About a decade ago, I was intrigued by the prospect of somebody writing a play about Truman’s decision to recognize Israel. Over the years, I have reflected repeatedly about the strange sequence of events that were necessary precursors for the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland.
My profound interest in the events and people surrounding the creation of the State of Israel stem in part from the strong Zionist passions of all of my grandparents and my mother. For example, Grandfather Werlin owned the first Hebrew typewriter in Texas, and used this machine to write articles supporting Zionism. Upon his death, this typewriter was bequeathed to my other Grandfather, Rabbi Henry Horowitz. The typewriter is currently in the possession of my first cousin, Bonnie Cotlar, and occupies a strategic place in their home.
In a nutshell, pragmatic Zionism leading to the recognition and survival of the State of Israel depended upon fortuitous circumstances, horrendous tragedies, and the steadfast devotion of millions of Jews throughout the Diaspora. Moreover, at each step of the way, key personalities that wielded unusual power took steps to convert Theodore Herzl’s (The Father of Zionism) dream into a reality. Stated differently, Israel’s statehood required overcoming many obstacles. The failure to surmount these impediments would have fatally blocked a Jewish homeland. In Barbara Tuchman’s book, The Bible and the Sword, she provided ample evidence that gentile support for the Jewish dream of a homeland was also essential. That is, both Jews and Gentiles believed that “God had bequeathed this land forever to the Jewish people, and they had a sacred duty to fulfill his commitment to Abraham.
Moreover, the success of Israel’s statehood application in 1948, required the juxtaposition of four outstanding individuals–Truman, Jacobson, Weizman, and Marshall–; thus, highlighting their “story” provides a wonderful human-interest complement to Israel’s becoming part of the family of nations.
In order to highlight the poignancy surrounding the birth of Israel, I would just like to mention some of the incredible circumstances that precluded statehood.
The birth of modern Zionism was almost surreal. That is Theodore Herzl, (1860-1904) its founder, was a non-religious newspaper reporter who happened to be in Paris during the trial and unfair conviction of Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish French officer. Dreyfus was convicted falsely of being a spy for Germany. Herzl was shocked at the venomous anti-Semitic epithets hurled at Dreyfus by ordinary Frenchman, because France was considered the most religiously enlightened nation in Europe. The strident anti-Semitism in France convinced Herzl that Jews desperately needed a homeland, because Gentile Europe was not hospitable to Jews. In essence, Herzl experienced an epiphany, and spent the rest of his short life launching a Zionist movement.
Herzl was a charismatic leader, who successfully reinvented himself in order to woo world leaders such as the Emperor of Germany, the Pope, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, and wealthy western Jews. In his audience with these august figures, Herzl shed the centuries old supine demeanor of his co-religionists, and instead portrayed himself as a regal, ambassador for the Jewish people. Given that Herzl did not represent a State: that is, he had only the support of the International Zionist organization, his performance was remarkable.
Moreover, Herzl was a superb propagandist whose messianic presence galvanized the inert Jewish masses of Eastern Europe that were struggling under oppressive poverty and the virulent anti-Semitism of the political establishment of their native countries.
While Zionism initially received lukewarm reception in Western Europe, it struck a deep chord in Eastern Europe, where government officials promoted anti-Semitic policies to assure the survival of their tyrannical, dysfunctional regimes. Starting in the late 1890’s Jewish pioneers facing horrendous physical privations step by step developed Jewish communities in Palestine, supported by the donations of wealthy benefactors in the United States, Great Britain, and France. That is, wealthy Jews contributed millions of dollars to allow their destitute co-religionists primarily from eastern Europe to purchase land in Palestine.
Fortunately, Herzl was succeeded by another outstanding Zionist leader, Chaim Weizman (1874-1952). Weizman who became a prominent scientist in Great Britain served a pivotal role in convincing Lord Balfour, the British foreign minister to issue the Balfour Proclamation. In 1948, Weizman, by then a sickly, legally blind man, convinced a skeptical Harry Truman, the American President, to not only take a strong lead in advocating Jewish statehood, but also including in the Israeli state the Negev desert.
