel and it’s head of the Arab delegation was actually a Christian Arab. He said, “If the Arabs don’t get their way, they’re going to kill the Jews.”

Now also, there’s problems with Pinhas Rutenberg who I talked about last week. He had employed a German firm for the equipment, for, remember, he’s going to electrify the grid in Palestine. And there’s a question in the house. The mandate is under attack. And on the 21st of June, a liberal peer, Lord Islington, introduces a motion in the House of Lords that the Palestine mandate was unacceptable and that the Rutenberg scheme would invest the Jewish minority with wide powers over the Arab majority. You know, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” And this is what he said, this is Lord Islington. “Zionism involves bringing to Palestine extraneous and alien Jews from other parts of the world. It’s a burden on the British tax prayer and a grave threat to the rights of the Arabs.”

Lord Sydenham, “Some of them are Bolsheviks who have already shown their most sinister activity. The Arab world has kept the Holy Land free from Bolshevism.” You see, this is Christianity now, the Holy Land. And warned Churchill that the mandate being presented to the League of Nations will undoubtedly, in time, transfer the, I’m quoting now, this is in Hansard, “Transfer the control of the Holy Land to New York, Berlin, London, and Frankfurt, and other places. Strings will be pulled from foreign capitals.” The House of Lords had a vote on the Balfour Declaration and by a vote, the motion was passed by 60 against 29 really to reject the Balfour Declaration.

And it was up to Churchill now to alter the declaration in the House of Commons. And he also had to deal with all sorts of complaints about purchase of land. William Joynson-Hicks opens the attack on Rutenberg saying that his concession had not been submitted to Parliament. And, in fact, he was a communist spy. And Churchill had to go into great detail. Do you remember, in my last session, I talked to you about Rutenberg and I went into quite a lot of detail about how he had been anti-Bolshevik, he’d worked for Kerensky’s government and Churchill had to tell his story in the House of Commons. And this is Lord Winterton. Lord Winterton, “You begin to buy land for the purpose of settling Jews, you’ll find yourself up against the hereditary antipathy that exists all over the world to the Jewish race.”

Now this Lord Winterton, we find him 16 years later representing the British government at the Evian Conference. Remember, in 1938, James McDonald, who was the commissioner for refugees for the League of Nations, he convened a meeting in Evian to look at the plight of Jewish refugees. And basically, very little was done. And at the end of the meeting, Lord Winterton actually went back to London and he apologised to the German ambassador for unwarranted interference in the affairs of a sovereign state. To me, this is pure anti-Semitism. And Churchill spoke very, very powerfully. He said, “Britain must keep the pledge that she’s given before all the nations of the world.”

And he pushed it through and there were some very, very principled characters who were with him all the way. And can we see the next slide please, Judy? Ah, no, sorry. I want to see Josiah Wedgwood, if you don’t mind. It’s my fault as ever, I’ve gotten around the wrong way. Have you got Josiah? Yeah. Josiah Wedgwood, he’s an amazing man. He was the great grandson of the Wedgwood family. I haven’t got time to tell his biography, but I think in August when we have a little more time, I’m going to look at some of the righteous and rescuers. And he’s an extraordinary man, Josiah Wedgwood, and a great friend of the Jews and also, a great fighter for all sorts of rights. And he was a close friend of Jabotinsky who we had met in the First World War. And he wrote a book really extolling the dream of Zionism.

And there were also Jewish MPs later on. And should we see their faces, if you don’t mind, Judy? Should we see they? No, I want to see the Jews. I will go back to the Webbs later, it’s my fault. If you could go on. If you go on from him to the next two.

• [Judy] Sorry, Trudy, who would you like to see now?

• I’d like to see Barnett Janner and Sydney Silverman.

• [Judy] So who’s first? Silverman?

• It doesn’t matter. I think, yes.

• There we go.

• There’s Sydney Silverman and Barnett Janner, I’ll be talking much more about these guys later. And also Eleanor Rathbone. These of them in later life and as young men, they’re in the house and we’re going to see that they’re going to be huge supporters of Zionism. There are Jews, there are non-Jews. And remember, Churchill does get it through. 292 in favour, 35 against. And then of course, he issues the White Paper on Palestine. And this is actually, it was a disappointment to many of the Zionists because he basically says that the British will completely stick by the Balfour Declaration.

