CHAPTER SIX
At midnight on 23 March 1921, Churchill left Egypt for Palestine by overnight train. Sir Herbert Samuel and T. E. Lawrence accompanied him. At that time 83,000 Jews and 600,000 Arabs lived between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan, in what was known as Western Palestine. No Jews lived east of the river. Churchill’s principal object in going to Jerusalem was to explain to Emir Abdullah the decision of the Cairo Conference, and of the British Government, that Britain would support him as ruler of the area of the Mandate lying east of the River Jordan – hence its name, Transjordan – provided that Abdullah would accept a Jewish National Home within Western Palestine, and do his utmost to prevent anti-Zionist agitation among his people east of the Jordan.
Lawrence had already secured a pledge from Feisal, Abdullah’s brother, that ‘all necessary measures’ would be taken ‘to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible upon the land through close settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil.’1
On the morning of 24 March, Churchill’s train reached Gaza, the first large town within the southwestern boundaries of the Palestine Mandate. Gaza had a population of more than 15,000 Arabs, and fewer than a hundred Jews. A British police guard of honour met him at the railway crossing, and a mounted escort took him to the town. Captain Maxwell Coote, a Royal Air Force officer who had served as Churchill’s Orderly Officer in Cairo, later recalled that there was ‘a tremendous reception by a howling mob, all shouting in Arabic “Cheers for the Minister” and also for Great Britain, but their chief cry over which they waxed quite frenzied was “Down with the Jews”, “Cut their throats”. Mr Churchill and Sir Herbert were delighted with the enthusiasm of their reception, being not in the least aware of what was being shouted. Lawrence of course, understood it all and told me, but we kept very quiet. He was obviously gravely anxious about the whole situation. We toured the town surrounded by this almost fanatical mob which was becoming more and more worked up by its shouting. No one appeared to have bargained for this, but all went off without incident.’2
It was twenty-two years since Churchill had last been in a Muslim setting, when he had been part of the British Army fighting the Sudanese Islamic khalif. His views on Islam had been formed then, and were not favourable. In his book The River War, first published in 1899, he had written: ‘How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.’
Churchill had gone on to write: ‘The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.’3
* * *
Before Churchill rejoined the train in Gaza, he was presented with a petition signed by the leading Muslims of the town, setting out their aspirations for Arab statehood in Palestine, and protesting against Jewish immigration. The Arab reaction to Churchill’s arrival in Palestine did not bode well for fulfilling Lloyd George’s instructions for a cheap – and a tranquil – administration. On 25 March there were Arab demonstrations in Haifa to protest against any further Jewish immigration. The British Mandate authorities, who had announced a ban on all public meetings during Churchill’s visit, tried to break up the demonstrations. Violence followed, and the police opened fire. A thirteen-year-old Christian boy and a Muslim Arab woman were killed. Following this police action, anti-Jewish riots broke out in Haifa, during which ten Jews and five policemen were injured by knives and stones.
Taking up residence in Government House – the former German hospice on the crest of Mount Scopus, the Augusta Victoria, modelled on the castle of Hohenstaufen in the Rhineland – Churchill worked for three days on the task ahead of him: to listen to both Arab and Jewish representatives, and to give them his answer to their respective requests. He also set up his easel and, as a keen amateur painter, painted the sunset over the city.
On Sunday 27 March Churchill went to the British Military Cemetery on the Mount of Olives, to attend a service of dedication. After the service he made a short speech. ‘It was a company of many people and diverse faiths,’ he said, ‘which had met to commemorate the victorious dead, who had given their lives to liberate the land and to bring about peace and amity amongst its inhabitants, but there remained the duty and responsibility on those who were present to see that the task was completed.’