In order to convert the Jewish dream of statehood into a reality, a number of dramatic political changes were required.
First of all, Turkey not only had to lose control over Palestine, but the British, not French needed to replace Turkey. That is, while the English were ambivalent about Jewish statehood from 1917 until 1948, France control over Palestine would have been a roadblock. That is, the Vichy Government of France that served as Hitler’s proxy during World War II would have been openly antagonistic to Jewish statehood.
Turkey’s intervention on the losing side in World War I, led to the break-up of the Ottoman Empire and the transference of control over Palestine to the British instead of the Turks. Moreover, during World War I, the British Foreign Minister, Balfour for mixed reasons issued a Proclamation recognizing the right of a Jewish homeland as long as it did not prejudice the existing Moslem population. Barbara Tuchman wrote a wonderful book, The Bible and the Sword, provided significant insights into British reasoning for issuing the Balfour Declaration. Weizman served as a key confident to Balfour in the months preceding the Declaration, and certainly influenced the timing and wording of the Proclamation. While the Balfour Declaration did not give carte blanche to Jewish immigration into Palestine, it did legitimize and motivate Jewish migration. Jewish migration from 1917 grew from a trickle to a meaningful influx in the 1933 as Jews sought to escape the growing anti-Semitism not only in Germany, but also in Poland, Romania, and Lithuania.
The horrendous holocaust, leading to the death of some six million Jews, and the displacement of millions of Jewish survivors led to a combination of factors that focused world attention on the plight of the Jews. Stated differently, after the Holocaust and the extension of Communist rule in Eastern Europe, the surviving Jews became stateless, leading to a humanitarian crisis that required immediate dramatic solutions. Moreover, many Western European nations and the United States did not want to offer sanctuary to millions of Jews. Thus, the case for the establishment of a Jewish State in part of Palestine became the only viable alternative. Stated differently, since nobody wanted millions of Jews, the solution to the Jewish problem was a Jewish State.
Nevertheless, to turn this alternative, a Jewish state, into a reality required the leadership and vision of a number of personalities. Moreover, the friendship of a Jewish haberdasher in Kansas City with the President of the United States, Harry Truman, became a critical catalyst in Truman’s taking the politically calculating step of putting his prestige behind America’s endorsement of a Jewish State.
I believe that Truman was the major person responsible for the realization of a 2000-year-old dream for a Jewish homeland. Moreover, Truman was ambivalent about the righteousness of the Jewish cause. That is, while Truman agonized over the hundreds of thousands of displaced Jews living under horrible conditions in camps in Europe, Truman also understood the Arab antipathy toward a Jewish state.
The turning point for which policy Truman would pursue was Truman’s acquiescence of Eddie Jacobson’s request for Truman to meet with Chaim Weizman, a man who led the Zionist movement from 1917 until 1949. Weizman charmed the cynical Truman, who was chaffing under withering criticism from his political opponents, that is, on one side many of the political establishment, including leading figures in the State Department, and senior business officials, particularly in the oil industry, actively opposed Jewish statehood. On the other hand, Truman was so embittered by the virulent attacks on his integrity by ardent Zionists, led by Rabbi Abba Silver who pounded Truman’s desk demanding more immediate action that he temporarily cut off all communication with the Zionists. Truman even questioned the loyalty of these American Zionists to the United States, claiming that they had placed Israel’s interests above the United States. Thus, Truman during the key years of 1947-1948, was trying to establish his own policy while being beset by adamant extremists on both sides. At one point Harry S complained that the Jews were never satisfied with his actions and said, “Jesus Christ himself could not satisfy these people when he was on the earth.
Moreover, the British foreign office, led by the anti-Semitic, Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, was adamantly pro-Arab and anti-Jewish. Given that Britain still had a mandate over Palestine during those years, Truman had to force the British to accept the partition of Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish. Furthermore, the United States had to obtain a two-thirds majority in the United Nations to give legitimacy to the Jewish State. Given that Truman needed to work through the anti-Semitic State Department to impose a two state solution in Palestine, Truman needed to show political dexterity and determination.
