Friday, Mary 31, 1957 — THE. D ETROIT JEWISH NEW S-2
Purely Commentary.
The Fluttering Dove of Peace
Interesting campaigns • for peace in the
Middle East have been instituted in many quar-
ters. Nearly all of them are linked with the
existing Arab refugee problem. They deserve
analysis.
Let us start examining the fluttering dove
of peace with a proposal made by an Israeli.
In a letter published by the New York Times,
a Jerusalem physician, Dr. Simon Shereshevsky,
declares that there is no real hope for peace
as long hundreds of thousands of refugees live
on Israel's borders and he disapproves of the
two conditions set by Israel—that there can
be no solution to the problem before the sign-
ing of a peace treaty and that the refugees
must be resettled only in Arab states.
Dr. Shereshevsky suggests that "whoever
has a sincere and honest belief in the possible
resettlement of Arab refugees in Israel must •
propose first of all an attempt to resettle a
small number, a few thousand, in order to know
how to continue with the . plan, without fixing
the final number."
While he admits that no one can foresee
whether such an experiment can succeed, he
nevertheless insists that the Israel government
must take the initiative to recognize "in prin-
ciple the right of the refugees to return." Such
an Israeli declaration, he contends, "would
exert untold influence on the thousands of
refugees and prepare the ground for a real
peace."
Although the Jerusalemite points to the
need for cooperation by all concerned —
Israel, the UN, the refugees and the Arab
states.—and suggests the formation of a mixed
commission to handle the refugees' resettle-
ment, he has failed to take into account so
.many factors, that his statement amazes us.
Surely, he knows the danger of a Fifth Col-
. urnn, the threat from fedayeen who might be
- sent into Israel to represent the refugees
whom Israel is advised to. welcome under
leis plan. .
The solution of any problem in the Middle
East calls for the establishment of a two-way
road, and this is especially true of the refugee
problem. If it is to be tackled by means of the
partial -settlement of some of their number in
Israel, it must be approached by direct nego-
tiations-7-Israelis are to be permitted to do the
selecting of newcomers, if refugees are to trek
back into Israel. If Arabs are to be permitted
entrance to Israel, Israelis must be permitted
to go to the Arabs for consultations. This calls
for mutual discussion and for critical examina-
tion. Bat so far, all the proposals are for Israel
to open her doors wide, while there is no talk
about granting similar rights to Israelis.
Dr. Shereshevsky's plan is a commendable
dream. It fails to take into account the rejec-
tion by the Arabs of any sort of negotiations
with Israel. It entertains the fantastic idea that
a declaration for their resettlement would exert
"untold influence" upon the refugees them-
selves. The Jerusalem physician overlooks the
fact that these refugees have been and con-
tinue to be fed on hatred of Israel. It is doubt-
ful whether many of them would consent to
a return to Israel: all they appear to be striv-
ing for is Israel's destruction. Israelis and their
friends must reject every step which might
provide a road towards the State's destruction.
The Shereshevsky plan would open an avenue
for fedayeen and Fifth Columnists and would
bring disaster to Israel:
It is to be regretted that statements like
his may leave the impression that the Israelis
are unwilling to talk peace by way of solving
the refugee problem. We believe this to be very
far from the truth. We admit that the premise
is correct: that peace will be speeded when the
refugee problem is solved. But Dr. Shere-
shev.sky's vague suggestion is certainly not the
way to such a solution.
* * *
Dean Pike's Realism -
There is far greater realism in the program
proposed by the Very Rev. James A. Pike,
Dean of New York's Cathedral of St. John the
Divine and Adjunct Professor of Religion and
Law at Columbia University, in a special ar-
ticle in the New York Times Sunday Magazine.
We were saddened to read the reiteration of
his view that, "as a non-Zionist," he was un-
convinced "by the arguments for the estab-
lishment of Israel in the first place." He is a
remarkable person, he has inspired, us with
his fiery speeches in which he has defended
Israel, and we would have assumed that he
would be among leaders in an effort to assure
justice for Jewry through an Israeli State. But
he is fair in recognizing Israel's existence and
in the need to protect the State, and we are
not unappreciative.
In his tackling of the refugee problem, he
is realistic in recognizing the existence of tragic
factors. For instance, he makes use of a state-
ment, already quoted on an earlier occasion by
your Commentator, made. by Ralph Galloway,
until recently head of United Nations relief in
Jordan, who said: "The Arab states do not
want to solve the refugee problem. They want
to keep it an open sore, as an affront to the
Unite,d. Nations and as a weapon against Israel.
Arab leaders don't give a damn whether the
refugees live or die."