But phrases, I’m quoting from the preamble, “Phrases that have been used that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. That his Majesty’s government regard any such expectation as impracticable.” And he goes on to say that the Zionist executive does not desire to possess any share in the government of the country. And of course, Hebrew is to be a language of the state and they’re going to facilitate Jewish immigration, but it’s tied to economic absorbative capacity. So even Churchill, who I really do believe was a great friend of Zionism, he did link that. And of course, Jabotinsky and Weizmann was disappointed. To Jabotinsky, it was an a great anathema.

The White Paper, Great Britain did not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish national home. That such a home should be founded in Palestine. Now it’s still not clear. This is the problem with the Balfour Declaration. I know some students online have sent me all sorts of articles saying that surely Palestine should be the whole limit of the mandate. And that’s what Israel should be today. And I know there are some who say that it should be the whole of King David’s kingdom at its height. I’m now talking about the 1/3 of Palestine left. That is what Churchill’s talking about.

But such a home should be founded in Palestine. Immigration would not exceed the economic absorptive capacity of the country. And steps will be taken to establish a legislative council. And this is the League of Nation’s approval of the mandate. And ironically, the mandate only comes into force on September the 29th, 1923, even though the British had already appointed a high commissioner and the fact that they chopped off 2/3 of the mandate. And the World Zionist Organisation is regarded as the Jewish agency. Weizmann was its president. He spent much of his time in London really working on the British government to keep them on the path.

David Ben-Gurion became the leader of the Histadrut. He was far more military and he was far more militant. The military in Palestine, very much as I’ve said before, tended to favour the Arabs. But the British government in London tended to be more pro-Jewish. But the foreign office was very complicated. More about that as we go through. The Jewish agency was controlled of course by the labour government. So, basically, Churchill is then out of office. He’s no longer the colonial secretary. And so can we go back to the picture of Churchill if you don’t mind, right at the beginning, Judy? I drive her crazy, sorry.

So Churchill is out of office. He’s out of the Colonial Office. And his next post, he is chancellor of the Exchequer. And he and Williams talked about this, and this is not what I intend to talk about, but he, of course, he was in charge of the disastrous return to the gold standard, which led to deflation. You had the terrible general strike of 1926 and unemployment. He later said, “It is the greatest mistake I ever made.” Now 1929, there’s a huge defeat for the Tories and Churchill’s out of office, but he’s still a member of Parliament.

Now, as William has told you, Churchill was often broke. He was a gambler. He lived life to the full and he was a brilliant journalist and a brilliant speaker. And in 1929, he went on a tour of Canada and America. He’s still an MP, but he is out of office. And of course, it’s in 1929 that terrible trouble erupts in Palestine at the Western Wall. I’m not going to spend time on this because I have covered it in a previous lecture. And once the website is up, you will be able to get hold of it. But there are also many books on it and we are preparing quite an extensive bibliography. Suffice to say, there was a terrible incident in Palestine, in Jerusalem on Temple Mount whether it was stirred up by the British, or by extreme Zionists, or by Haj Amin al-Husseini.

The problem with this area is there are so many conflicting accounts. The point is, it resulted in a terrible massacre in Jerusalem, in Hebron, the mob went on the rampage, 133 Jews were killed mainly by Arab insurrectionists. 110 Arabs were killed mainly by the British. And what is fascinating is that Jabotinsky, in Palestine, had begged the British to put more police at the Temple Mount. They knew it was happening. And even Weizmann, in London, they saw, and Ben-Gurion, they knew something awful was going to happen. And then after the terrible riots, the situation is going to lead to the British doing what they always do, setting up a commission.

Meanwhile, while this is all happening, Churchill is in San Francisco and he is asked for his opinion. And this is what he says. “The Jews have developed the country, grown orchards and grain fields out of the desert, built schools and great building, constructed irrigation projects and water powerhouses and made Palestine a much better place in which to live than it was before they came a few years ago. The Arabs are much better off than they were before. It will be a short time before they realise it.” He was always an optimist. “The Jewish enterprise, the Arab owes nearly everything he has.

