Dr. Mohammad Omar
Farooq
Associate Professor,
Faculty of Business and Financial Sciences Royal University
for Women
Updated:
July 2006*
All
the emphases are mine, unless noted otherwise Feedback
welcome: farooqm59@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
The Zionists, particularly political Zionists, are too quick to claim and label Nobel Laureate Albert Einstein as a Zionist. How valid or accurate is this claim? This paper examines that issue drawing on Zionist as well as Jewish sources and attempts to set the record straight.
*********************************************************
Did Albert Einstein
support the political Zionism that led to the establishment of the State of
Israel? Did he later politically support
the Zionist state of Israel until his death? Popular answers to these questions
might be inaccurate. Indeed the answers
make up a common MYTH, or at least, a misperception.
What? Are we talking about the same Einstein? Did he
not identify himself as “a strong devotee of the Zionist idea” in 1929? While
addressing a meeting, did he not begin with: “Ten years ago, when I first had
the pleasure of addressing you in behalf of the Zionist cause …”? Didn't
Einstein deliver a speech entitled “Our Debt to Zionism” in 1938?
The answer to all these questions is “yes”. Then,
how can it be a myth or misperception? Well, that is the topic of this essay. I
only request that conscientious and inquiring minds defer judgment, until they
peruse this essay completely.
The subject of this essay is important and
relevant not merely for historicity, but also for an overriding reason.
Einstein's greatness and impact as a scientist are all too well known. However,
his views and contribution as a human being and a philosopher on a myriad of
major issues of our time are still worth exploring and pondering. There is
another special relevance of this subject to the ongoing Middle East conflict.
Even if we desire to look beyond what has transpired in the past, we all (Jews
and non-Jews, Arabs and non-Arabs, Muslims and non-Muslims, western or eastern)
can benefit from the insight, vision and values of this great humanist and a
servant of, in his own words, "truth and justice."
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1471907
The Propaganda1
That Einstein was a Zionist, plain and simple, is a
myth perpetuated by the pro-Israel media. Their motive behind an unqualified
portrayal of Einstein as Zionist and pro-Israel--to distort public perception
of him, is understandable. The tactics and methods of such distortion of
reality in regard to Israel, and its allies or adversaries, are quite
well-known. Since Einstein was undeniably one of the most towering figures of
the 20th century's scientific community, his endorsement for political Zionism
and Israel is an enormous political capital to pass up. But more importantly,
if he was not portrayed as a pro-Israel Zionist, people most likely would be
curious about his real views. Such
curiosity—and follow-up knowledge--could incur significant liability against
political Zionism and Israel. To prevent this, exploitation of the mighty
Zionist media seemed most convenient, to propagate ad nauseam what is contrary
to the truth, create a MYTH about the connection between Einstein and Zionism
(political, to be specific) and suppress all information contrary to that which
is put out by that media. It's a fortress almost impossible to break
through.
In this age of internet, try searching ("all
the words" option) for Einstein and Zionism or Einstein and Israel; you’ll
find that almost all relevant entries at the top2 (until this essay
was available online) present Einstein as pro-Zionism, pro-Israel, with no
distinction among types of Zionism. If the searcher did not seek beyond
customarily available data, if he did no additional due diligence, he would
easily remain outside of the fortress. For example, if you did that search
using Google, the top entry would be something like "Albert Einstein on
Zionism". If you click on it, you
would be at3 and it would flash a quote by Einstein saying: “Zionism springs from an even deeper motive
than Jewish suffering. It is rooted in a Jewish spiritual tradition whose
maintenance and development are for Jews the basis of their continued existence
as a community.” Notable is the absence of a citation or reference, which
is unusual. It is possible they want you to read the quote but not see its
context. It is also likely the context might have information damaging to the
bulwark of Zionism.4
Below are some samplers from online and other
sources:
1
No one should be shocked at the mentioning of
“propaganda” in this context. The circle of political Zionists
that blindly support the State of Israel is intoxicated with
propaganda. That’s the view of Nahum Goldmann, one of the leading Zionists, who
was the president of World Zionist Congress (later combined with World Zionist
Organization) during 1955-1977. In understanding the position of Einstein,
where in his characteristic way of a non-politician, Einstein was measured and
tactful in issues pertaining to his Jewish people, Goldmann was a Zionist
leader and blunt in sharing his wisdom and observations for the interest of his
own people. We will be referring to him to better understand some of the things
that Einstein had said with almost prophetic insight, which later were realized
as expressed in words of some Jewish/Zionist leaders like Goldmann. In regard to
propaganda, Goldmann writes in The Jewish Paradox:
[T]he Israelis overestimate the importance of propaganda and
‘public relations’. The Israeli press keeps saying: ‘Our propaganda is badly
handled, we have a poor image’, and so forth. I am familiar with the subject,
since the World Zionist Organization has spent millions of dollars on
propaganda. Well, I regret that, because it is worth very little. The decisive
factor to influence world opinion is the character of Israel’s policies, and if
those policies are criticized by the majority of the states, the best
propaganda is helpless. The Israelis have inherited this misjudgement and this
infatuation for slogans from the Americans. In the United States, everything is
sold by what they call ‘Madison Avenue’ methods, from the street where their
biggest advertising firms are based. This technique may be terrific for
launching a brand of soap or toothpaste, or even a new newspaper, but not when
it comes to disseminating a political idea by distorting it.” [p. 62]
2
This has changed since
the writing and availability of this article online [January 2000]
3 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Quote/einsteinq.html
4
The citation has been
added recently. It wasn’t there when this essay was originally put online. Possibly
someone pointed out the lapse and it has been addressed.
2
Electronic copy available at:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1471907
“Another important aspect of Einstein's politics during
the 1920s was a strong belief in Zionism. Einstein was
drawn to the Zionist cause as a result of the influence of Chaim Weizmann, a
Russian Jew who had recently persuaded the British government to issue the
famous Balfour Declaration, declaring its full support for the establishment of
a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.” [Spark Notes: “Pacifism and Zionism”]
“The two social movements that received his full
support were pacifism and Zionism. During World War I he was one of a handful
of German academics willing to publicly decry Germany's involvement in the war.
After the war his continued public support of pacifist and Zionist goals made
him the target of vicious attacks by anti-Semitic and rightwing elements in
Germany. … While continuing his efforts on behalf of world Zionism, Einstein
renounced his former pacifist stand in the face of the awesome threat to humankind
posed by the Nazi regime in Germany.” [Samuel Zwetchkenbaum, Albert Einstein, 1879-1955]
"When the greatest scientist of our age died on
April 18, 1956, at the age of seventy-six, the [New York] Times in the course
of its eulogy referred to 'Israel, whose
establishment as a state he had championed.'
