867N.01/982
Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs (Murray)
The British Ambassador called on me by appointment yesterday to discuss the Palestine situation.
Sir Ronald stated that he was able to obtain anything but a clear impression in the American press as to the present attitude of American Jewry regarding the proposed partition of Palestine, and said he would appreciate any information that the Department was in a position to furnish him.
In reply I recalled the meeting of the World Zionists Organization at Zurich last summer when the American delegation, despite the vigorous opposition of its leader, Rabbi Wise, had joined with the majority of the World Organization in approving negotiations with the British Government on the basis of the partition proposal. Since Rabbi Wise had in the past been the most active spokesman in this country on the questions relating to Palestine it seemed only natural that his activities should be somewhat hampered by the outcome of the Zurich conference.
I also reminded the Ambassador of the position taken by Mr. Felix Warburg, speaking for the non-Zionist members of the Jewish Agency which convened in Zurich shortly after the Zionist congress. Mr. Warburg at that time made an urgent plea against the termination of the mandate and the establishment of a Jewish state, but, for reasons entirely different from those put forth by Rabbi Wise. The Rabbi does not want a restricted Jewish state established such as was proposed by the Royal Commission. Mr. Warburg and other distinguished American non-Zionists, members of the American Jewish Committee, are opposed in principle to the establishment of a Jewish state and separate Jewish nationality on the grounds that such action would seriously prejudice the position of Jews the world over and lead almost inevitably to widespread anti-Semitism.
There was, I said, on the other hand, undoubtedly a considerable portion of American Jewry which, while deploring the necessity for abandoning the present mandate, nevertheless accepted the partition proposal as a basis for negotiation in the hope that much more favorable terms for the establishment of the new Jewish state would result from such negotiations with the British Government.
In conclusion I reminded the Ambassador that American Jewry in general, regardless of undoubted disagreements as to policy, is united in a feeling of profound concern over the present plight of Jews in various European states and, whether Zionist or non-Zionist [Page 922] in conviction, American Jews had shown themselves prepared to contribute generously toward the amelioration of the situation in which their European co-religionists find themselves and to endeavor by every practicable means to provide a refuge for their co-religionists whether it be in a Jewish national home or in a Jewish state. In this connection I recounted the views of the New Zionist Organization—the former Revisionists and radical wing of the World Zionists Organization—who regard the present plight of the Jews in Central Europe as a grave menace to peace and the establishment of a strong Jewish state embracing all of present Palestine and Transjordan as in the interest of not only Great Britain herself but of all countries of the world concerned in the preservation of peace.
Sir Ronald thanked me for this information and added that, as far as he was able to gather, progress in London with respect to the partition proposal seems to have slowed down and to be attended with some confusion.