The cemetery, established after the conquest of Jerusalem at the end of 1917, contained the graves of 2,180 British soldiers, 143 Australians, fifty South Africans, forty British West Indians and thirty-four New Zealanders, as well as sixty men whose bodies it had not been possible to identify, and the graves of sixteen German, five Italian and three Turkish soldiers. ‘These veteran soldiers,’ Churchill said, ‘lie here where rests the dust of the Khalifs and Crusaders and the Maccabees. Peace to their ashes, honour to their memory and may we not fail to complete the work which they have begun.’4
The ceremony ended with three volleys fired by a guard of honour, and the sounding of the Last Post.
On 28 March Churchill welcomed Abdullah to Government House in Jerusalem. Abdullah insisted that an Arab Emir in Palestine was the best solution ‘to reconcile the Arabs and the Jews.’ He expressed his fears to Churchill, asking him: ‘Did His Majesty’s Government mean to establish a Jewish kingdom west of the Jordan and to turn out the non-Jewish population? If so, it would be better to tell the Arabs at once and not to keep them in suspense … The Allies appeared to think that men could be cut down and transplanted in the same way as trees.’
Churchill sought to put Abdullah’s mind at rest, telling him that there was ‘in his opinion, a great deal of groundless apprehension among the Arabs in Palestine. They appeared to anticipate that hundreds and thousands of Jews were going to pour into the country in a very short time and dominate the existing population. This was not only not contemplated, but quite impossible.’ There were then more than 600,000 Arabs in Palestine and 80,000 Jews. ‘Jewish immigration would be a very slow process and the rights of the existing non-Jewish population would be strictly preserved.’
‘A very slow process’ was not what the Zionists had envisaged. But Churchill assured Abdullah that if the Emir promised not to interfere with Zionist activity in Western Palestine, the British Government would promise that the Zionist clauses of the Mandate ‘would not apply’ in Transjordan, and that the Transjordan Government ‘would not be expected to adopt any measures to promote Jewish immigration and colonization.’5 This promise effectively destroyed Weizmann’s appeal for Jewish economic development east of the Jordan, and ended Zionist hopes of being able to extend the area of their settlement into the biblical lands of Bashan and Gilead.
As a result of his meetings with Abdullah, Churchill was able to report back to London that Transjordan would become an Arab kingdom ruled by Abdullah, and that Western Palestine, from the Mediterranean to the River Jordan, would be ruled by Britain, with a commitment to continued Jewish immigration.
* * *
On 29 March Abdullah visited the Mosque of Omar, the seventh-century Muslim shrine built on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. Just outside the Mosque – where three decades later he was to be assassinated by a Palestinian gunman – he tried to speak to the Arabs who had gathered to see him, but was interrupted by shouts of ‘Palestine for the Arabs’ and ‘Down with the Zionists’. The crowd then marched to the General Post Office to demonstrate against the Balfour Declaration. They were dispersed by armed British police.6
That afternoon, in Jerusalem, Churchill visited the building site on Mount Scopus of the future Hebrew University, which opened four years later. Churchill’s visit to the site was an important landmark in the university’s progress. Before planting a tree, he spoke words of encouragement that thrilled his listeners. ‘Personally, my heart is full of sympathy for Zionism,’ he told them. ‘This sympathy has existed for a long time, since twelve years ago, when I was in contact with the Manchester Jews. I believe that the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine will be a blessing to the whole world, a blessing to the Jewish race scattered all over the world, and a blessing to Great Britain. I firmly believe that it will be a blessing also to all the inhabitants of this country without distinction of race and religion. This last blessing depends greatly upon you.’
Churchill pointed out that Britain’s promise ‘was a double one. On the one hand, we promised to give our help to Zionism, and on the other, we assured the non-Jewish inhabitants that they should not suffer in consequence. Every step you take should therefore be also for moral and material benefit of all Palestinians. If you do this, Palestine will be happy and prosperous, and peace and concord will always reign; it will turn into a paradise, and will become, as is written in the scriptures you have just presented to me, a land flowing with milk and honey, in which sufferers of all races and religions will find a rest from their sufferings. You Jews of Palestine have a very great responsibility; you are the representatives of the Jewish nation all over the world, and your conduct should provide an example for, and do honour to, Jews in all countries.’