... In late March 1972 the New York Times
published ... a three-column photograph of Einstein with Israeli Premier David
Ben-Gurion, and the caption read: 'Einstein
papers tell of scientist's efforts toward the creation of Israel.' [Lilienthal, p. 340]
But if the impact of Einstein's scientific thought
on the general ideas of his time is in some doubt, there can be none about the
relevance of his non-scientific views to one of the most positive political
phenomena of our time. Einstein lent the prestige
mondial of his great name, and in fact gave his heart, to the movement
which created the state of Israel. Men and nations owe a debt to those who help
to transform their realistic sel-image for the better. No Zionist with the
least degree of self-esteem can refuse to pay him homage if the opportunity of
doing so is offered to him." [Isaiah Berlin, "Einstein and
Israel," in Holton and Elkana, eds., p. 283]
Thus, it's hardly surprising that many Muslims in
general and Arab Muslims in particular not only endorse that media-touted
distortion/myth, but some would go even further to condemn Einstein. On one
hand I was prompted to add a little bit more to my personal research on the
relationship between Einstein and Zionism, attributed by those who seek to
capitalize on his fame for their partisan/nationalist agendas; on the other,
between Einstein and racism flung by those who’d like to condemn him as
"racist," due to his ties to Zionism.
I was disturbed by some messages on several Bangladeshi
forums, except Shetubondhon
(meaning, bridge-building), pointing to him as "racist" and
"Zionist". Regardless, characterization of Einstein as
"racist" or "Zionist" may simply showcase the Zionist
media's effectiveness in sustaining the MYTH.
As a Muslim I seek no misinformation,
ill-information, or ignorance about my faith. Of course, I have a better chance
of expecting it from others, if others can expect no less from me as a Muslim.
As a Muslim I am also duty-bound to act consistently in regard to others -
Jews, Christians, Hindus, Agnostics, or Atheists.
O
ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or
your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah
can best protect both. Follow not the
lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline
to do justice, verily
Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. [al-Qur'an/4/an-Nisa/135]
Hence I wanted to avail of this opportunity after
seeing recent discussions referring to Einstein, by contributing some material
online to set the record straight. I did not find any well researched material
online that challenges persisting distortions about Einstein. Yet based on my
previous readings I remembered him differently.
I am no expert in this field. However, to update
this essay I have gone beyond what others have said about Einstein. Einstein's
own words and actions should be the most relevant basis, to help us understand
what Zionism was to him and how he was linked with it. His own words are
faithfully presented in this essay.
Zionism and its many shades
Toward understanding the connection between Einstein
and Zionism, it is worthwhile to note that more than Einstein being drawn to
Zionism, there were some key Zionist figures that attempted to gradually
utilize his name for the Zionist cause.
"It is demonstrably unfair, yet still perfectly
true, to claim that the Zionists seized upon
Einstein's fame from 1919 onwards and exploited it
to their advantage." [Clark, p. 374]
No one was more instrumental in bringing Einstein
closer to the Jewish/Zionist cause than Kurt
Blumenfeld, the secretary general of the Executive
of World Zionist Organizations during 1910 to 1914. However, it is important to
note how he delicately and effectively handled Einstein for the cause.
"Utilizing him [i.e. Einstein] for publicity
purposes was thus a delicate matter and 'was only successful if I was able to
get under his skin in such a way that eventually
he believed that words had not been put
into his mouth but had come forth from him spontaneously.' " [Clark,
p. 381]
At the insistence of Chaim Weizmann, Blumenfeld was
successful in persuading Einstein to visit America for the Zionist cause.
"... [T]he journey to America meant a great deal to Einstein. His
commitment to Zionistic ideas was enormously strengthened and his sense of
being a Jew took on a new profundity. From now on, guided by Blumenfeld, he spoke and wrote frequently in support of
Zionism. No longer did he object that the Zionists were using his name."
[p. 239]
But let's first explore the concept and movement of
Zionism and its various shades. Zionism is a catch-all label, which lends
itself to misuse and misrepresentation.
“There are many 'Zionisms' - religious, political,
and cultural - all of which have in common the desire to see Jews from around
the world settled permanently in a homeland in Palestine, the historical land
of Israel. Religious Zionists believe that the gathering together of world
Jewry into the land of Israel will fulfill biblical prophecy and bring on the
millennium. Political Zionists seeks to build a nation state for the Jewish
people, and cultural Zionists seek to strengthen Jewish cultural identity within
their historic homeland. Jews who are not Zionists either oppose the existence
of the Jewish state for religious reasons (they believe that Israel cannot come
into being before the Messiah arrives) or for political reasons (as citizens of
various nations they cannot give their primarily allegiance to a Jewish state,
or do not wish to be associated with an expansionism that drives the
Palestinians from their traditional home).” [Link]
There is little doubt Einstein was a religious Zionist. But
was he also a political Zionist or a cultural Zionist? Before addressing these
questions, establishing specificity of meaning for both political Zionism and
cultural Zionism would seem critical.
"Political Zionism was emancipated West
European Jewry's response to the pervasiveness of anti-Semitism and to the
failure of the enlightenment to alter the status of the Jew. Its objective was
the establishment of a Jewish homeland in any available territory--not
necessarily in Palestine--through cooperation with the Great Powers."
[Library of Congress_1]
Gradually, Political Zionism became identified with
Theodore Herzl. By 1897 World Zionist
Organization was established and it had a new focus.
Political Zionism wasn't interested in a Jewish homeland just anywhere in the
world, but in Palestine only. [Library
of Congress_1] Political Zionism was nationalistic in essence.
Cultural Zionism is another form of Zionism.
"The counterpoint to Herzl's political Zionism was
provided by Asher Ginsberg, better known by his pen name Ahad HaAm (One of the
People). HaAm ... was the son of a Hasidic rabbi. ... His views on Zionism were rooted in the
changing nature of Jewish communal life in Eastern Europe. HaAm realized that a
new meaning to Jewish life would have to be found for the younger generation of
East European Jews who were revolting against traditional Jewish practice.
Whereas Jews in the West could participate in and benefit from a secular
culture, Jews in the East were oppressed. While Herzl focused on the plight of
Jews alone, HaAm was also interested in the plight of Judaism, which could no
longer be contained within the limits of traditional religion.
Ahad HaAm's solution was cultural Zionism: the
establishment in Palestine of small settlements aimed at reviving the Jewish
spirit and culture in the modern world. In the cultural Zionist vision, a small
number of Jewish cadres well versed in Jewish culture and speaking Hebrew would
settle in Palestine. Ahad HaAm believed that by settling in that ancient land,
religious Jews would replace their metaphysical attachment to the Holy Land
with a new Hebrew cultural renaissance. Palestine and the Hebrew language were
important not because of their religious significance but because they had been
an integral part of the Jewish people's history and cultural heritage."
[Library of Congress_2]
After Herzl's death in 1904, "the mantle of
Zionism was carried by the cultural Zionists led by
Ahad HaAm and his close colleague, Chaim
Weizmann." [Library of Congress_2]
"... the centrality of ethics to Judaism was made
an intellectual staple by the widely
read
Hebrew essayist writing under the name Ahad HaAm
(Asher Ginzberg, 1856-1927). His
Zionism envisioned the Jewish homeland serving as a
'spiritual center' for worldwide Jewry. By 'spiritual' he meant nothing
religious since he was a committed secularist. An uncompromising elitist, Ahad
HaAm believed the human spirit could only by fulfilled in high cultural
creativity. He therefore wanted the Jewish people to return to their land to
revive an authentic Jewish culture. In this, Jewish ethics would have to play a
vital role since he insisted that the Jews had a special national gift for ethics,
one their reestablished cultural independence would clearly make manifest. In
equating Jewish nationalism with high ethical attainment, Ahad HaAm was
exceptional among the early theoreticians of Zionism -- the reason, observers
suggest, that he is no longer considered relevant by most Israeli
intellectuals." [Borrowitz, 1991]
HaAm [d. 1927] was known as the icon of
"spiritual Zionism" or "cultural Zionism" and opposed to
political Zionism of Herzl. Except for some orthodox non-Zionist (or even
anti-Zionism) Jews, as represented for example by Neturei Karta International, all
shades of Zionism (religious, political, cultural, spiritual) converged to
secure a homeland or settlement for the Jewish people, to which a Jew from
anywhere in the world could migrate. That's the common denominator for all the
Zionists.