Fanaticism and a sort of envy have driven the Arabs to violence. The problem is one of proper policy until harmony has been restored.” And of course, he writes many articles on this vein. He gives lectures on this in America. And this is a memo from Sir Ronald Lindsay, who is the British ambassador to Washington. “The effect of these articles can only be to induce Jews in America who might wish to take a moderate view to refrain from doing so. They will expect a purely Zionist policy from the Conservatives when they come into office and will hamper any move towards settlement until then.”

And Churchill also published his views in “The Sunday Times.” And then what happens, we can go back to that picture of Beatrice and Sidney Webb, if you don’t mind, Judy. Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb, better known as Beatrice Potter, not the Beatrice Potter novelist. They were great social reformers. She’d done a lot of work on the East End. He had been quite involved in Zionism, but he was taking a different view. And he wrote the Passfield White Paper. You have a Labour government in power under McDonald and the White Paper, which states that Britain’s obligation was an equal one with regards both the Arab and Jewish community in Palestine.

And the Passfield White Paper said, “We will stop even though the riots were caused by the Arabs, it was because they were frightened of Jewish immigration.” And don’t forget there’d been a slump in 1929, the Wall Street Crash, there’s terrible poverty. You could, for example, if you read Golda Meir’s autobiography, she gives this in great detail what is actually going on in Palestine at the time. It was a terrible time of deprivation. And the Webbs, the Passfield White Paper, they decide because she has a lot to do with the writing of it. He says that in the end, no more Jews can come into Palestine if there’s one unemployed Arab. Weizmann resigns, he’s broken, he’s totally disillusioned.

But there is enough support in parliament that in the end, it’s reversed. And economic absorptive capacity is now tied to the Yishuv. If the Yishuv could maintain the economic side of the Jewish settlement, then more Jews could come in. And this is a speech that Churchill made on the 2nd of November, 1930. And this is off the Balfour Declaration. And he explained that Passfield, who’s the new colonial secretary, have overlooked and ignored the fact that the obligation was different in character.

So this is Churchill at his best. “The 1922 obligations were totally different. The 1922 White Paper recognised an obligation not only to the inhabitants of Palestine but to the Zionist movement all over to world to whom the original promise was made. The British obligation is to Jews wherever they might be. No similar obligation has been made to the Arabs outside of Palestine. It was to the Jews alone to whom Britain was pledged with regards to building a homeland in Palestine by immigration. As to whether the obligation which Great Britain had contracted by the Balfour Declaration, a Palestine mandate were wise or unwise, there is no use answering at this stage. The sole question is whether they are being fulfilled.”

Churchill was a man of great honour, you know? He basically said, we made an obligation. We had committed ourselves. We cannot renege. In parliament, he joined an informal committee which was made up of people like Josiah Wedgwood, Jewish MPs, Eleanor Rathbone, to really do everything they could to speak up for the Zionists. And when Weizmann came to thank him, because basically, the White Paper was rescinded by linking it not to the whole of the mandate but to economic absorptive capacity. And Weizmann still believes in England. And basically, he still has hope. And I think we must be very careful not to use the hindsight of history.

Look, I would suggest that I believe the British were in the Middle East for pragmatic reasons. That’s what most states do, you know? And I think most of you would agree with me. I do believe Churchill was a Zionist, but he was also an English statesman. I mean, there were many who believed what he did in Palestine in 1922 was wrong. But one thing that was really true about Churchill was his stand against Hitler. And this is where, again, he’s going to be very much on the side of the Jews. And, actually, in August, 1932, when he was travelling in Bavaria, he was actually writing a biography of his illustrious ancestor, John Churchill, the first Duke of Marlborough, by the way, his army contractor was Sir Solomon de Medina, first Jew ever to be knighted.

His son, Rudolph, said to his father, “Do you want to meet Hitler?” Because he knew Hanfstaengl, you know, the half American, half German colleague of Adolph Hitler. “Do you want him to arrange a meeting?” And Churchill, no meeting occurred, but Churchill said, “Tell your boss, anti-Semitism may be a good starter but a bad sticker.” They didn’t ever meet. But Churchill did see a progression of brown shirts. And he loathed any kind of extremism, be it communism or fascism. He very much saw them as the same kind of tar. He believed in personal freedom. He’s also a Victorian, never forget that.

