Ze'ev Jabotinsky

Ze'ev Jabotinsky (October 18, 1880 – August 3, 1940) was a Revisionist Zionist leader.

• A Jew brought up among Germans may assume German custom, German words. He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish, because his blood, his body, his physical-racial type are Jewish. ... It is impossible for a man to become assimilated with people whose blood is different from his own. In order to become assimilated, he must change his body, he must become one of them, in blood. ... There can be no assimilation as long as there is no mixed marriage. ... An increase in the number of mixed marriages is the only sure and infallible means for the destruction of nationality as such. ... A preservation of national integrity is impossible except by a preservation of racial purity, and for that purpose we are in need of a territory of our own where our people will constitute the overwhelming majority.
  • V. Jabotinsky, "A Letter on Autonomy", Evreiskaya zhizn, no. 6, June 1904. As translated in "Israel Among the Nations : Selection of Zionist Texts" (ed. Zvi Zohar; Jerusalem : World Zionist Organization, Organization Department, Research Section, 1966). Reprinted in L. Brenner, 51 Documents, Barricade Books, 2002, pp. 7–20.

• Our habit of constantly and zealously answering to any rabble has already done us a lot of harm and will do much more. … We do not have to apologize for anything. We are a people as all other peoples; we do not have any intentions to be better than the rest. As one of the first conditions for equality we demand the right to have our own villains, exactly as other people have them. … We do not have to account to anybody, we are not to sit for anybody's examination and nobody is old enough to call on us to answer. We came before them and will leave after them. We are what we are, we are good for ourselves, we will not change, nor do we want to.
  • Instead of Excessive Apology (1911).

• The Jews might become the dynamite that will blow up the British Empire.
  • Palestine Bulletin, (1934-01-04) (Source).

• [It is the] iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else – or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not “difficult”, not “dangerous” but IMPOSSIBLE! … Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonialization.
  • As quoted by Lenni Brenner, in The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir (1984), where the quotation is cited as being from "The Iron Law"

• Our starting point is to take the typical Yid of today and to imagine his diametrical opposite … because the Yid is ugly, sickly, and lacks decorum, we shall endow the ideal image of the Hebrew with masculine beauty. The Yid is trodden upon and easily frightened and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to be proud and independent. The Yid is despised by all and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to charm all. The Yid has accepted submission and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to learn how to command. The Yid wants to conceal his identity from strangers and, therefore, the Hebrew should look the world straight in the eye and declare: "I am a Hebrew!"
  • Quoted in Amnon Rubinstein, From Herzl to Rabin: The Changing Image of Zionism (2000), Chapter one.

• My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent.
  The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage.
  • [1]

• Two brief remarks: In the first place, if anyone objects that this point of view is immoral, I answer: It is not true; either Zionism is moral and just or it is immoral and unjust. But that is a question that we should have settled before we became Zionists. Actually we have settled that question, and in the affirmative.
  We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmet agree with it or not.
  • [2]

• We cannot offer any adequate compensation to the Palestinian Arabs in return for Palestine. And therefore, there is no likelihood of any voluntary agreement being reached. So that all those who regard such an agreement as a condition sine qua non for Zionism may as well say "non" and withdraw from Zionism. Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population - behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach.
  That is our Arab policy; not what it should be, but what it actually is, whether we admit it or not.
  • [3]
    • Variant translation:^[1]
      We cannot promise any reward either to the Arabs of Palestine or to the Arabs outside Palestine. A voluntary agreement is unattainable. And so those who regard an accord with the Arabs as an indispensable condition of Zionism must admit to themselves today that this condition cannot be attained and hence that we must give up Zionism. We must either suspend our settlement efforts or continue them without paying attention to the mood of the natives. Settlement can thus develop under the protection of a force that is not dependent on the local population, behind an iron wall which they will be powerless to break down.

The Ethics of the Iron Wall,” Jabotinsky cited a Talmudic story to illustrate his view. Two men find a piece of cloth on the road. “A” says “I found it. It’s mine.” But “B” says: “No, I found it, and it’s mine.” They take their dispute to a judge and A—hoping to impress the judge with his magnanimity—says: “We both found the cloth, and therefore I ask only half of it, because the second half belongs to B.” Jabotinsky noted the Talmudic teaching is “very disappointing to our magnanimous gentleman”:

The judge says: “There is agreement about one half of the cloth. ‘A’ admits that it belongs to B. So it is only the second half that is in dispute. We shall, therefore divide this into two halves.” And the obstinate claimant gets three-quarters of the cloth, while the “gentleman” has only one quarter, and it serves him right. It is a very fine thing to be a gentleman, but it is no reason for being an idiot. Our ancestors knew that. But we have forgotten it. We should bear it in mind. … It is incredible what political simpletons Jews are. They shut their eyes to one of the most elementary rules of life, that you must not “meet halfway” those who do not want to meet you.^[2]

Later that month, Jabotinsky testified in London before the Palestine Royal Commission (colloquially named the “Peel Commission” after its chairman, Lord Peel), which had been charged with making recommendations for Palestine. For years, Jabotinsky had been calling for a Jewish exodus from Eastern Europe, and the formation of a Jewish majority in Palestine as the basis of a Jewish state. He was savaged by other Jewish leaders for what they called his “evacuationism.” In his testimony before the Commission, Jabotinsky said:

I am very much afraid that what I am going to say will not be popular with many among my co-religionists, and I regret that, but the truth is the truth. We are facing an elemental calamity … We have got to save millions, many millions. I do not know whether it is a question of re-housing one-third of the Jewish race, half of the Jewish race, or a quarter of the Jewish race; I do not know; but it is a question of millions … [I]t is quite understandable that the Arabs of Palestine would also prefer Palestine to be the Arab State No. 4, No. 5, or No. 6—that I quite understand. But when the Arab claim is confronted with our Jewish demand to be saved, it is like the claims of appetite versus the claims of starvation.

