History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2) — John Shaqi
History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2)Sokolow, Nahum
History
History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2)
Sokolow, Nahum
Jews -- Restoration; Zionism -- History
empowered to protect the Jews of Palestine and Syria, just as, for
example, the Polish Committee protected the Poles from Galicia, who
were also technically alien enemies. Sykes obtained this concession
after considerable labour. This was an official recognition of the
Zionist Organisation as competent authority. When at the time of the
most strenuous military efforts, the later categories of the male
population were called to the colours, the Zionist Organisation
in England was threatened with losing the last of its secretaries,
speakers, organisers, etc., and with seeing its activities restricted,
if not completely interrupted. None were more patriotic than the
Zionists, so many of whom were in the Army, but we had to deal with
a number of men who could be of no value to the Army, and who, on the
other hand, were indispensable to the Zionist Organisation. Previously
some had been left with us, but now it was a question of large numbers.
It was a generally recognised principle that people whose occupation
was of national importance were allowed to continue at it. I insisted
upon having this principle applied to Zionism. This matter could not
be settled by any single individual or by any single tribunal. The
question concerned a matter of principle, and had nothing to do with
individuals. Since we had received the declaration of recognition from
the British Government and the whole Entente, and as we had to prepare
the field for the realisation of this declaration, this ought surely to
have been regarded as a matter of national importance from the official
standpoint. Sykes adopted this point of view and made strenuous efforts
to have it realised. He was thoroughly convinced that our loyalty to
Great Britain and her Allies was boundless, and that in all our demands
the interests of both parties had been considered with equal devotion.
On the other hand, we recognised that when he denied us something
as inadmissible, though like any other man he might sometimes make
mistakes, he was open to change of conviction upon good reason being
shown, and that any stand taken by him against our proposals was due
rather to the fact that he regarded the matter at issue as unfavourable
in certain circumstances to Zionism, than that he had the interests of
Zionism less at heart than we; thus a community of effort and a mutual
trust was established, which led to a complete solidarity of aims. In
this way our work in conjunction with Sykes became the foundation for
our relations with the higher Government authorities, as also with
Sykes’ colleagues and successors.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account