Historical Roots of Zionism
The Zionist movement was born out of the socio-political conditions faced by Jews in the 19th century. As a generalized jewish persecution affected most European countries and the situation in Eastern Europe was further worsening and culminating in violent pogroms, jewish movements with nationalist ambitions began to come together. The publication of Autoemancipation by Leon Pinsker in 1882 was a turning point, arguing that no laws or social reforms in Western societies could truly emancipate Jews. The only viable solution, according to Pinsker, was the creation of an independent Jewish state. At that point, the movement was far from being homogeneous, but still gained further momentum after the publication of Der Judenstaat by Theodor Herzl in 1896. Herzl played a central role in unifying the movement: his publication inspired the first Zionist Congress, which was held in Basel in 1897. During this congress Palestine was declared as the future homeland for the Jewish people. Recognizing the need for diplomatic support, Herzl emphasized the importance of securing the backing of a Great Power for the movement’s success. This diplomatic necessity was fulfilled after World War I, as the Ottoman Empire's territories were divided into mandates overseen by Britain and France. The British government’s strategic interests in the region led to the issuance of the Balfour Declaration in 1917, supporting the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This support also served Britain’s geopolitical goals by ensuring a British presence near the strategically vital Suez Canal and curbing French influence in the area.
Immigration Policies
The ambitions initially envisioned by the Zionist movement gradually came into conflict with reality. Born as a movement that aimed at rescuing and relieving oppressed Jewish communities, soon enough Zionism evolved into a project solely focused on nation-building and safeguarding the prospects of a Jewish state. As Ben-Gurion remarked, “We must consider not only the fate of those German children but the future of the entire Jewish people.” It was precisely perspectives like this one that shaped the immigration policies in the years that followed, more exactly through the selective immigration policy brought forward by zionist figures like Ruppin, Sheinkin and Ben Gurion.
Ruppin - German Zionist, director of the Palestine Office and therefore in charge of immigration - demanded a ‘quality immigration’ and emphasized that ‘in the selection of the human material lies the structure of the Jewish population of the Land of Israel in the future.’ With quality immigration, zionist leaders like Ruppin concretely meant giving preference to individuals that owned capitals, who had needed skills - such as doctors and administrators - and the young and able-bodied, who could work as agricultural laborers (Hacohen, 1998). As a result, the majority (80%) of the jews hoping to settle in Ottoman Palestine were rejected by the zionist leadership (Greenstein, 2022), 61% of the Jews that wanted to move were told not to come (Alroey, 2014) and substantial efforts to foster healthy ‘elements’ and exclude the weak and the ill were made (Bloom, 2007). Ruppin’s worry was that a large influx of - in his words - “inferior refugees” would pose a danger to Yishuv (Jewish residents in Palestine before the creation of the state of Israel) who instead needed candidates with the right “profession, state of health and character”: in other words they didn’t want “undesirable elements” (Ruppin). In the attempt to oppose illegal immigration, the Jewish Agency - Zionist pre-state government and operative arm of Zionist Organisation - had a strict control over permits. As a result, many Jews, including sick and impoverished individuals, were excluded and left to face persecution and death. Figures like Henrietta Szold, expressed concern about the presence of ill and destitute individuals among migrants and, in some cases, advocated for their return to Germany (Nova Lectio, 2021). Applications for asylum were meticulously screened, and those unable to work or with health issues were frequently denied entry.
Some of the Zionist major leaders statements on immigration:
Sheinkin wrote:
“This immigration lowers us in the eyes of the government and the local populace. They see poor, ragged, miserable people with tattered bundles, the dregs of society, who are unlikely to do the country any good…If there are never any wealthy, respectable, well-dressed, attractive people stepping ashore, the word ‘Jew’ will become synonymous for weak, inferior and low-class.”
At the Zionist Congress in 1933, David Ben-Gurion, one of the prominent leaders of the movement, declared:
"Eretz Israel today needs not ordinary immigrants but pioneers. The difference between them is simple: The immigrant comes to take from the land while the pioneer comes to give to the land. Therefore we insist on granting priority to pioneering aliyah. We see aliyah of this kind as a prerequisite for Zionist fulfillment. It would not be amiss to say that support for selective immigration was the leading view at the time.” (Hacohen, 1998)
Ussishkin, zionist leader, claimed that: “If the country could not save the people, let the people save the country.”
Zionism and National Socialism
During the years, zionist leaders and more specifically the Jewish Agency maintained contact with Germany and Nazi figures. Adolf Eichmann, a high-ranking SS officer and key architect of the Holocaust, held multiple discussions with Zionist delegates to facilitate the migration of Jews to Palestine. More precisely, The Jewish Agency and the Nazis brought forward negotiations that were marked by a controversial dynamic but that eventually highlighted their mutual interest: on one hand, the Nazis sought to expel Jews from Germany, while on the other, the Zionist leadership sought to prevent assimilation of Jews to Germany, to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine and facilitate the selective immigration of Jews to Palestine.