Churchill continued: ‘The hope of your race for so many centuries will be gradually realised here, not only for your own good, but for the good of all the world.’7
Churchill’s speech made a profound impression on the Zionists, who felt that they had found a friend. More than that: James de Rothschild, a leading British Jew and Member of Parliament, understood that by removing Abdullah from any control over Western Palestine, and giving him the eastern part of Mandated Palestine, Churchill had ensured the survival of the Jewish National Home. Thirty-four years later, Rothschild wrote to Churchill, thanking him for the fact that in Jerusalem in 1921 ‘you laid the foundation of the Jewish State by separating Abdullah’s Kingdom from the rest of Palestine. Without this much-opposed prophetic foresight there would not have been an Israel today.’8
* * *
On the morning of 30 March the Executive Committee of the Haifa Congress of Palestinian Arabs went to see Churchill at Government House in Jerusalem, and received his answer to their thirty-five page protest against Zionist activity in Palestine. It contained arguments that, while in places contradictory, were an amalgamation of long-held prejudices against the Jews, prejudices that were to remain an integral part of the Arab indictment in the years ahead. In the words of the memorandum: ‘The Arab is noble and large-hearted; he is also vengeful, and never forgets an ill-deed. If England does not take up the cause of the Arabs, other Powers will.’ It was not only the Muslims of Palestine to whom Britain would have to listen. ‘From India, Mesopotamia, the Hedjaz and Palestine the cry goes up to England now. If she does not listen, then perhaps Russia will take up their call some day, or perhaps even Germany.’ The voice of Russia, the Palestinian Arabs warned, ‘is not heard in the councils of the nations, yet the time must come when it will assert itself.’
In their memorandum, the Arabs sought to prove ‘that Palestine belongs to the Arabs, and that the Balfour Declaration is a gross injustice.’ As for the Jewish National Home, and the very concept of Jewish nationalism, they informed Churchill: ‘For thousands of years Jews have been scattered over the earth, and have become nationals of the various nations amongst whom they settled. They have no separate political or lingual existence. In Germany they are Germans, in France Frenchmen, and in England Englishmen. Religion and language are their only tie. But Hebrew is a dead language and might be discarded. How then could England conclude a treaty with a religion and register it in the League of Nations?’
The Arab memorandum continued: ‘Jews have been amongst the most active advocates of destruction in many lands, especially where their influential positions have enabled them to do more harm. It is well known that the disintegration of Russia was wholly or in great part brought about by the Jews, and a large proportion of the defeat of Germany and Austria must also be put at their door. When the star of the Central Powers was in the ascendant Jews flattered them, but the moment the scale turned in favour of the Allies Jews withdrew their support from Germany, opened their coffers to the Allies, and received in return that most uncommon promise,’ – the Balfour Declaration.
‘The Jew, moreover,’ Churchill was told, ‘is clannish and unneighbourly, and cannot mix with those who live about him. He will enjoy the privileges and benefits of a country, but will give nothing in return. The Jew is a Jew all the world over. He amasses the wealth of a country and then leads its people, whom he has already impoverished, where he chooses. He encourages wars when self-interest dictates, and thus uses the armies of the nations to do his bidding.’
The memorandum concluded by asking Churchill to agree to five specific Palestinian Arab requests, ‘in the name of justice and right.’ These were: ‘First: The principle of a National Home for the Jews be abolished. Second: A National Government be created, which shall be responsible to a Parliament elected by the Palestinian people who existed in Palestine before the war. Third: A stop be put to Jewish immigration until such a time as a National Government is formed. Fourth: Laws and regulations before the war be still carried out and all others framed after the British occupation be annulled, and no new laws be created until a National Government comes into being. Fifth: Palestine should not be separated from her sister States.’9 These States were Syria – then under French rule – and Egypt, under British rule but on the path to independence.