By Philip
Slomovitz
Dr. Pike points to "the Arab aim to foster
in the refugees the notion that return to their
former homes is the only desideratum," and
he hastens to discredit such an idea. He thus
describes the danger and the real possibility:
"Assume that there is a minimum of 800,000
refugees (it is hard to get a firm figure: there
- vvere probably 500,000 to 600,000 to start with).
The population of Israel today is 1,900,000. No
nation, regardless of past rights and wrongs,
could contemplate taking in a fifth column of
such size. And fifth column it would be —
people. nurtured for ten years in hatred of
Israel and totally dedicated to its destruction
. . For an analogy we must think of this: the
scrupulosity with which the United States ex-
amines the views of each potential immigrant
does not encourage us to imagine that we
would be willing to take in nearly 71,000,000
sworn enemies of the nation, which is what
the proportionate figure would be."
(Our readers will recognize the utter
unrealism, of Dr. Sherevsky's ap-
proach, when it is compared with
the keen analysis of Dr. Pike.)
Dr. Pike anxiously searches for a solution.
He recognizes that the clock of history can't be
turned back; that the Israel territory, literally,
is not the same that was abandoned by the
refugees; that there are barriers in the path
of the refugee problem. But he believes there is
a solution, involving these elements:
"A permanent peace treaty," he declares,
would acknowledge Israel's existence and would
remove "trigger-happy".anxieties.
"Mutual development, with outside aid, of
water projects," he believes, would contribute
towards an increase of the arable land of both
Jordan and. Israel.
"Economic union and mutual planning," he
asserts, would increase employment opportu-
nities.
Then he tackles the question of the refu-
gees' resettlement, suggests that Israel, "her
borders secure, her existence recognized by her
neighbors," should admit a proportionate num-
ber of refugees—he mentions the number of
perhaps 100,000, "which back in 19.49 Israel
offered to take, though the offer was declined."
Dr. Pike recognizes that not rtao many of
the refugees may be willing to go back to
Israel, a land that is now strange to them.
"This quota filled," he suggests, "let the rest
be settled in Arab nations on new arable lands
made available by new water and in the new
industry and service trades that will follow."
There is realism in the eminent clergyman's
plan when he points out:
"The pattern for this has already been
set by Israel. in its resettlement - of some
400,000 Jews from Arab lands in Western,
Asia and North Africa. who abandoned their
property and whatever wealth they had and
arrived penniless in Israel. There have been
refugee camps in Israel all along—but with
this difference: they have been temporary-
reception centers, because ISrael really
wanted to settle the newccmiers."
To finance the plan, Dr. Pike suggests the
use of large sums available from the refugee
relief fund and by Israel's adding to it "the
value of the Arab property which it now utilizes
for others ... Then let the Arab countries add
to the account the value of the property of the
40,000 Jews who fled Arab lands into Israel."
He also suggests help from the United States.
At last, we have an equitable proposal
that takes into consideration not only the lands
evacuated by Arabs but also those confiscated
from Jews by Arab countries where they had
lived, in many instances, for thousands of years
lbievfeos.re they were compelled to flee for their
Leonard. N. Simons to Receive
Wayne State U. Honor Degree
Leonard N. Simons, promi- as Michigan movements. He is
nent Michigan advertising ex- a board member of the Jewish
ecutive, a leader in many civic Publication Society of America.
and philanthropic movements,
will receive an honorary de-
gree at the commencement ex-
ercises of Wayne State Univer-
sity, at the State Fair Colise-
um, on June 13.
Simons has been active in
the Detroit Historical Society,
the Detroit Round Table and
scores of civic causes, in addi-
tion to Jewish community af-
fairs.
In the 1957 Allied Jewish
Campaign, Simons played one
of the most important roles as
a pre-campaign co-chairman.
He is a former president of
Temple Beth El, a member of
the national executive of the
Union of American Hebrew
Congregations, is a Fellow of
Brandeis University and is ac-
LEONARD N. SIMONS
tive in many national as well
Reform Rabbi Assails Anti-Zionist
Activities of Alfred M. Lilienthal
NEW YORK (JTA) — Rabbi
William F. Rosenblum, former
president of the Synagogue
Council of America, has accused
anti-Zionist author and lecturer
Alfred M. Lilienthal of falsely
claiming the rabbi's endorse-
ment of one- of his books.
Rabbi Rosenblum made the
charge in a letter to Lilienthal,
one-time American Council for
Judaism member, in which he
described Lilienthal's activities
as "really a heinous affront to,
as well as attack upon, our
people in Israel, whose right to
life, liberty and existence
fervently espouse."