In a nutshell, I think that the United Nations recognition of the State of Israel could have only taken place in the short time period following the holocaust. That is, in 1948 the world was dominated by two nations, the United States and the Soviet Union. For opposite reasons, these post-war antagonists felt that the emergence of a Zionist state was also in their national interest. Moreover, the guilt over the death of 6 million Jews haunted many Europeans following World War II.
In 1948, France and England had large colonial empires. Possibly by the early 1950’s, many newly independent countries who had won independence from France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands, might have chosen to side with the Arabs. Moreover, the overwhelming influence of America in the early post-war era made it difficult for many nations to oppose American foreign policy. Almost the entire world with the exception of the Iron Curtain was economically and militarily dependent upon the United States. Today, the large Arab populations in Western Europe would prevent those countries from voting for Jewish statehood.
By the 1960’s, once Europe emerged from its post World War II economic devastation, European countries could afford to take an independent political line from the United States. Moreover, in recent years, anti-Semitism in Western Europe has grown significantly. Thus, while western European countries for the most part supported the recognition of a State of Israel in 1948, today they would vote differently. That is, a combination of their dependence on Arab oil to fuel their economies and an influx of significant number of Moslems to Western Europe has radically altered the political position of Western Europe toward Israel. Stated differently, if the United Nations voted today on Israel’s recognition, Israel would not get the necessary two-thirds vote.
I think it is important to discuss some of the political underpinnings that swayed Truman. That is, America since Woodrow Wilson has championed the rights of nationalities such as the Poles, Finns, Czechs, etc. to establish their own states. Truman, heavily influenced by the Bible, certainly felt that the Jews also deserved statehood.
However, the success of Israel’s statehood application, required
the juxtaposition of four outstanding individuals–Truman, Jacobson, Weizman, and Marshall–; thus, highlighting their “story” provides a wonderful human-interest complement to the main theme.
The lifelong affection between Eddie Jacobson and Harry Truman withstood changes of economic fortune and political success that would have shattered or faded the intensity of most relationships. The enduring friendship represents the antithesis of the cliché that blood is thicker than water.” Truman remained indelibly close to Eddie despite the anti-Semitic attitudes of his “beloved” wife Bess and her mother. For example, despite the fact that Eddie Jacobson and Harry Truman were almost like brothers, Bess would not allow a Jew into her house in Independence, Missouri.
The role of Eddie Jacobson in convincing Truman to meet Weizman is a drama unto itself. Stated differently, this meeting might have been the turning point in the fight for the recognition of the Jewish state.
In 1948, Truman was so irritated by the Arab-Jewish conflict that he stubbornly chose to isolate himself from either side. From the perspective of the Jews, Truman’s neutrality was a liability, because the Arabs had powerful friends both within the State Department and in Great Britain, our strongest ally. The Jewish Federation asked Jacobson to risk his long-standing friendship with Truman to persuade Truman to meet with Chaim Weizman who was staying at the Waldorf Astoria, but unable to get access to the President. That is, leading politicians such as Senator Wagner of New York, and Senator Vandenberg of Michigan failed to convince Truman to meet with Weizman.
Jacobson without an appointment with the President walked into the White House. Despite Jacobson’s violation of protocol, Steve Early, Truman’s appointment secretary, on the spot set up a meeting with Harry on the condition that nothing was to be said about Zionism.
After a few short minutes of idle conversation, Jacobson raised the issue of Weizman. Truman went into a rage, pouring out venomous anti-Semitic comments. Jacobson was stunned by Truman’s outburst, but suddenly Jacobson had a brilliant inspiration. On Truman’s desk was a small statue of Andrew Jackson, one of Truman’s great heroes. Jacobson grabbed the statue and uttered to Truman that Jacobson also had a hero that was as important to him as Andrew Jackson was to Truman. Jacobson went on to say to the President that Jacobson’s hero was a dying, legally blind man who had traveled half way across the world to see Truman. Furthermore, if Truman possessed the same character as Andrew Jackson, he would have the courage to meet Weizman. Moreover, Jacobson reminded Harry that Weizman had nothing to do with the anti Truman diatribes of the extremist Zionists.