And in April, 1933, there’s a debate, Hitler comes to power in Germany. And this is what he said in the debate. “The dictatorship appears to every form of fighting spirit. The reintroduction of duelling at universities, the persecution of the Jews. I cannot rejoice that the Germans have not got the heavy cannon, the thousands of military aeroplanes and the tanks which they have been pressing for to make their status that of other countries.” And in the 30s he wrote, and he wrote, and he wrote about the danger of Hitler and the dangers of Nazism. And in November, 1935, he made quite a close friendship with a woman called Baroness von Goldschmidt-Rothschild. She was the only daughter of the great German-Jewish coal magnate Freidlander-Fuld. And she told him all about the Nuremberg Laws.

He continually defends Zionism in the House of Commons. And this is one of his speeches. “Surely the House of Commons will not allow the one door which allows some relief, the one door which is open, which allows some escape from those conditions to be summarily closed.” So Churchill in the house, Josiah Wedgwood, who is with him on this all the way begging also for rearmament. But the great motif in Neville Chamberlain’s government in particular was appeasement. And again, try not to use the hindsight of history. They had fought a ghastly war. That war of 1918, it’s impact is incalculable. And is it 20 years later, we’ve got to do it all over again? We lost a cream of a generation. Are we going to have to do it again? And of course, you know what happened at Munich.

But what the Arabs, under Haj Amin al-Husseini, in Palestine, were playing an absolute blinder. In the 30s, the situation in Palestine is ratcheted up a lot. Why? Because Hitler had a judenrein reich policy. And between '33 and '36, 136,000 German Jews came into Palestine. They weren’t necessarily Zionist, they were fulfilling Zionism. And they authored the mandate. They were an incredible immigration. I mean, those of you who live in Israel and I mean, I don’t have to tell you about Bauhaus architecture, I don’t have to tell you about the coffee houses, I don’t have to tell you about, you know, the bookshops. They totally enriched the mandate. But Haj Amin has become a complete fanatic. And he creates the Higher Arab Committee and he basically says to the British, in any future war, if you do anything to help the Jews, we’re going to turn against you.

The British had tried to come up with one more partition to partition 1/3 of the mandate into a tiny little sliver. The Arabs rejected, even though the appeals, this is in 1937, because what Hitler does, and it’s fascinating, just as he did it in foreign policy, push, pull, he did it with the Jews. I’ll see how far I can go. After Evian, Goebbels actually wrote in his diary, “We savages are better than the so-called civilised world because we say what we’re going to do.” And then the final coup de grace, 20th of April, 1939, the issue of Palestine, the Peel Commission that suggested partition of the 1/3 that was left is rejected. And policy is dictated from London. 20th of April, Chamberlain stresses the importance of having the Muslim world on his side.

The quote, “If we must offend one side, let us offend the Jews.” And he issues the White Paper on Palestine where basically, he says, “We never meant anything by the Balfour Declaration, because if you think about it, what does it mean?” And as a gesture of humanity, the British government were going to allow 15,000 Jews into Palestine for five years. Then immigration was going to cease unless the Arabs would allow it. And that meant you had another Arab-dominated state in the Middle East. And this is shutting, as far as the Zionists were concerned, be they Irgun, or Haganah, or Stern. Stern is about to be formed, remember?

It didn’t really matter. Be they Weizmann, be they Jabotinsky, be they Ben-Gurion, as far as they were concerned, this is the betrayal. Weizmann is really, he loses power now. He’s going to be incredibly useful. But this is, you know, he put his faith in Britain. And Britain was not faithful. And it’s absolutely tragic.

Churchill makes a brilliant speech in the House of Commons. “I find this a melancholy occasion. Others may feel that the burden of faith weighs upon them oppressively. Some may even be pro-Arab, some may be anti-Semite. None of these motives offer me any means of escape because I was, from the beginning, a sincere advocate of the Balfour Declaration. As a person intimately and responsibly concerned in the earliest stages of Britain’s Palestine policy, I could not stand by and see the solemn engagement into which Britain has entered before the world set aside for reasons of administrative convenience, or it will be a vain hope for the sake of a quiet life.