Einstein's affinity to Zionism was of this cultural
shade.
"While he had long supported the Zionist cause
- first visiting the United States in 1921 on a fund-raising with its leaders
by urging cooperation with the Arabs. Einstein often clashed with its leaders
by urging cooperation with the Arabs. He
considered himself primarily a cultural
rather than a political or territorial Zionist. In 1930, while Zionist
policy called for a Jewish state in Palestine, he proposed a power-sharing
arrangement for the nation-to-be (a Joint Council of four Jews and four Arabs,
modeled after the Swiss Constitution) ..." [Jerome, p. 110]
"Einstein's views place him squarely in the
tradition of German cultural Zionism.
Cultural Zionism, first espoused by Ahad Ha'am and
Martin Buber ... emphasized the cultural and spiritual renewal of the Jewish
people. It saw itself in opposition to political Zionism, as espoused by Herzl,
which focused on the establishment of Jewish state." [Stachel, p. 68]
As Einstein underwent his personal awakening toward
Jewish identity, "by 1938, he decisively rejected any taint of racism in
his concept of Judaism." [Jerome, p. 68]
I have conceived of Judaism as a community of
tradition. Both friend and foe, on the other hand, have often asserted that the
Jews represent a race; that their characteristic behavior is the result of
innate qualities transmitted by heredity
from one generation to the next. ... The Jews,
however, are beyond doubt a mixed race, just as
are all other groups of our civilization.
Sincere anthropologists are agreed on this point; assertions to the contrary
all belong to the field of political propaganda and must be rated
accordingly."
["Why do They Hate the Jews?", in
Einstein, 1986, p. 196]
Thus, his understanding of who is a Zionist was also
quite distinctive. According to him, "A
Jew who strives to impregnate his spirit
with humanitarian ideals can declare himself a Zionist without contradiction." [Stachel, p. 66, quoting
"Botschaft." Judische Rundschau,
vol. 30: 129. French translation in La
revue juive, vol. 1: 14-16]
Einstein, Zionism and Israel: Excerpts from the work of Dr. Alfred
Lilienthal and others
Before we explore what Einstein himself has said,
let us take a look at what others have to reflect on this. One of the persons
who has written extensively about distortions regarding Einstein's connection
with Zionism and Israel is Dr. Alfred Lillienthal. He was an American Jewish
scholar. His book "The
Zionist Connection: What Price Peace?" is a monumental and
authoritative work on Zionism and Israel. The book also deals with Einstein's
connection with Zionism and the Israel.
In this segment excerpts from Dr. Lillienthal's book
are reproduced, which also contain some quotes from Einstein. The 850+ page
book is a must read for anyone seeking to understand the Zionism, Israel,
modern media, the Middle East, US political apparatus and much more. Lilienthal
thoroughly documented all references.
According to Lilienthal, many American Jews did not envision Israel as an exclusivist Zionist/Jewish entity. Point of note and also in contrast, despite his wholehearted support for the Jews to reclaim their dignity and security, Einstein was a universalist.
"For their part, American Jews have sincerely
believed they were safeguarding the very existence of their coreligionists in
Israel, never dreaming it was Zionist exclusivism for which they were giving
their dollars, political support, and moral aid, and betraying their single
loyalty to their own country.
And today, when the thesis of binationalism is
raised by Arabs in advancing their rights to a Palestinian state and in calling
for a secular pluralistic Israel, the Jews in America see this only as a threat
'to destroy the State of Israel.' They see no reason why there should be, nor
do they believe there can be, a de-Zionization or restructuring of the Israeli
state, in line with the universal thesis of Judaism and the thinking of universalists such as Magnes, Buber,
Einstein, and others." [p. 152]
Despite being an eminent newspaper, the New York
Times' Zionist bias is all too well known. Lilienthal provides a detailed
account of NYT's role in "kidnapping of Einstein for Israel."
"I also personally endeavored to set the Times' record straight on one rather
important matter--the exploitation of Dr. Albert Einstein by the Zionist
movement. When the greatest scientist of our age died on April 18, 1956, at the
age of seventy-six, the Times in the course of its eulogy referred to 'Israel,
whose establishment as a state he had championed.' This 'kidnapping' of
Einstein for Israel was one of the most extraordinary coups ever perpetrated by
any political group anywhere, but with the help of the omnipotent Times anything is possible. The great
mathematician had vigorously opposed the creation of the State of Israel, but a
myth to the contrary has been widely spawned by the media, and was repeated
sixteen years later.
In late March 1972 the New York Times published a series of articles dealing with the life
and thought of Albert Einstein as allegedly revealed in the collection of his
manuscripts, letters, and other papers, which were to be published by his
estate. The third of the series included on the front page a three-column
photograph of Einstein with Israeli Premier David Ben-Gurion, and the caption
read: 'Einstein papers tell of scientist's efforts toward the creation of
Israel.' The article further referred 'to his long efforts in behalf of the
creation of a Jewish national state and of his sad refusal' to accept the
Presidency upon the death of Chaim Weizmann.
Einstein, despite the Time's incessant recitals to
the contrary, clearly opposed the creation of the State of Israel. A clear
understanding of the position taken on Palestine by the great mathematician,
himself a refugee from Nazi Germany, will not only set the record straight and
correct journalistic inaccuracies, but is most relevant to the continuing quest
for a just peace in the Middle East." [pp. 340-341]
What was really Einstein’s view regarding the
creation of the State of Israel? Dr. Lilienthal went to Princeton to see
Einstein and pose the question directly to him.
"Then, in 1952, in a message to a 'Children to
Palestine' dinner, Einstein spoke of the necessity of curbing 'a kind of
nationalism which has arisen in Israel if only to permit a friendly and
fruitful co-existence with the Arabs.' When this portion of the Einstein
message was censored in the organization's press release so as to impart the
impression of all-out support Israel, I went to Princeton to seek the
Professor's views on the incident. Einstein then told me that he had never been a Zionist
and had never favored the creation of the State of Israel.[1]
It was then that he also told me of a significant
conversation with Weizmann. Einstein had asked him: 'What of the Arabs if
Palestine were given to the Jews?' And Weizmann replied: 'What Arabs? They are
hardly of any consequence.' " [p. 341]
Einstein may have lent himself to the Zionist cause,
worked with Zionist leaders, traveled to
America to raise funds for the Zionist projects,
such as establishing Hebrew University of Jerusalem. However, his statement
that he had never been a Zionist can't be properly understood, if it is not put
in the context of what Zionism meant to those who have been on the frontline
for the struggle to establish Israel as a Jewish state and then led it. Here
are some samplers.
“Ben Gurion declared. 'Why should the Arabs make peace? If
I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is
natural: we
have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does
that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but
two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis,
Hitler, Auschwiztz, but was that their fault? They only see one
thing: we
have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept
that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the
moment there is no chance. So, it's simple: we have to stay strong and maintain
a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipe us
out.' " [Nahum Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox, p. 99]
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people...