Rabbi Rosenblum made the
charge following an appearance
by Lilienthal on a New York
radio interview program, dur-
ing which the lecturer said
Rabbi Rosenblum had endorsed
his latest anti-Zionist book.
In his letter, Rabbi Rosen-
blum referred to "my letter to
you of some years ago." The
rabbi bluntly demanded that
Lilienthal stop using the 1953
letter "in any of your addresses
and appearances. All I did then
was to say you had a right to
present your views. Your use of
my letter in some advertising
since then,. as well as on' such
appearances as -last night (on
the radio program) creates the
impression that I am backing
you, rather than the right of
free expression."
Terming Lilienthal's pro-Arab
views "unwarranted," R a b b i
Rosenblum said "I do not wish
my name in any way associated
with • them."
tp01) 10 ■ 011•1•11.0.1•01.0 ■ 11 ■ 0-111MOMIN1111 ■ 011•1111.0 ■ 11•11111.q1.1 ■ 11 0•01-41 ■ 41,11111•14)11=1•041•1111.111111•1•11411101.0.11 ■ 41.11111.111
Boris Smolar's
'Between You
... and Me'
(Copyright, 1957,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Inc.)
Political Echoes:
Mention Texas, and one immediately associates it with a*
interests . . . No wonder that a conference on the Middle East
held last week in Dallas, Texas, was looked upon as.a one-sided
affair stimulated by American groups having oil interests in the
Arab countries . . . Especially since the speakers included people
who are closely associated with the Arabian-American Oil
Company, and not a single representative of American Jewish
groups interested in the Middle East . . This is apparently why
the three-day conference attracted almost no public attention,
despite the fact that high State Department officials were among
the speakers . . The most interesting and refreshing address
delivered at the parley was not by any of the State Department
experts or top officials of American oil companies, but by Ernest
K. Lindley, head of the Washington bureau of Newsweek
Can Arabs and Jews live together? Dr. magazine . . Lindley, a brilliant political analyst, was most
Pike doesn't believe the enmity is undying. outspoken in revealing diplomatic. "misplays" made by the State
He relates: • Department with regard to the Middle East situation . . He
"Maybe it was just a straw in 'the wind, pointed out that probably in all circumstances the United States
but when I visited with a class at the new had to disassociate itself from the Israel-British-French action
University of Tel Aviv, I 'observed that an in Sinai and Egypt . . However, he emphasized, the State
Arab student scented to be well received
Department could have followed a course more likely to produce
and he was friendly enough to the others.
constructive results . It might have insisted that the United
And at the Mandelbau• Gate, at the Jordan;-
Israel border in Jerusalem, we observed Nations take permanent control of the Suez Canal, or at least
something that is a foretaste of what that the UN Emergency Force keep control of the Suez Canal
could be.
until a satisfactory permanent arrangement for its operation
"On the Israeli side I saw a pile of new was negotiated . .•. He expressed regret over the fact that Britain
Arab picture magazines. 'Where did you get and France did not take the whole canal and hold it until the
them?' I asked the guard. 'From the guards UN agreed to assume full responsibility for it . . . The United
on the Jordan side,' he answered. 'We trade States, he said, could have insisted on full UN control not only
them.' I pressed further. 'When you do that, of the Gaza Strip, but also of the whole Sinai peninsula, pending
do you smile at each other?' Of course,' he a peace settlement between Israel and. Egypt . . . In his opinion,
retorted. 'We're friends; we have coffee the State Department took a position which substantially ignored
together.' Individuals can always get along the acts of Egypt's beligerency which had cause Israel to attack
with each other—or at least can judge each Egypt . . • Lindley asserts that the stand taken by the State
other for what each one is—once the official Department in the Skiai crisis greatly improved the American
tensions are relaxed.'
position in the Arab 904orld . . . He believes that the gains made
"Among the narrow, winding streets of by the U. S. in the Arab world have been achieved without
old- Jerusalem (in Jordan), shared as they weakening Israel, or seriously damaging Israel-American re-
are by native Arabs, tourists and donkeys, lations . . He told the conference that in his opinion, Israel
is a tiny side street surmounted by a large accomplished a considerable part of what it set out to do last
sign which reads, 'FOR PEOPLE ONLY.' October, and that he thinks Israel also "performed a service to
This provides a good slogan for any plan the free world" .. . At the same time, he drew attention to the
for the resettlement of the Arab refugees fact that Israel has suffered some disappointments in the ar-
and the consequent chance of peace for all rangements made ar acquiesced by the United States and the
United Nations
(Continued on Page 32•