I would feel personally embarrassed in the most acute manner if I lent myself by silence or inaction to what I regard as an act of repudiation. Now, there is a breach, there is a violation of the pledge. There is an abandonment of the Balfour Declaration. There is an end of the vision, the hope, and the dream. What will our friends say? What will the opinion of the United States be? Shall we not lose more? And this is a question to be considered most naturally in the growing sympathy and support of the United States. What will our potential enemies think? What will those who have been stirring up the Arabs think? Would not the Arab agitators themselves not be encouraged. This is another Munich. We are asked to submit to agitation, which is ceaselessly inflamed by Nazi and fascist propaganda.”

Nathan Laski wrote from Manchester, “May I congratulate.” Remember they’d been friends from the beginning when he was MP for that constituency. “May I congratulate you upon the great and statesmanlike speech you gave on the Palestine question. I think that it’s not exaggerating to say that you will get the blessing of millions of Jews all over the world.” Unfortunately, the speech didn’t make any difference. The vote was 268 in favour, 179 against. So it was carried, the White Paper was carried. But in September the third, 1939, Chamberlain brings Churchill back into government as First Lord of the Admiralty. But I will leave that for tomorrow because I want to look at the Jews in war years.

There’s one other rather amusing incident because Churchill bumps into the Jews in another way. His rather wayward daughter, Sarah, actually marries a Jewish entertainer, a man called Vic Oliver who’d been married before. He was a very charming, sophisticated Viennese Jew. And I’d like to thank my student, they know who they are, for sending me this letter. It’s absolutely amazing, because Churchill writes a concerned letter to his daughter, who’s very young saying that, please, please don’t do anything. He’s 20 years older than her. Don’t do anything precipitative. Let us check this man’s origins. Whether he’s still got a wife, his race.

I don’t think it’s anti-Semitic. As a mother, I, myself, have expressed certain concerns over the years. But it’s interesting that he and somebody else about Churchill, his daughter became quite a good actress. And I will be on Thursday at the 7:30 slot talking about Churchill and his great friendship with a media mogul called Sir Alexander Korda, the great British mogul, who in fact, was a Hungarian Jew who is terribly involved in propaganda films. As usual, I haven’t got through all the information I wanted. Wendy is right. We must go slower.

But let me just see how the questions are.

Q&A and Comments

Q: “Why were Anglo Jewry against the Balfour Declaration” asks Rod. A: Look, it’s mainly Jews who were in the British establishment. It’s one of the dilemmas of Jewish identity. In Britain, there was a wonderful letter when all the Eastern Europeans came over. Lord Rothschild, who was president of the Jewish Free School, he wrote a letter to the parents in which he said, You know, “Send your boys to the football fields. Don’t send them to Cheder. Make them into English gentlemen.” The Balfour Declaration promising the Jews a homeland in Palestine when there’s a lot of Jews who are trying to be Englishmen. And the question you have to ask yourself, certainly for the grandees to sit in Parliament, to become a member of the House of Laws, you know, to fall in love with the British establishment. This is the great dilemma of the Jew, I think. You know, are we a nation? Are we a key culture? Are we a people? Am I English or am I a British Jew?

I am reading “The Light of Days: Women Fighters of Jewish Resistance.” An excellent insight. Thank you for drawing a attention. Yes, of course, Judy Batalion spoke a couple of weeks ago, and Spielberg’s making it into a film.

This is from Edward Cross. “'The Protocols’ is easily available in the UK. Just go to any large Muslim supermarket. My son was at the University of Bradford.”

Ellie, “Churchill and the Palestine immigration quote.” Yes, he linked it to economic absorptive capacity. So it didn’t slow it too much, actually. 80,000 did come in, The Third Aliyah, but yes, he is putting the brakes on as well. What does the Balfour Declaration mean?

Q: Marilyn, “To what extent was Arab nationalism above the interest of the Arab few, the Lords as opposed to the Arab masses?” A: Marilyn, that’s a very interesting question. It would take hours to answer. Can you save that? Because when we look at the Arab-Israeli conflict, I will be, myself and colleagues will be dealing with this.

