Evening star., 1946-08-17
Letters to The Star
Differs With Editorial Discussing
British Policy in Palestine

statement justifying the use of force in
preventing so-called illegal" immi-
grants from landing in Palestine
abounded with distortions of fact which,
unfortunately, were not discerned by
many American readers, including the
editors of The Star. In your editorial
entitled "Brltain's Decision" the en-
pres repressive policy is condoned not
Withstanding the injustice to thousands
OF hapless Jews escaping from the char
mel house of Europe
The very term illegal immigrants"
is misleae/2g since it implies that refu-
gees arriving in Palestine are offenders
ana Britain is reluctantly fulfilling it's
duty as the defender of law and order.
The truth is that immigration of Jews
i to Palestine is legally sanctioned by
international agreements signed by 81
nations of the world, including the
United States. AS Sumner Welles ably
| pointed out recently it is Great Britain
that Is violating the spirit and the letter
OF international agreements by imposing
It's solution on Palestine. Britain's White
Paper of 1889. which provides for the
ultimate termination of all Jewish immi-
grafton to Palestine, was condemned by
the League of Nations as a transgression
OF the League mandate which is the
only legal basis for Great Britain being
in Palestine at all. Let us not speak of
'lllesaI' immigration of Jews into Pales-
Tine but rather of the INSCRIPTIONS dis
regard for law on the part of Britain
in frustrating the legitimate aspiration
of homeless Jews.
1t further is stated in your editorial
that the mass migration of European
Jews to Palestine is not spontaneous
movement. While it is true that dis
placed persons may be aided across the
underground railway by well-meaninp
sympathizers, there can be no doubt
that the hazardous journey is under
taken only by people who desperately
desire to turn their backs on Europe,
where they have suffered bitterly in the
past ten years or more. The report of
the Anglo American Committee of In
qulry. appointed by President Truman
and Prime Minister Attlee, testifies re-
hably that the vast majority of Jews
remaining in Europe, many of whom
are still in detention camps IS months
after We day, see in Palestine their
only hope for reconstruction of their
shattered lives,
The Stars editorial goes on to state
that: There is good reason to believe
that Illegal Jewish immigration, If not
checked by the British, would lead to
bloody clashes with the Arab popula-
tion.' Almost the same words were used
by Bevin in his Bournemouth speech
in which he estimated that it would
require division Of troops to suppress
possible Arab violence if 100000 Jews
were admitted to Palestine. His Mai
esty's government was not willing to
use one division of troops to protect
jewish Immigrants, but apparently is
willing to use many times that number
OF troops As well as fleet and air units
TO prevent handful of unarmed
refugees from disembarking in the
promised land. Obviously, it is not the
threat of Arab violence that motivates
Britain's Middle East policy.
The real motive behind that policy.
as indicated in The Stars editorial is
Britain's desire to secure its Middle East
lifeline as well as its oil interests in
Arab lands by winning the Arab nations
to its camp There is always a posi-
bllity that, having wrung political con-
ceSslons from the western powers and
having been strengthened by subsidies,
the Arab nations in the final ANALYSIS
may throw their weight behind the
Soviet Union, as they have threatened
SO often to do. On the other hand. there
is considerable segment of opinion
which believes that progressive, demo-
cratic Palest1nian state, sponsored by
the western powers and developed in
the western traditions, will be a strong
and reliable ally in the Near East. The
splendid record of Palestinian troops in
North Africa and in Italy during the
war adds weight to this contention
Leaving aside humanitarian considera-
tions, it may be advantageous from
military standpoint to build Middle East
strategy on the firm foundation of an
energetic, economically sound Palestin-
ian state with provision for British land,
sea and air bases rather than on the
shifting sand of opportunistic Arab
potentates. LESTER RINDLER.
What Owen and Chandler Did
To the Editor of The Star:
Happy" Chandler, ma ajor-domo of
the monopoly of baseball, has seen fit
to deprive a man of his best means of
earning a livelihood. This coming from
Mr.. Chandler, former lawmaker,
makes the action all the more unsavory.
Does baseball dwell upon a pedestal
above the level of judgment? In which
directions are the antitrust laws
pointed? Certainly not toward base
ball. Here is an organization which
rules the professional end of a sport
with an iron hand. Any man desirous
of making living playing baseball
must play for this organization, at its
price, or not at all. If this does not
constitute monopoly, there is no such
word.
When Mickey" Owen was released
by the Navy, he had no contract with
the high order" of baseball and he
did not care for the one offered by his
peers He committed no crime when
he refused to sign. He broke no law
by going to Mexico to work for larger
salary. This great sporting monopoly,