Churchill replied at once, speaking to the deputation in blunt terms. ‘You have asked me in the first place to repudiate the Balfour Declaration and to veto immigration of Jews into Palestine,’ he said. ‘It is not in my power to do so nor, if it were in my power, would it be my wish. The British Government have passed their word, by the mouth of Mr Balfour, that they will view with favour the establishment of a National Home for Jews in Palestine, and that inevitably involves the immigration of Jews into the country. This declaration of Mr Balfour and of the British Government has been ratified by the Allied Powers who have been victorious in the Great War; and it was a declaration made while the war was still in progress, while victory and defeat hung in the balance. It must therefore be regarded as one of the facts definitely established by the triumphant conclusion of the Great War.’
‘Moreover,’ Churchill told the Palestinian Arab delegation, ‘it is manifestly right that the Jews, who are scattered all over the world, should have a national centre and a National Home where some of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in this land of Palestine, with which for more than 3,000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated? We think it will be good for the world, good for the Jews and good for the British Empire. But we also think it will be good for the Arabs who dwell in Palestine, and we intend that it shall be good for them, and that they shall not be sufferers or supplanted in the country in which they dwell or denied their share in all that makes for its progress and prosperity. And here I would draw your attention to the second part of the Balfour Declaration, which solemnly and explicitly promises to the inhabitants of Palestine the fullest protection of their civil and political rights.’
The British Government was determined, Churchill said, to give the Zionist movement ‘a fair chance’ in Palestine. ‘If a National Home for the Jews is to be established in Palestine, as we hope to see it established, it can only be by a process which at every stage wins its way on its merits and carries with it increasing benefits and prosperity and happiness to the people of the country as a whole. And why should this not be so? Why should this not be possible? You can see with your own eyes in many parts of this country the work which has already been done by Jewish colonies, how sandy wastes have been reclaimed and thriving farms and orangeries planted in their stead. It is quite true that they have been helped by money from outside, whereas your people have not had a similar advantage, but surely these funds of money largely coming from outside and being devoted to the increase of the general prosperity of Palestine is one of the very reasons which should lead you to take a wise and tolerant view of the Zionist movement.’
There was no reason, Churchill told the Palestinian Arabs, why Palestine ‘should not support a larger number of people than it does at present, and all of those in a higher condition of prosperity.’ The task before the Zionists, Churchill added, was one of ‘extraordinary difficulty’. The present form of government would continue for many years, and step by step Britain would develop representative institutions leading up to full self-government. ‘All of us here to-day will have passed away from the earth and also our children and our children’s children before it is fully achieved.’ Meanwhile, the Jews would need the help of the Arabs at every stage, ‘and I think you would be wise to give them your help and your aid and encourage them in their difficulties. They may fail. If they are not guided by wisdom and goodwill, if they do not tread the path of justice and tolerance and neighbourliness, if the class of men who come in are not worthy of the Jewish race, then they will fail and there will be an end of the experiment. But on the other hand, if they succeed, and in proportion as they do succeed year by year, such success can only be accompanied by a general diffusion of wealth and well-being among all the dwellers in Palestine and by an advance in the social, scientific and cultural life of the people as a whole.’
Churchill concluded his remarks to the Arab deputation by urging them to grasp the positive prospects: ‘If instead of sharing miseries through quarrels you will share blessings through cooperation,’ he told them, ‘a bright and tranquil future lies before your country. The earth is a generous mother. She will produce in plentiful abundance for all her children if they will but cultivate her soil in justice and in peace.’10
The Arab deputation withdrew, its appeal rejected, its arguments rebutted. A Jewish deputation followed in its place. They too presented a memorandum, which expressed gratitude to the British for helping to rebuild ‘the National Home of Israel’, and pointed out that the Zionist programme ‘lays special stress on the establishing of sincere friendship between ourselves and the Arabs.’ The Jewish people, it added, ‘returning after 2,000 years of exile and persecution to its own homeland, cannot suffer the suspicion that it wishes to deny to another nation its rights.’