Q: “Why did the Turks ally with the Germans rather than the Brits?” A: Because the Kaiser was very persuasive and they, look already, the Brits were making huge inroads into the Ottoman Empire. Think about Egypt. That had been part of Ottoman territory and basically, they thought the Germans would win.

This is from Romi. “After Tisha B'Av, I felt more aware of the need to return to our homeland. While the Arabs had many states to call, the Jews had none.

Q: “How could the British place them on an equal footing or see the Jews as less needy of a homeland?” A: You see, Romi, there was a lot of Jews telling the British government, including Edwin Montagu, that I’m an English Jew. There was, you know, before the Balfour Declaration was issued, when it was being discussed, there was a conjoint letter put together by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Board of Deputies and the Anglo-Jewish Association denying the Balfour Declaration, saying, we are quite happy with our status in the countries in which we live. We are Englishmen of the Jewish religion.

Next week, William’s going to lecture on Napoleon and I’m going to lecture on Napoleon and the Jews because I want you to see the ramifications of Jewish identity that really begins with the French Revolution. What are we? Are we a nation in exile? Are we a religious group? And what about those of us who are no longer religious, but we feel part of the Jewish world but we don’t live in Israel? Cultural affiliation. I keep on quoting Elias Canetti, actually, “No people more difficult to understand than the Jews.” Every one of you will come up with your own answer.

“Britain has never made promises to the Arabs. See McMahon’s letter to ‘The Times’”. Now this is very interesting because Lawrence consulted McMahon and he said he didn’t. Let me see what you’re saying. Sorry.

“Many references have been made in the Palestine Royal Commission to the McMahon pledge. It has been suggested to me that the continued silence on the part of the giver of the pledge may be in itself misunderstood. I feel therefore called upon to make some statement. But I’ll confine myself whether the portion of Syria, now known as Palestine, was or not intended to be included in any territory in which the independence of the Arabs was guaranteed in my pledge. I feel it my duty.” Yes, you see this. McMahon didn’t but others interpreted it differently. That is the problem. It’s all so woolly that map. This is McMahon. Thank you for showing this to us.

Q: Martin Bellman. “Churchill drank large amounts of alcohol every day. How did he survive in Arab?” A: He wasn’t there very long and I, you know, and besides, in Cairo, it was British-controlled Cairo. I’m sure that he drunk at the Officer Club and I’m sure in Jerusalem, he was at the King David Hotel where there was copious alcohol.

Q: “Are there records of the Arabs providing any confirmation they were the indigenous?“ A: Ooh David, we are into such naughty areas here. Who has the right to the land?

Rod is saying, "It’s clear that Britain reneged on the San Remo conference by giving up half of the promised Jewish state.” Was it a promised Jewish state? What is the terms of the Balfour Declaration?

Romain, she loves Meyer’s side. He was such an optimist. You see, Howard Epstein,

Q: “Do you agree that Churchill does the greatest favour by removing Transjordan? As we could never have secured these extensive from.” A: Howard, it’s very interesting talking about Jordan because there were certain Zionists in London who thanked Churchill for doing it and said, “At least we’ve got Palestine now.” And of course, you know, you can’t predict the future. You’re again, you are doing the ifs and buts of history, Howard.

Elaine is saying, “We have a wonderful book by Gideon Biger, ‘The Boundaries of Modern Palestine.’ We took a yearlong course with him, which he taught about the wonderful things the British did in Palestine. Electricity, roads, bank.” Yes, of course. You know, it’s not all negative and it was costing the British a lot of money. It’s not all negative, but much of it was done actually by the Jews.

Q: “How are the assassination of Lord Moyne and the Stern Gang regarded with the Israeli mainstream? Are they considered heroic or Jewish terrorists, or both?” A: Morris, you’re going to have to wait for tomorrow, and that is such a tough lecture to give because I know some of you are partisan and some of you are so anti.

Q: Was it Churchill’s extraordinary prescience that allowed him to see Hitler for what it was and his freedom from the need to please the majority to make no ways? A: Yeah. Hitler was, whether you agree with Churchill or not, he walked the world. Hitler was pygmy. You know, I’m reading you from his speeches. Don’t forget the man who was prime minister of England, who saved England, also won the Nobel Prize for Literature. He walked the world and yet he had such a fractured background. It’s fascinating, isn’t it? He had a father, who by the time Churchill, you know, he of course had tertiary syphilis, died when Churchill was 20. He had a very remote mother. He was so eager to please his father, and yet he was a mountain of a man.