It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't
exist." [Golda
Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969]
"How can we return the occupied territories?
There is nobody to return them to." [Golda Meir, March 8, 1969]
"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us.
Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian
population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them
out!" [Yitzhak
Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the
New York Times, 23 October 1979]
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two
legs." [Israeli Prime Minister Menachem
Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon
Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.]
"The settlement of the Land of Israel is the
essence of Zionism. Without settlement, we will not fulfill Zionism. It's that
simple." [Yitzhak
Shamir, Maariv, 02/21/1997]
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain
to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are
forgotten with time. The first of these is that there
is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish
State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." [Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister,
addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party,
Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998]
The sense in which these leading Zionists
(consistently held core views of political Zionism), who later assumed the
leadership of Israel, Einstein was not a Zionist.
to say: 'Given that there is a state, it would be immoral to
allow it to be destroyed, but if I had been asked for
my opinion before it existed, I would have said that it was not a solution to
the Jewish problem.' " [The Jewish Paradox, p.
162]
Einstein continued to remain engaged with
enterprises and activities, including in Israel, which were akin to cultural
Zionism.
"In subsequent years he vigorously supported
many Israeli cultural activities, in particular the Hebrew University and the
Weizmann Institute, to which he was deeply dedicated. According to biographer
Dr. Philip Frank, the professor had a 'good hearted weakness' and was hesitant to rebuke Zionists for their frequent
manipulations of his views and unauthorized
use of his name in order to enhance their prestige and fill their political
Zionism helped confuse the American press.
In his modest manner, he publicly declined the
Israeli Presidency, as Weizmann's successor, on the given grounds that he was
not qualified in the area of human relationships. But, in fact, that acceptance
of high office in nationalist Israel was hardly in keeping with the basic
philosophy of this great humanist and universalist." [pp. 341-342]
Misrepresentation of Einstein by news spinners of
the American media was all too common.
"Attempts to tie the renowned scientist to
political Zionism continued. First there were the welter of public tributes
from Israeli and Zionist leaders, published at the time of his death. And two
weeks later in a story prominently published by the Times, the Israeli Consul in New York claimed that Einstein had
been preparing a laudatory speech for nationwide television in commemoration of
the seventh anniversary of Israel. Not only was the evidence of Einstein's
Zionist intent scarcely substantiated, but it was in direct conflict with the
professor's last statement about the Israeli state, given in an interview with
Dorothy Schiff, pro-Israel publisher of the New York Post. She quoted him as
saying: 'We
had great hopes for Israel at first. We thought that it might be better than
other nations, but it is no better.' " [p. 342; quoting New York Post, March 13, 1955]
Einstein's ideas about the creation of Israel were
similar to Dr. Judah Magnes', President of Hebrew University.
"In the third of its articles on Einstein, the Times nevertheless repeated the myth of
his support of the creation of Israel without indicating any new proof. Were
the good professor alive today, there is every reason to believe that he would
be in the forefront of those condemning the deprivation of the rights of the
Palestinian Arabs. As far back as January 28, 1930, Einstein had warned in the
Palestinian newspaper Falastin that 'oppressive nationalism must be conquered'
and that he could 'see a future for Palestine only on the basis of peaceful
cooperation between the two peoples who are at home in the country . . . come
together they must in spite of all.' And from the outset he had fully supported
the idea of Dr. Judah Magnes, President of Hebrew University, of an ArabJewish
binational state. In a letter to the Times
with Rabbi Leo Baeck of Germany, he wrote: 'Besides the fact that they [Magnes
and his followers] speak for a much wider circle of inarticulate people, they
speak in the name of principles which have been the most significant
contribution of the Jewish people to humanity.' Such statements are hardly
consonant with the Times' allegation
of the scientist's support of the creation of a Zionist state." [p. 342]
Lilienthal's encounter with New York Times in
exposing the myth about Einstein's support for, and championing of, the
creation of the Zionist State of Israel is quite revealing.
"The Times'
revival of this Einstein mythology led me to call Op-Ed page editor Harrison E.
Salisbury and suggest that it would be appropriate for him to run a piece
presenting the true views of the learned scientist on this subject. Although
every type of opinion has been presented on this important page. Salisbury
refused to commission such an article, as is customarily done. He stated he
would be happy to look at the finished product if it were written on
speculation.
Even this I did, and here is his letter rejecting
the article, the substance of which has been set forth in the above pages: 'I'm
sorry to say that we decided against your article concerning Professor
Einstein. As I told you when we discussed this matter on the telephone, I was
dubious about the idea of elaborating on this particular aspect of Dr.
Einstein's career, and I confess on reading the article my feeling was
strengthened. You may feel that I overstate the case, but it would seem to the
casual reader like myself that Dr. Einstein's views, as one might expect,
underwent a series of changes over the years and the picture does not come out
so strongly in your article as to compel its publication.'
How possibly could any subsequent Einstein 'change
over the years' -- and his basic attitude toward political Zionism never
altered an iota--affect what he did or did not do about the creation of Israel,
an act which took place in 1948? The cultural Zionism in which Einstein believed
was a far cry from Jewish nationalism embodied in the Zionist State of Israel,
which he decried to his very death in 1956." [pp. 342-343]
Lilienthal's work definitively exposes the myth
about Einstein's "championing" of or support for the creation of
Israel as a Jewish state. Though facts stand on their own merit, some people
might remain unconvinced, because after all Lilienthal was an anti-Zionism Jew.
By the way, not all Jews are for Zionism or the State of Israel.[2]
Einstein's own words regarding Zionism and Israel
Einstein was a Jew, deeply proud of his heritage,
and empathic toward the Jewish struggle and suffering throughout the history.
His personal experience of this struggle and what he observed especially in
Europe reawakened his Jewish identity, brought him closer to the collective
struggle for a Jewish solution.
In A Letter to
Professor Dr. Hellpach, Minister of State (1929), published in his Ideas
and Opinions, Einstein wrote:
“I have read your article on Zionism and the Zurich
Congress and feel, as a strong devotee of the Zionist idea, that I must answer
you, even if only shortly. … I realized that salvation was only possible for
the living society to which he as an individual might rejoice to belong and
which might enable him to bear the hatred and the humiliations that he has put
up with from the rest of the world.” [P. 171]
“Then I realized that only a common enterprise dear
to the heart of Jews all over the world could restore this people to health. It
was a great achievement of Herzl’s to have realized and proclaimed at the top
of his voice that, the traditional attitude of the Jews being what it was, the
establishment of a national home or, more accurately, a center in Palestine,
was a suitable object on which to concentrate our efforts.
All this you call nationalism, and there is
something in the accusation. But a communal purpose without which we can
neither live nor die in this hostile world can always be called by that ugly
name. In any case it is a nationalism whose aim is not power but dignity and
health. If we did not have to live among intolerant, narrow-minded, and violent
people, I should be the first to throw over all nationalism in favor of
universal humanity.” [p. 172]
In the above letter, Einstein seems to identify with
Herzl. He even seems to assume a nationalistic tone. However, please note that
he unreservedly declares his preference for "universal humanity"
against anything "intolerant, narrow-minded, and violent." In 1929,
Jews were still at the receiving end of that intolerance and violence.