The Jewish memorandum sought to assure Churchill that ‘The Jewish people have full understanding of the aspirations of the Arabs with regard to a national revival, but we know that by our efforts to rebuild the Jewish National Home in Palestine, which is but a small area in comparison with all the Arab lands, we do not deprive them of their legitimate rights. On the contrary, we are convinced that 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 give the assurance that we shall in due course come to a complete understanding with them.’11
Churchill did not need convincing, telling the Jews: ‘I am myself perfectly convinced that the cause of Zionism is one which carries with it much that is good for the whole world, and not only for the Jewish people, but that it will also bring with it prosperity and contentment and advancement to the Arab population of this country.’
Churchill then spoke to the Jewish deputation about Arab fears; fear of being dispossessed of their lands and property, of being ‘supplanted from their rights’, and of being put ‘under the rule of those who are now in a minority, but who will be reinforced by large numbers of strangers coming from over the seas.’
The Arabs had also expressed alarm, Churchill said, at the character of some of the new Jewish immigrants, ‘whom they accuse of bringing Bolshevik doctrines.’ It was the duty of the Jews, Churchill added, ‘to dispel’ these fears. He continued: ‘When I go back to London, I have no doubt I shall be told that but for the Zionist movement there would be no need to keep up such a large British garrison, at so great an expense, in this country. You must provide me with the means, and the Jewish community all over the world must provide me with the means, of answering all adverse criticism. I wish to be able to say that a great event is taking place here, a great event in the world’s destiny.’
Churchill wished to be able to say on his return to Britain that the ‘great event’ was taking place ‘without injury or injustice to anyone; it is transforming waste places into fertile; it is planting trees and developing agriculture in desert lands; it is making for an increase in wealth and of cultivation; it is making two blades of grass grow where one grew before, and the people of the country who are in a majority are deriving great benefit, sharing in the general improvement and advancement. There is co-operation and fraternity between the religions and the races; the Jews who are being brought from Europe and elsewhere are worthy representatives of Jewry and of the cause of Zionism, and the Zionists are taking every step to secure that that shall be so.’
Concerned about Bolshevik activity and influence among the Jewish immigrants from Russia, Churchill urged that the pioneers ‘must be picked men, worthy in every way of the greatness of the ideal and of the cause for which they are striving and in that way you will give me the means of answering effectively those who wish to prevent this experiment and cause from having its fair chance.’
‘I earnestly hope that your cause may be carried to success,’ Churchill concluded. ‘I know how great the energy is and how serious are the difficulties at every stage and you have my warmest sympathy in the efforts you are making to overcome them. If I did not believe that you were animated by the very highest spirit of justice and idealism, and that your work would in fact confer blessings upon the whole country, I should not have the high hopes which I have that eventually your work will be accomplished.’12
This was a powerful endorsement of the Zionist enterprise. One of the Jewish delegation, Dr Arthur Ruppin, the founder of the kibbutz movement, wrote in his diary that Churchill’s remarks ‘made a great impression on all present, as we had been afraid that he had been influenced against us by the Arabs.’13
Churchill’s appeal in his remarks for ‘picked men’ struck a deep chord. In farms throughout Europe, including in Soviet Russia, groups of Jews were being trained to become farmers. Only after they had mastered the art of tilling the soil, animal husbandry and other creative rural pursuits, were they sent on to Palestine to start new farming communities. This process was known in modern Hebrew as hachshara: preparation.
* * *
Churchill left Jerusalem at midday on 30 March. Before catching the evening train from Lydda to Egypt he had time to see two of the most impressive Jewish achievements in Palestine. One was the twelve-year-old Jewish town of Tel-Aviv, next to the ancient and predominantly Arab town of Jaffa. The second was the thirty-nine-year-old agricultural colony of Rishon le-Zion. In his speech to the people of Tel Aviv, in the presence of its mayor, Meir Dizengoff, who had presided over the growth of the city since its foundation two decades earlier, Churchill spoke of how glad he was to have seen ‘the result of the initiative of its inhabitants in so short a period during which, too, the war had intervened.’14
Churchill also stopped briefly at Sarafend, where a group of new immigrants from Russia were working at road building, the first large public works undertaking by the Mandate authorities using Jewish labour. Weizmann had arranged for Pinhas Rutenberg, the former Russian revolutionary – and later a leading anti-Bolshevik – who was bringing modern irrigation and electrification techniques to Palestine, to accompany Churchill and interpret for him.
