Evening star., 1942-11-09

Zionist Leader Argues Case
For Military Force Of Hebrews
Despite Arob Objections
T, tn. us,.J, ., tn. star:
In your issue Of November 4, Maj.
George Fielding Eliot sets forth the case
against the claim for = Jewish army in
Palestine. On . number Of important
points his arguments against the demand
for such N army appear to be based on
4 misconception Of the facts and prob
lens involved. Permit me, for the infor-
nation Of your readers, to seek to clarity
certain OF these issues.
Immediately after the outbreak Of the
war, In September. 1899. the World Zion
ist Organization and the Jewish Agency
for Palestine, officially recognized under
the mandate Is representing interests
in Palestine, urged upon the British gov
ernment the full mobilization of avail
able Jewish manpower there in . spe-
cifcally Jewish military force. Had this
request been granted at that time, at
least 60,0Op to 10000 Jews would have
been mobihzed for service in the Middle
East, available for the Libyan campaigns
of Gen. Wavell and Gen. Auckinleck.
(The figure of 100000 is that Of the Jew
ish Army Committee, q private body
which has no connection with the Zion
ist Organization or the Jewish Agency
for Palestine.) It is we'll known that the
British campaigns In Africa were under
taken with relatively small number Of
men and the addition of these 10000 to
10000 might we'll have tipped the scales
in favor Of the Allied forces in these
campaigns.
The problem of training which Maj.
Eliot advances as a major obstacle has
no validity; the British military authori-
ties today are calling for the enlistment
of as many, Jews from Palestine as pos
sible. in British units, so that officers
for training purposes are in any case
necessary.
The question of command also is not
the serious obstacle which Maj. Eliot
considers 1t. The Jewish agency always
has agreed that Jewish military force,
when organized, should be under British
command. In fact, at one stage in the
negotiations between the Jewish agency
and the British government, when an
agreement In principle on the raising OF
such a force had been reached-from
which the British subsequently receded-
a British general actually was appointed
to take command.
Transportation and shipping, as Maj
Eliot points out, are dif1culties, but they
have no special application to this ques-
ton. In the first place, had use been
made OF the men on the spot. less Amer
ican and British troops would have had
to be transported to Palestine. And, as
far as equipment is concerned, the same
difhculties would have applied to the
shipping Of. equipment for the Jewish
army as for all other troops fighting In
the Middle East The Jewish agency
never asked for special privileges. It
asked only that q Jewish military force
receive equipment in the same proportion
as other military forces Of the United
| Nations.
The argument of Maj Eliot that 4
Jewish army cannot be used "as an in
strument to further Zionist political am
bitions in Palestine" is unacceptable and
unfair. The armies of al peoples are,
If one is to Use Maj. Eliot's expression,
"an instrument to further political am
bitions." Every people has right to
protect its future and to mobilize its
manpower against the common enemy
and In defense of its country. The Jews
Of Palestine are no different from other
peoples.
Would Mai. Eliot suggest that the
Poles, Czechs, Greeks, Norwegians and
others should give up their identity and
do their fighting by enlisting in the
British Army? What is legitimate for
all the people in the world cannot be
labeled "an instrument to further po-
ntical ambitions" when the Jewish peo-
pie in Palestine is concerned. To do Sc
implies real discrimination against the
Jewish people and the denial to them OF
one of the elementary rights Of all peo-
pies: To hight the enemy and to defend
their country under their own flag.
That Arab resentment at the forma-
ton of Jewish military force in Pales-
tine might create dif1culties for the
British long has been the contention OF
those elements in the British colonial
administration responsible for the ap-
peasement policy Of the Macdonald
White Paper. For more than 10 years
British policy in the Middle East has
been one Of concession ut the expense o1
the Jews in the hope of placating the
extremist Arabs. This disastrous policy
has produced the usual results. The
Arab leaders, after extorting one con-
cession after another from the British
finally proceeded to open cooperation
with the Axis; the Mufti of Jerusalem Il
today in Berlin, as too, after an abortive
coup against the United Nations, is the
former Prime Minister of Iraq. Egypt
bound TO- Britain by treaty of alliance
has not even sought to defend her owr
soil. The Rlicy Of appeasement ha.
merely sucSeeded in depriving thu
United Natidhs of the fighting strength
of their only genuine ally in the Middle
East-the Jews of Palestine. No ont
who really knows the situation believe.
that Jewish military force in Palestine
would induc4,the Arabs, disorganized a.
they are an( without any real military
| - ~i& iy.