By that time struggle to secure a homeland for the
Jews was crystallized, and the campaign intensified. However, to Einstein, this
struggle or campaign was not to be at the expense of the Arabs or Palestinians.
He wasn't envisioning an exclusivist, racist national entity that would be a
colonial settlement, dispossessing of the Arab Palestinians, the overwhelming
majority of the natives at the time. He became keenly aware of the problem and
spoke his mind.
In a Letter to
an Arab, March 15, 1930, (Ideas and Opinions) he wrote:
“What make the present position so bad is the fact
that Jews and Arabs confront each other as opponents before the mandatory
power. This state of affairs is unworthy of both nations and can only be
altered by our finding a via media on
which both sides agree.” [p. 173]
By the early 1930s the issue of Arab-Jewish tension and
the critical need for an amicable and just resolution became a dominant theme
in Einstein’s writings and speeches. Point of note: he was actively involved in
the early 1920s with a project to establish some sort of an
intellectual/scholarly/spiritual center for the
Jewish renaissance in "Palestine." He was particularly campaigning
and fundraising for a world class Jewish university in that part of the world.
He was also actively supporting and promoting development works in Palestine
that would utilize the skills of the Jewish migrants, for the benefit of
everyone in Palestine--Jews and Arabs.
In Addresses
on Reconstruction in Palestine (Ideas and Opinions), Einstein articulates
his view in no unclear terms that the solution must be a "just" and
"advantageous partnership" involving the Arabs. This speech was given
in 1931.
“Ten years ago, when I first had the pleasure of
addressing you in behalf of the Zionist cause, almost all our hopes were still
fixed on the future. Today we can look
back on these ten years with joy; … The latest pronouncements of the British
government indicate a return to a juster judgment of our case; …
But we must never forget what this crisis has taught
us—namely, that the establishment of satisfactory relations between the Jews
and the Arabs is not England’s affair but ours.
We—that is to say, the Arabs and ourselves—have got to agree on the main
outlines of an advantageous partnership which shall satisfy the needs of both
nations. A just solution of this problem and one worthy of both nations is an
end no less important and no less worthy of our efforts than the promotion of
the work of construction itself.” [pp. 176-177]
By then, he was still referring to Herzl, but more
in line with Ahad HaAm's cultural Zionism, seeking to establish "a
spiritual center ... in Palestine."
“A decade or two ago a group of far-sighted men,
among whom the unforgettable Herzl stood out above the rest, came to the
conclusion that we needed a spiritual center in
order to preserve our sense of solidarity in
difficult times. Thus arose the idea of Zionism and the work of settlement
in Palestine, the successful realization of which we have been permitted to
witness, at least in its highly promising beginnings.” [Ideas and Opinions, p.
177]
Even by the late 1920s, toward the end of his life,
HaAm was already disillusioned.
"Toward the end of his life, when he had made
it to Palestine but was unhappy at what he found there, he wrote, 'Are we
really doing Zionism only to add in an Oriental corner a small people of new
Levantines who vie with other Levantines in shedding blood? If this is to be
the Messiah, then I do not wish to see his coming.'" [Sicherman, 2002]
Einstein was close to HaAm in pursuit of cultural
Zionism and never embraced the idea of nationalism. He apparently believed:
"Nationalism is an infantile
sickness. It is the measles of the human race.”7 [Link] Before
the next excerpt, it is worth pointing out that in 1929 in A Letter to Professor Dr. Hellpach, Einstein seemed to use some
nationalistic tone. By now, his thoughts have become unmistakably clear of any
nationalism as well as political Zionism.
“The difficulties we have been through have also
brought some good in their train. They have shown us once more how strong is
the bond which unites the Jews of all countries in a common destiny. The crisis has also purified our attitude to the
question of Palestine, purged it of the
dross of nationalism. It has been clearly proclaimed that we are not seeking
to create a political society, but that our
aim is, in accordance with the old tradition of Jewry, a cultural one in the widest sense of the world. That being so, it
is for us to solve the problem of living side
by side with our brother the Arab in an open, generous, and worthy manner.” [Ideas and Opinions, p. 178]
By 1929, a number of Arab-Jewish clashes made
Einstein was fully aware of the problem, and justice and peace inclusive of
Arabs became a central point of his understanding and approach to the Palestine
project for Jewish revival. He categorically warned his fellow Jewish people:
that [the Zionist] movement [must] avoid the danger of
degenerating into a blind nationalism. In my opinion, we must endeavor above
all that psychological understanding and an
honorable will towards cooperation take the place of resentment towards the
Arabs. The overcoming of this difficulty will, in my opinion, be the touchstone
that our community has a right to existence in the higher sense. I must unfortunately openly acknowledge that the attitude of our [Zionist]
officialdom, as well as the majority of public expressions in this connection, appear to me to leave much to be
desired." [Stachel, p.
72, quoting memo of Einstein to Heinrich
York-Steiner, 19 November 1929]
Einstein recognized the problem of growing Arab
resentment due to migration of Jews that was emerging like a colonial
settlement by outsiders. As he foresaw the fundamental problem, he dealt with
not just as a matter of true and higher interest of the Jewish cause in the
long term, but also as a matter of principle. He insisted on "complete
equality." The world is familiar with Einstein's famous E=MC2 equation.
This message of "complete equality" might have been his 1=1 equation:
1 Jew = 1 Arab. A rather radical, principled position.8
"Considering the unrestrained
7
This is one of the popular quotations
attributed to Einstein. However, quite remarkably, there is no source
provided. At least, I have not come across any. To verify
this quotation, I contacted the Official
Einstein Archive at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Here is what
Barbara Wolff of the Archive wrote to me (July 5, 2006): "The quote was
published as one of the statements Einstein made in an interview with G.S.
Viereck in 1929, an interviewer I do in no way consider a reliable person.
However, asked many years later if Einstein indeed had said it, his secretary
replied that while she cannot find a reference, Einstein was of the opinion
that he might have said so, and therefore the quote could be considered
authentic."
8
This 1=1 equation is particularly important to
me as a Muslim and a human being. Just like Einstein desired
equality between Arabs and Jews, I also affirm the same from
the Islamic perspective. How God is going to deal with us in the Hereafter is a
different issue. However, in this world, we must value and respect lives of all
as equally sacrosanct. Just as the Jews must recognize and respect the Arab or
Muslim life equally sacrosanct, the same is expected of Arabs and Muslims
regarding the life of Jews or others. In respect of the entire humanity, all
from the Islamic viewpoint, all human relationship should begin with the
principle of non-hostility: "Let there be no hostility except against
those who practise oppression." [The Qur'an 2/al-Baqarah/193] Thus, as a
Muslim, I must not have any hostility against anyone, whether Jews, Christian,
Hindus, animists, atheists, or whatever, except against those who practice
injustice and oppression. That's a fundamental principle of common ground
toward which the entire
racism ravaging the Middle East today, it's
important to note that until the end of his life, Einstein insisted:
'The most important aspect of our [Israel's] policy
must be our ever-present, manifest desire to institute complete equality for the Arab citizens living in our midst ... The
attitude we adopt toward the Arab minority will provide the real test of our
moral standards as a people." [Jerome, p. 111, quoting Einstein letter to
Zvi Lurie, January 5, 1955]
Looking beyond Arab rejection of Israel, Einstein
saw then and was afraid of what was to come due to Israeli policies and
attitudes. As Nahum Goldmann, the
president of World Zionist Congress during 1951-1977 and one of the leading
Zionists through the thick and thin of the Zionist movement leading to the
establishment of Israel, reminded the Jewish people, especially in Israel, in
an article "Zionist Ideology and the Reality of Israel" in 1978:
"The Zionist movement had always been convinced
that the Arabs would receive it with open arms, and be happy for its bringing
the values, the ideas and the know-how of West European and American
civilization into the Middle East. Because of this illusion—a result of the
lack of political experience of the Jews during 2,000 years of Diaspora life— Zionism committed the unintentional error of
ignoring the importance of the Arab attitude for
the realization of Zionist aspirations. The leadership of the Zionist
movement, to which I belonged for several decades, concentrated primarily on
winning the sympathy and the support of the great powers and of world public
opinion, and in this it was successful, as the U.N. decision of 1947 proves. Attempts were made occasionally to try to win over
the Arabs to agree to the establishment of
a Jewish state in their midst, but these efforts were never intensive nor flexible enough. ...