According to Jacobson, Truman whirled around in his chair and stared out the window for an interminable minute. He then whirled back and said, “OK, you bald son of a bitch, I will see him.” At that point, both Jacobson and Truman had tears in their eyes.
The incredible role of Chaim Weizman in converting Truman deserves amplification. When Weizman met Truman, Weizman’s failing eyesight, weakened physical strength, and his political enemies even within the Zionist movement beleaguered him. In his short meeting with Truman, Weizman, the central figure of the Balfour Declaration and the leading figure of the Zionist movement for almost 25 years, won the heart and mind of Harry Truman. Weizman’s meeting with Truman was not only “last hurrah” to achieve statehood for the Jewish people, but probably his finest moment. By 1947, Weizman had lost almost all-political influence within Zionist circles to Ben Gurion. (In fact, Ben Gurion did not allow Weizman to sign Israel’s Declaration of Independence because “he (Weizman) had been out of the country” when it was announced). A Weizman failure to convert Truman would have undermined all of his great accomplishments, resulting in a “failed” life rather than an extraordinary one. Instead, Weizman’s made such an indelible impression on Truman that the President committed himself “not to let down that old man.” Truman, even went against his hero, George Marshall, the Secretary of State, to support Israel.
Lastly, the opponents of Israel’s recognition were prestigious adversaries who possessed formidable arguments. The Secretary of State, George Marshall, felt that the “inevitable Jewish defeat” by the numerous Arabs would lead to a “second holocaust” and wished to support America’s wartime ally, England. His views reflected the biases of the State Department, which favored the Arabs as a bulwark against Communist expansion and wished to cultivate the Arabs for there immense “oil wealth.” George Marshall pleaded with leading Jewish figures that a Jewish defeat to the Arabs was a matter of simple mathematics. That is, the Arabs outnumbered the Jews one hundred to one. Marshall was not alone in his pessimism regarding the viability of a Jewish state. Ben Gurion, by a margin of one vote, won a vote in his cabinet for Israel to declare statehood.
Unfortunately, while Zionist support was broad among a majority of Congress, and White House insiders such as Clark Clifford and Richard Niles, these men lacked the stature of George Marshall. Thus, Truman faced significant political and personal risk in overriding Marshall, a person whom he revered. The decision of Marshall to support the President’s Zionist position add’s to the General’s stature. That is, Marshall, a man of legendary aloofness and integrity, sacrificed his personal preferences because of his reverence for the office of the Presidency and his admiration for the integrity of Truman. General Marshall in a rare open display of affection commented in a public forum “The full stature of this man (Truman) will only be proven by history, but I want to say here and now that there has never been a decision made under this man’s administration, affecting policies beyond our shores, that has not been in the best interest of this country. It is not the courage of these decisions that will live, but the integrity of the man.” General Marshall’s loyalty instead of his resignation was important ingredients in helping Truman “keep the course.”
In summary, underlying America’s support for Israel represented at least four human dramas: (1) The personal courage of Eddie Jacobson to risk his friendship with Harry Truman over the Zionist issue (2) The magnetic persuasion powers of an infirm Chaim Weizman (3) The “sense of duty” by General Marshall to the office of the Presidency and (4) The greatness of that “little man from Missouri.” The Chief Rabbi of Israel, Isaac Halevi said to Truman “God put you in your mother’s womb so that you would be the instrument to bring the rebirth of Israel after two thousand years.”
I fervently hope that somebody can capture the magic of the rebirth of Israel on its sixtieth anniversary. If Evita, a self-serving prostitute, can be immortalized, certainly the extraordinary confluence of events leading to Truman’s using America’s influence to persuade wavering countries to support the American position deserves attention.