The Zionist leadership was aware of the Nazi discriminations and the Holocaust. At the 1935 Lucerne congress, the German delegation asked not to include on the agenda the discussion of the discrimination faced by Jews in Germany, warning that if the question arose they would be obliged to leave the hall (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 1935). By 1942, the Zionist press, such as the newspaper Davar, had reported the massacre of one million European Jews. However, despite being aware of the ongoing situation, the Jewish Agency upheld its selective immigration policy. Of the nine million Jews living in Europe before the Holocaust, six million were murdered. Ultimately, few of the survivors owed their survival to Zionist efforts: the Zionist movement remained indeed focused on its overarching goal, namely the establishment of a Jewish state. Soon enough, however, zionist leaders realized that “we are risking Zionism's very existence if we allow the refugee problem to be separated from the Palestine problem” (Ben-Gurion). When it became clear that European Jewry faced extermination and that there might be no Jews left alive, the fear amongst the Zionist leadership was the effect this would have on the Zionist project: ‘not only was European Jewry being destroyed: it would also be the end of the Zionist enterprise’ (Greenstein, 2022). As a result, their approach started gradually changing. In addition, immigration became central to the Zionist struggle and unrestricted immigration became viewed as an inseparable part in the effort to create Israel.
The Zionist Response to Refugee Rescue
There is one final piece to add to the story. The Zionist movement prioritized the establishment of a Jewish state over rescuing Jews during the Holocaust unless the rescue directly involved immigration to Palestine. The Jewish Agency (JA) downplayed reports of the Holocaust until the very end, withheld information about it, and obstructed efforts to aid Jewish refugees that did not align with their focus on Palestine. Had the rescue of Jews been the Zionist movement’s top priority, they would have pushed Allied nations to accept Jewish refugees, developed rescue plans, and advocated for an international organization dedicated to refugee aid. However, they did not pursue these actions. Instead, they opposed the establishment of the War Refugee Board (WRB), arguing that the survival of individual Jews was secondary to the long-term goal of securing a Jewish state. In 1938, after the Kristallnacht, a rescue effort called “Kindertransport” was organized: 10,000 Jewish children were moved from Germany to the UK. In response, Ben-Gurion stated on Dec. 9, 1938 stated that: “If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, or only half of them by transporting them to Israel, then I would opt for the second alternative, for we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the people of Israel”. Weizmann, another leading figure of the Zionist movement, insisted on the children being brought to Palestine. Malcolm MacDonald, the Colonial Secretary, recalled: “[...] As far as he [Weizmann] was concerned, it was Palestine or nowhere.”
Hillel Silver, Zionist leader, made it clear that Jewish displaced persons should be channeled only to Palestine:
“Are we again, in moments of desperation, going to confuse Zionism with refugeeism which is likely to defeat Zionism?... Zionism is not a refugee movement. It is not a product of the Second World War, nor of the first. Were there no displaced Jews in Europe... Zionism would still be an imperative necessity.”
Conclusions
Zionist immigration policies ultimately reflect a pragmatic and realist approach, where immigration was instrumentally used to advance the state's interests, often at the expense of immediate humanitarian concerns. Initially, the movement focused on building an ideal Jewish society by selecting immigrants based on their skills, health, and economic status. However, the escalation of the refugee crisis and the horrors of the Holocaust forced a shift. Despite the growing urgency to rescue Jews from persecution, the Zionist leadership continued to prioritize the establishment of a secure Jewish state for the majority of the time, resulting in the exclusion of many vulnerable individuals throughout most of the movement's operational period. Finally, the refusal to support rescue efforts and immigration of Jews to countries outside Palestine illustrates the controversial political and national priorities of Zionism during the Holocaust.
Bibliography
Alroey, G. (2014). An unpromising land: Jewish migration to Palestine in the early twentieth century.
Bloom, E. (2007). What ‘The Father’ had in mind? Arthur Ruppin (1876–1943), cultural identity, weltanschauung and action. History of European Ideas, 33(3), 330–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2007.02.002
Cleveland, W., & Bunton, M. (2024). A History of the Modern Middle East (7th ed.). Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.perlego.com/book/4440990/a-history-of-the-modern-middle-east-pdf (Original work published 2024)
Greenstein, T. (2022, August). Zionism during the Holocaust: The weaponization of memory in the service of state and nation.
Hacohen, D. (1998). Immigration policy in Israel: The reality behind the myth. Israel Studies Bulletin, 14(1), 1-8. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41805397
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (1935, August). News. http://pdfs.jta.org/1935/1935-08-21_017.pdf
Nova Lectio (2021, May). La nascita dello Stato di Israele: dall’Antisemitismo al Sionismo (Parte 1). Storie di Geopolitica. Podcast.
Seidelman, R. D. (2012). Conflicts of quarantine: The case of Jewish immigrants to the Jewish state. American Journal of Public Health, 102(2), 243-252. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300476
Streets of Israel (2013). Spotlighting the personalities behind Israel's street signs. https://streetsofisrael.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-menahemsheinkin/
コメント