The tragedy of the situation is that, although
Israel won all the wars—more or less decisively—nothing definite was achieved
by the victories. ... [However,] instead of
leading to peace, the victories only aggravated
the conflict: the Arabs felt more humiliated and insulted with each defeat,
and the Israelis acquired a feeling of superiority and the conviction that they
need not worry too much because of the Arabs' refusal to recognize them.
Characteristic of this attitude is Prime Minister Begin's statement that Israel does not
require Arab acceptance because its existence is the affirmation of God's
promise and Jewish tradition. ...
One of the objections is that in
many cases peoples have kept territories conquered in war. This in fact occurred when the conquerors were strong enough to impose
the territorial changes on their defeated
opponents and to achieve peace, but the past 30 years have proved that the Arabs cannot be forced to yield.
..." [Foreign Affairs, Fall
1978]
Goldmann, a leading Zionist leader, was
acknowledging this reality and reminding the State of Israel in particular in
1978, long after Einstein, a problem of Israeli intransigence against seeking
any peace.9 In introducing Goldmann, Leon Abramowicz writes:
humanity can
converge.
9
This is not to suggest that the Arab neighbors
themselves did not have any part in contributing toward the Palestinian
diaspora. David Fromkin, in his book A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the
Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East [Owl Books; 2nd Rep
edition, 2001], is one of the best sources on how the imperialist powers
connived and conspired to divide and shape the Middle East. The emergence of
the Zionist movement seeking a Jewish state, and such a state only in
Palestine, coincided with the colonial powers' design for shaping the
post-colonial Middle East. Various Arab leaders played into the hands of this
design. Of course, there are two dimensions of the story here: the problem
involving the Palestinians who were dispossessed and displaced, and
“After resolving to create a Jewish state at the age
of sixteen, Nahum Goldmann did not rest until that goal has been achieved. But
his own conception of the Jewish state has often been at odds with the reality.
By giving priority to the spiritual development which alone, in his view, is
capable of assuring the continuity of Judaism and a special place among the
nations for a Jewish state, he is in opposition to the rulers of Israel who, preoccupied by
the state of war, have exaggerated the importance of military power.”
[Goldmann, Paradox, p. 4]
The problem would continue to haunt Israel.10
Indeed, just a few years earlier in 1974 Goldmann made an observation that
would remain on one hand a devastating moral blow to Israel, and on the other
hand, a critical insight, along the same line of Einstein, into any effort
toward future solution to the problem in the Middle East conflict.
“... If we had invested in the Arab problem a tenth
of the energy, the passion, the ingenuity, the resourcefulness which we
developed in order to gain the support of Britain, France, the US and Weimar
Germany, our destiny in the development of Israel may have been quite
different. ... We were not ready for compromises: we did not regard it as a
major problem. ... We did not make sufficient efforts to get, if not the full
agreement of the Arabs, at least their acquiescence to the Jewish state, which
I think would have been possible. That was the original sin.” [Lilienthal, p. 7,
quoting New Outlook, NovemberDecember 1974]11
Einstein's view about the emerging "Military Mentality"
is noteworthy in this context. He was opposed to the Military Mentality, as was
already being displayed by America during and after the WWII. He believed that
America already succumbed to this "Military Mentality" like
"Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm II". "The characteristic feature
of the mentality is that people place the importance of what Bertrand Russell
so tellingly terms 'naked power' far above all other factors which affect the
relation between peoples." [Ideas and Opinions, pp. 133-134] Einstein was aware of this problem all along,
just as it was borne out and acknowledged by Goldmann in the 1970s, in the
context of the Arab-Israeli problem. Just as he was concerned about the Arab
animosity, he was even more concerned about Israel as powerful country with the
“military mentality.” In February 11, 1953 he wrote to a correspondent in
Italy:
the broader Arab-Israeli relationship in the Middle East. The
issue of the dispossessed and displaced Palestinians is easy to understand. But
how much difficult is it to understand the reaction of the Arab-Muslim world?
Henry Kissinger writes in White House Years: “The Nazi holocaust added moral
urgency to the quest of a Jewish state. But no sooner was it established and
blessed by the international community in 1948 than it was forced to defend its
independence against Arab neighbors who did not
see why they should make sacrifices to atone for European iniquities in which
they had had no part.” [p. 342]
10
Kissinger writes: “It
naturally saw in the territories occupied in 1967 an assurance of the security
that it
had vainly sought throughout its existence. It strove for both territory and recognition, reluctant to
admit that these objectives might prove incompatible.” [p. 343]
11
That the establishment of Israel in the
heartland of Arab-Muslim world would bring about serious
consequences was all too well known even to the American
leaders, such as President Roosevelt. Nahum Goldmann describes the pressure
from a powerful Zionist American, Stephen Wise, on the American government.
“Before Yalta Roosevelt came under pressure from American Jews who wanted him
to accept the idea of participation. ... [after exchange with Ibn Saud and
learning about the vehement rejection, Wise was asked] ‘So how could you live
there as a tiny minority among Arab fanatics?’ Roosevelt concluded. ‘They would
exterminate you.” Wise was at a loss, and Roosevelt went on: ‘Stephen, I’m
going to ask you a personal question: you are a rabbi, with religious and moral
obligations. Will you take the responsibility of getting millions of Jews
killed if you do eventually get there (i.e., have the state of Israel)?’ Wise
was shaken, but stated that he stood by the official programme of American
Jewry. Then Roosevelt
concluded: ‘I agree that the majority of Jews want partition.
But I’m warning you, you may be committing a
crime.’ [Goldmann, Paradox, p. 32]
"It is quite true that our [Israel's] situation
has once again become perilous and that we lack all power to check the danger.
But when I look at Russia and America, I cannot help wondering whether we
[Israel] would behave more sensibly if we were as powerful as they are."
[Nathan, p. 574]
The kind of problem Einstein anticipated subsequently
became a sad reality as Israel gained territory as well as a military with a
reputation of “invincibility.” It didn’t want any meddling by outside powers,
even the United States, except to back it up for direct handling with the Arab
world on its own terms.12 Indeed, Israel has been consistently
ambivalent about any
“comprehensive settlement”13 and would
not even give a clear term for peace that its own patron, US, could work with.