Now, Michael Block,

Q: “If Churchill was such a Zionist and supporter of Judeans, why from 1942, when they knew for sure about the murder of Judeans in the Nazi camps, there’s nothing done to assist?” A: Michael, we are moving into terribly contentious waters. I will do everything in my power to walk the line. We’re looking at that tomorrow.

“If you could, can you tell the title of the…” I just mentioned the Arabis-Israeli conflict, it’s history and maps. I am not going to recommend a book on the Middle East. Myself and my colleagues will bring together lots. One of the problems is that when you get to this particular subject, how objective can any historian be?

Q: Am I aware that Churchill almost lost his life in New York by touring America? A: No, I didn’t know that, Elliot. You see, this is what I love about this course. There’s so much you can give me. Thank you, thank you.

Brie, “The original mandate. Most do not know that the Golan was part of the Palestine mandate and France and England exchanged territories with the Golan. Only now going to the French mandate for Syria.” Yeah, yep, yep. You’re right. Of course, you’re right. Problematic. They also carved up Kuwait out of the Mesopotamian mandate because they owed a sheikh a favour.

“Many of us are tribal Jews.” What’s a tribal Jew, Yolanda? “It wasn’t King David.” Oh, okay, sorry. Thank you for that. Thank you for that. Oh, so where would he have had his tipple? The American Colony, was that built? Where would he have had his tipple. I suppose in Government House. I didn’t realise that, thank you. More information.

Q: “How do we absolve Churchill? Read the sinking of the Struma” A: I’m going to be answering that. I’m not saying I can absolve him. He, I do not believe Churchill was complicit, but I don’t think he kept enough of an eye on. Should he have done? Could he have done?

“Tom Segev’s book on the life of Ben-Gurion, ‘A State at any Price’ gives a fascinating account, Zionism between the world wars.” Yes, Tom Segev’s book is brilliant. Some people think it’s brilliant. Other people think it’s ideological. You know, that’s what I mean.

Q: “Can we make a distinction between religious and observant? I’m a reformed Jew who strongly believes in the higher being but do not keep Shabbat or Kosher. I go to synagogue every Friday. I feel religious but not observant.” A: You see how you are now complicating it, Janet? That’s a fifth category, please. Culture, peoplehood, national, religious, observant. How many more? We wouldn’t have that problem if we were defining Christian, you know?

Thank you. Nice comments.

Q: “Was it not British Jews who made Balfour change state to homeland?” A: Yes, If we had more time, Tibar, there are five different draughts of the Balfour Declaration. Maybe many of you should go on thinking about doing a masters, actually. Because I know how interested and how much you all know. Lockdown is fascinating. It’s giving us a lot of time to think, isn’t it?

This is from Francine. “In a recent study, 50% of Arab men share a genetic link to ancient Canaanites. Therefore, Jews also have an indigenous right to Israel.” Hmm.

Now this is Morris. “While I regard myself as a staunch ethical Zionist, I have difficulty accepting the argument that the state was created from a tiny sliver of the Arab territory when the sliver was occupied by Arabs. Today, there’s a recognition of this difficulty as seen in the movement to abandon ‘Hatikva’ as the national anthem. I believe we have to recognise the wrong done and the necessity from that wrong.” Do you see how many different opinions, all legitimate, we have amongst our students? That’s why I love teaching you and I’m sorry about my hand. I’m going to have to go. I’ll go this way. No, I think that’s it, actually.

• [Judy] Yes, that’s it. Yeah.

• Thank you. Thank you all very much. I didn’t get through as much information as I wanted. I’ll leave Josiah Wedgwood and the others to another time, but tomorrow, I’m going to look at Churchill and the war years. It won’t be an easy lecture to give or an easy lecture to receive, so there’s a health warning on it. But bless you and welcome from the first day of Freedom Britain. Let’s start.

• [Judy] Thank you, Trudy.

• God bless, darling.

• [Judy] And thank you everybody. We’ll see you all tomorrow. Take care.

• [Trudy] Bye.

• [Judy] Bye bye.