August 5, an unsigned note from talks with Vladimir Jabotinsky regarding Jewish emigration to Palestine Secret Note from conversations with Mr. Jabotinsky on August 5, 1938. At the breakfast attended by: Z. Jabotinsky, S. Schechtmann, Col. Wenda, Director Żyborski, Director M.B. Lepecki, Col. Banach, Director Z. Lepecki, Dr. Dylinger, Chief Zarychta, Dr. Wagner.

In his very extensive speech, Mr. Jabotinsky touched on the following interesting moments from this speech: 1) Palestine, of course, "Great Palestine" on both sides of the Jordan, is a country which, despite its external appearances, can accommodate the entire Jewish diaspora, i.e., 15,000,000 Jews. Mr. Jabotinsky is sure that in 60 years, we will see the implementation of this process. There will be funds for sufficiently deep drilling to reach the water. The existing difficulties are well known, but they can be conquered, and since they are possible, they will be fought.

2) Palestine does not play a significant role for the Arabs. Although diverse, this tribe occupies the area from Morocco to the Persian Gulf, so it has enough space to accommodate its population, which currently lives in Palestine.

3) Can Jews be accommodated outside Palestine? Mr. J. claims that it is possible, "but I don't believe in it; I only believe in Palestine, and I vote only for it." [...] 7) Mr. Jabotinsky believes that in our situation, we can afford, and even the development of events requires it, to raise the slogan towards the Jewish group: "We want you to have it with us as they have today in England ... that the percentage ratio of Jews to Poles is 1/2%, i.e., it corresponded to the percentage of Jews to English people in Great Britain." In relation to Polish anti-Semites, the slogan would be: "Only in a calm atmosphere will we achieve the liquidation of the Jewish minority in Poland."

8) These two slogans are a consequence of Mr. J. reasoning, which states that panic does not help solve the problem; only in an atmosphere of calm and certainty can such a complex and complicated problem as the Jewish issue be effectively solved. He cited the example of pre-war Germany, where Herzl's Zionist idea was created thanks to the peace and favorable atmosphere. Mr. J. further says, calling himself a cynic, that if panic could lead to a great exodus, he would be the one to incite it.

9) Mr. Jabotinsky recalled that he declared the need for a great Jewish emigration from Poland regardless of our emigration desiderata and much earlier than the beginning of the great anti-emigration campaign on the part of Jews in Poland. He was fully aware that this slogan would be unpopular. Yet, believing in it and seeing it as the only solution to the Polish and global situation, he decided to announce it. He further promised that he was ready to tell the Jewish masses in the same conditions that, while maintaining his position on the great emigration, he also drew attention to the fact that world Jewry would have to help Poland in the sense that this great Jewish emigration should not take place at the expense of economic losses. Polish, i.e., that Poles must oppose the export of Polish capital and that such opposition is right from Poland's position. In this situation, the Jews will have to develop a plan that will respect Poland's interests.

10) Even though both the first, already accomplished declaration and the promised one are very unpopular, Mr. J. is sure of the final victory, especially in the current changing situation, which will provide him with the support of the majority of the Jewish masses. Jews already seem to understand his ideas. Mr. J. declared that if he obtained the "recognition" of the Polish Government, he would bury his opponents with "hats."

11) The difference between Zionism and Mr. J.'s ideology is roughly that Zionism wants to take the Jewish elite out of Poland and leave - as Mr. J. expressed - "Jewish cattle," Mr. J., and above all, wants to deport the impoverished Jewish masses, in accordance with his central thesis about the liquidation of the entire diaspora. [...] Mr. J's requests boil down to support and official recognition of his organization in Poland, breaking the monopoly that the Jewish Agency has created for itself, exerting a decisive influence on England, and allowing Poland to take an unambiguous position according to the abovementioned motives. [...] Polskie Dokumenty Dyplomatyczne 1939 (google translated)^[3]

In August 1938, Jabotinsky was in Warsaw, delivering an address on Tisha b’Av, the day set aside to remember the destruction of the ancient Temple in Jerusalem. To the Jews of Poland, he set forth both a warning and a vision:

It is for three years that I have been calling on you, Jews of Poland, the glory of world Jewry, with an appeal. I have been ceaselessly warning you that the catastrophe is coming closer. My hair has turned white and I have aged in these years, because my heart is bleeding, for you, dear brothers and sisters, do not see the volcano which will soon begin to spurt out the fire of destruction. I see a terrifying sight. The time is short in which one can still be saved. I know: you do not see, because you are bothered and rushing about with everyday worries … Listen to my remarks at the twelfth hour. For God’s sake: may each one save his life while there is still time. And time is short. I want to say one more thing to you on this day of the Ninth of Av: Those who will succeed to escape from the catastrophe will merit a moment of great Jewish joy — the rebirth and rise of a Jewish State. I do not know if I will earn that. My son, yes! I believe in this just as I am sure that tomorrow morning the sun will shine once again. I believe in this with total faith.^[4] In contrast After the Kristallnight Pogram of November 1938: If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel. [David Ben-Gurion]

Wikipedia has an article about:

Ze'ev Jabotinsky

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

Zeev Jabotinsky