As an indulgent patron, US had to advise Israel to come up with such terms.14
And, once it did come up with a definition or term of peace, it wasn’t really
ready to follow up.15 It became reckless, even by the standard of
its own closest patrons.16 The problem has been acknowledged by many
supporters and advocates of Jews, Zionism and Israel. Leon Abramowicz writes in
the Introduction to Nahum Goldmann’s The Jewish Paradox:
“By giving priority to the spiritual development
which alone, in his [Goldmann’s] view, is capable of assuring the continuity of
Judaism and a special place among the nations for a Jewish state, he is in
opposition to the rulers of Israel who,
preoccupied by the state of war, have
exaggerated the importance of military power.” [p. 4]
Einstein’s support for the Jewish cause, association
with the Zionist movement, and yet ambivalence about some of the core issues
and ideas were vindicated by subsequent development. That would explain, why
even though Einstein closely identified with the Zionist cause, quite
frequently his position was at odd with the principal tenor of the movement. As
Clark explained:
There were two other things which tended to make him
qualify his support of Zionism. One was his belief that a first priority should
be agreement with the Arabs. He was not alone in this opinion. 'A few Jewish
leaders, particularly Magnes, Hugo Bergmann, Ruppin, and Calvaresci, were
convinced that the first political aim should be not maximum immigration, but
understanding with the Arabs,' Norman Bentwich has written.
12
“As the pace of
diplomacy quickened so did domestic excitement. Within a week of the
announcement of our ‘favorable’ attitude to Four-Power talks, Israel’s
supporters reacted with the vigor I would come to know so well in the years to
come. They reflected Israel’s own concern that outsiders not seek to substitute
for direct talks with the Arabs.” [Kissinger, White House Years, p. 353]
13
“Israel much preferred that the United States
avoid an active role and let Jarring pursue his course. Israel
was ostensibly willing to negotiate but profoundly
pessimistic about prospects for a comprehensive settlement. This meant that
there was no way of pursuing the course we had set for ourselves without a
massive clash with Israel.” [p. 360]
14
“In that first conversation I could not answer
his [Yitzhak Rabin] question about our policy; we had not yet
settled on it ourselves. But I was reasonably certain that
the President would proceed with both the Four-and TwoPower forums. My private
advice was that Israel should prepare a concrete program articulating a
definition of ‘peace’ that it could live with; only this could give us criteria
by which to judge progress.” [Kissinger, p. 355]
15
The Arab states, with
the exception of Jordan, were clearly not prepared for a real peace expressed
in
normal relations with Israel or any concrete definition of
security. Israel was not willing to return all the territories – probably not
even in return for the definition of peace it was putting forward.” [Kissinger,
p. 378]
16
Kissinger writes about
the periods of gradual escalation during 1970 that ultimately led to led to a
war. “I
did not succeed in getting such a strategy considered. Our
agencies blamed Israel for the tension along the Suez Canal, arguing – not
without evidence – that Israel had provoked the Soviet reaction by its deep
penetration raids.”
[pp. 570-571]
'That conviction was expressed emphatically by
Albert Einstein when I visited him in his cottage during my stay in Berlin in
1930. He would not remain associated, he said, with the Zionist movement unless
it tried to make peace with the Arabs in deed as well as in word. The Jews
should form committees with the Arab peasants and workers, and not try to
negotiate only with the leaders.' [Clark, p. 397]
Although Einstein's identification and empathy with
his own Jewish people had not changed by the early 1930s (and it never did),
his primary loyalty to universal humanity kept him clear of political Zionism.
Subsequently, he seems to have categorically distanced himself from political
Zionism.
“We need to pay greater attention to our relations
with the Arabs. By cultivating these carefully we shall be able in future to
prevent things from becoming so dangerously strained that people can take
advantage of them to provoke acts of hostility. This goal is perfectly within
our reach, because our work of construction
has been, and must continue to be, carried out in such a manner as to serve
the real interests of the Arab population also.
… For our community is not, and must never become, a
political one; this is the only permanent source
whence it can draw new strength and the only ground on which its existence can be justified.” [Ideas and
Opinions, p. 179]
“We nurse the hope of erecting in Palestine a home
of our own national culture which shall help to awaken the Near East to new
economic and spiritual life.
The object which the leaders of Zionism have before their eyes is not a
political but a social and cultural one.” [Ideas and Opinions, pp. 179-180]
What Zionism, in terms of goals, policies,
strategies and priorities, meant to the leaders and promoters of the cause
often stood asynchronous to Einstein's own positions. In 1932, Einstein spoke
at a meeting in Los Angeles:
"The Zionist goal gives us an actual
opportunity to put into practice, through a viable solution of the Jewish-Arab
problem, those principles of tolerance and justice that we owe primarily to our
prophets. I am convinced that the living transmission of those principles is
the most important thing in Judaism." [Hoffmann, p. 242]
This was not just because he was a humanist and
internationalist, but also because he knew and affirmed based on the historical
experience that the relationship between the Arabs and Jews in that part of the
world was essentially one of friendship. Einstein reminded in a speech in 1939,
shortly after acts of violence the new and growing Jewish presence attracted:
“There could be no greater calamity than a permanent
discord between us and the Arab people. Despite the great wrong that has been
done us, we must strive for a just and lasting compromise with the Arab people
... Let us recall that in former times no
people lived in greater friendship with us
than the ancestors of these Arabs." [Hoffmann, p. 242]
To better appreciate Einstein and his views in this
context, it is important to take into account the fact that Einstein was
essentially a humanist, pacifist and internationalist. As Clark, a biographer
of Einstein explained:
Along with these feelings which tended to qualify
Einstein's enthusiasm for Zionism there was the essentially pacifist nature of
his approach to the problems of the world. Even when it came to Zionism, a
subject as emotionally close to his heart as anything ever was, he could never
look on his opponents, in this case Arabs, as the deep-eyed villains which the
sentiments of the case demanded. he was all for the policy of live and let
live. While many Zionists - possibly the majority of them - saw a Jewish National
Home essentially as a political state created for political purposes, Einstein
saw it rather as a cultural center. 'For me,' he wrote as late as 1938, 'the
value of the Zionist undertaking lies mainly in the educational and unifying
effect on the Jews of different countries. I am
not for the striving for a Jewish state,
mainly because I am against the secularization (or becoming worldly) of Jewry.'
Many Zionists called for mass emigration to the Promised Land, but Einstein
foresaw the way in which Arab opposition would be intensified. Thus the
dichotomy which runs through so much of his life showed itself here also. To
the demands of Realpolitik he would
oppose the need for idealism; when force was demanded he would respond that
pacifism was essential." [pp. 381-382].
As Einstein saw the Zionist movement taking
decisively political direction and the Arab-Israeli gap gradually began to be
defined and pronounced, he shared his humanistic wisdom in Working Palestine, 1934 (Ideas and Opinions).
“It is, moreover, this working class alone that has
the power to establish healthy relations with the Arabs, which is the most important
political task of Zionism. Administrations come and go; but it is human
relations that finally tune the scale in the lives of nations.” [p. 183]
So, what about Einstein's debt to Zionism? Didn't he
deliver an address entitled "Our Debt to Zionism"? Yes. On April 17,
1938 (Ideas and Opinions). By 1938 he had already distanced himself from
political Zionism and in this speech, while acknowledging the debt, pride in
his Jewish identity, and empathy for the Jewish struggle, he made it clear he
was not supporting the creation of a Jewish state. He also stated that he
didn't view political nationalism, which had by then gripped Zionism for a
"Jewish state," as compatible with the longstanding legacy of
Judaism.