Through Rutenberg Churchill asked the new arrivals if they were Bolsheviks. ‘This was much on his mind,’ Rutenberg later recalled, adding that Churchill ‘convinced himself’ that the pioneers were not Bolsheviks, but men ‘dedicated to the ideal of labour’ – the Labour Zionist ideal of redeeming the land by physical work, in the fields, on the roads, in stone quarries and on building sites.15
From Sarafend, Churchill was driven ten miles to Rishon le-Zion – Hebrew for ‘the first in Zion’ – one of the oldest Jewish agricultural villages in Palestine, established four decades earlier during the Turkish period. Before his visit, the inhabitants of Rishon had been divided as to how to receive him. The old-timers wanted to stress the hardships and dangers, including the hostility of some of the nearby Arab villages. The young people wanted to show him what had been achieved, even deciding to greet him on horseback.16
The youngsters prevailed. Churchill was met at the entrance by an enthusiastic display of horsemanship. He was then welcomed by the colony’s council, and handed a letter of greeting. ‘Your kind words we were happy to hear yesterday in Jerusalem,’ it stated, ‘gave us a clear idea of your opinion and they serve us as a good guarantee to enable us to reach our aim.’17
Founded in 1882 with only ten inhabitants, by the time of Churchill’s visit to Rishon there were two thousand Jews living there. He was so impressed by their enthusiasm and achievements that ten weeks later he told the House of Commons: ‘Anyone who has seen the work of the Jewish colonies which have been established during the last twenty or thirty years in Palestine will be struck by the enormous productive results which they have achieved.’ From ‘the most inhospitable soil, surrounded on every side by barrenness and the most miserable form of cultivation,’ he had been driven ‘into a fertile and thriving country estate, where the scanty soil gave place to good crops and good cultivation, and then to vineyards and finally to the most beautiful, luxurious orange groves, all created in twenty or thirty years by the exertions of the Jewish community who live there.’
Churchill recalled how, on approaching Rishon, ‘we were surrounded by fifty or sixty young Jews, galloping on their horses, and with farmers from the estate who took part in the work,’ and how, when they reached the centre of the town, ‘there were drawn up three hundred or four hundred of the most admirable children, of all sizes and sexes, and about an equal number of white-clothed damsels. We were invited to sample the excellent wines which the establishment produced, and to inspect the many beauties of the groves.’
What Churchill had seen and heard at Rishon impressed on him how precarious the work of the farmers could be, and how essential it was for Britain to protect them. ‘I defy anybody, after seeing work of this kind, achieved by so much labour, effort and skill, to say that the British Government, having taken up the position it has, could cast it all aside and leave it to be rudely and brutally overturned by the incursion of a fanatical attack by the Arab population from outside,’ he told the House of Commons on his return to Britain. It would be ‘disgraceful if we allowed anything of the kind to take place. I am talking of what I saw with my own eyes. All round the Jewish colony, the Arab houses were tiled instead of being built of mud, so that the culture from this centre has spread out into the surrounding district.’18
Churchill had been in Palestine for eight days. In that short time he had been struck by the enthusiasm of the Jews and the intensity of Arab hostility against them. The Zionists were optimistic that his visit boded well. According to the May issue of the leading Zionist journal in Britain, Churchill’s visit marked ‘a turning point in our movement: it indicates the passing from discussion to real practical work. He has detailed our difficulties in no uncertain manner, but with the sympathy and understanding of a friend. He has stated that his Zionism is based upon his faith in the Jewish people to make good in Palestine – it is only left to us to justify that faith.’19