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•