“To be a Jew, after all, means first of all, to
acknowledge and follow in practice those fundamentals in humaneness laid down
in the Bible—fundamentals without which no sound and happy community of men can
exist.” [p. 189]
“Just one more personal word on the question of
partition. I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis
of living together in peace than the
creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical consideration,
my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the ideas of a Jewish
state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power no matter how
modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain—especially from
the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we
have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state. We are no
longer the Jews of the Maccabee period. A return to a nation in the political
sense of the word would be equivalent to turning away from the spiritualization
of our community which we owe to the genius of our prophets.” [p. 190]
Based on a joint British and American initiative,
there was the Anglo-American
Committee of
Inquiry in 1946 to examine the growing conflict
between Jews and Arabs in the British Mandate of Palestine and to seek a
solution. Einstein was among those prominent Jews who gave testimony before the
Committee.
"In his
testimony in January 1946 before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, and
in answer to the specific question whether refugee settlement in Palestine
demanded a Jewish state, Einstein stated: 'The State idea is not according to my
heart. I cannot understand why it is needed. It is connected with
narrow-mindedness and economic obstacles. I believe that it is bad. I have
always been against it.’ He went further to deride the concept of a Jewish
commonwealth as an ‘imitation of Europe, the end of which was brought about by
nationalism.' " [Lilienthal, p. 341]
The above statement of Einstein leaves no ambiguity
about his actual position and role regarding the creation of the State of
Israel.17 In February 16, 2005, the Guardian published an article
titled "Einstein's
other theory," by the controversial Israeli historian Benny
Morris. It was based on some correspondence in 1947 between Einstein and
Jawaharlal Nehru, and some pro-Zionist people have tried to use this
correspondence to connect Einstein again to political Zionism. The article
alleged: "In 1947 Zionist leaders asked Albert Einstein to work a miracle
and persuade a sceptical India to support the birth of a Jewish state." I
am yet to gain access to that correspondence. Regardless, the excerpts reflect
the central position of that correspondence which was Einstein's affinity with
cultural Zionism, as distinguished from political Zionism. This, presuming Einstein did not totally
switch his publicly stated positions prior to and after that correspondence.
That he really did not switch his position can be
corroborated by letters and/or statements of
Einstein from the same period. Barbara Wolff, a staff
with the Einstein Archive at the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, brought to my attention a
letter, dated Sept 24, 1948, to Einstein's friend Hans Mühsam who had lived in
Palestine-Israel since the early 1930s. They were such close friends that
Einstein dedicated, and also sent the very first printed copy of original
German book On the Special and General Theory of Relativity, to Mühsam. [See
the image of
the inscription]. They shared common views on many issues, including Zionism
and Israel. In the following letter to Mühsam, Einstein contends that the
British Mandate power had caused the two parties - Jews and Arabs - to fight
one another. The original quote in German is given in the endnote.
You are quite correct in what you're saying about
the underhanded posture of England and America toward us [the Jews]. All the
Arabs are only poor mercenaries who must carry their skin to market for that.
[...] I also think that during these last years an understanding between us and
the Arabs which could have led to a bi-national administration was no longer
possible. Earlier, however - actually, since 1918 - we neglected the Arabs and
trusted in the Englishmen over and over again. I never thought the state idea
was a good one, for economic, political and military reasons. But now there is
no way to reverse it and it must be contended with. [Einstein Archive DB #38-380]18,
19
17
Some people
either misread Einstein's testimony or distorted its content, describing it as
pro-Zionist. Einstein did call for a Jewish homeland, which must be understood
in the light of his consistent views articulated over the preceding decades.
In 1946, with hundreds of thousands of European Jews still
'displaced' and with the victorious allies unwilling to absorb even a portion
of the refugee population, Einstein appeared before an Anglo-American Committee
of Inquiry on Palestine, calling for a 'Jewish homeland.' The Zionist
establishment seemed to have intentionally misread this as a call for Jewish
sovereignty, so with help from his friend Rabbi Stephen Wise, he clarified his
position. Jews, he said, should be able to migrate freely within the limits of
the economic absorptive possibilities of Palestine, which in turn should have a
government that made sure there was no "‘Majorisation’ of one group by the
other." Resisting Wise’s demands for a more forceful statement, Einstein
replied that a 'rigid demand for a Jewish State will have only undesirable
results for us.' Radical journalist I. F. Stone praised him for rising above
'ethnic limitations.' (Einstein later became a charter subscriber to I. F.
Stone’s Weekly.) [John J. Simon. "Albert
Einstein, Radical: A Political Profile," Monthly Review, May 2005.
18
The original
quote in German: "Sie haben ganz recht mit dem, was Sie über die
hinterhältige Haltung von England und Amerika uns [the Jews] gegenueber sagen.
Die ganzen Araber sind ja nur armselige Söldner, die für jene ihre Haut zu
Markte tragen müssen. [...] Ich denke auch, dass in diesen letzten Jahren eine
Verständigung zwischen uns und den Arabern nicht mehr möglich war, die zu einer
bi-nationalen Verwaltung hätte führen können. Früher aber - eigentlich seit
1918 - haben wir die Araber vernachlässigt und auf die Engländer immer wieder
vertraut.
Die Staatsidee habe ich nie für gut gehalten, aus
wirtschaftlichen, politischen und militärischen Gründen. Aber nun
Wolff commented in an email: "It is true that
here, Einstein seems to defend that 'there was no other choice' idea:
bi-national administration no more possible. But this statement, out of
context, is usually quoted as Einstein's enthusiastic support of the Jewish
state. Yet it expresses actually bitter resignation in the face of a fait accompli, and a little hope that
once, the struggle ends, reason will lead Jews and Arabs to an
understanding." [email dated, 7/15/2006]
Just one year prior to that letter to Mühsam [i.e.
1948] - the letter to Nehru was signed & sent [June 13 1947, to be exact],
the UN had not yet voted for separation - Einstein wrote to an unidentified Mr.
Brainin in the US about his viewpoint:
"[I have] long-held [...] conviction [...] that
for Palestine the only fair and suitable form of government is a bi-national
arrangement. However, the management
would have to be substantially taken over by the United Nations for the
foreseeable future, because the political life of Palestine is thoroughly
muddled and, therefore, the land is not ripe for political independence."
[August, 6, 1947; Einstein Archive DB #57-685]20
Wolff commented in the same email: "Compared
with what the letter to Nehru says, this statement must trouble the reader who
does not know who indeed drafted the Nehru letter." In another personal
email in response to my inquiry [July
12, 2006], Wolff shared some illuminating information, which is helpful to put
the Einstein-Nehru correspondence in perspective: "the long letter to
Nehru dated 06/13/1947, an item which recently made headlines, was composed by
a journalist on behalf of the Zionists, and eventually discussed and signed by
Einstein. As you know, Einstein used to
(co)sign appeals and letters on behalf of issues he supported in general, even when particular formulations or subtleties
did not express his personal opinion. The letter to Nehru has to be read
with this reservation in mind.”21
Wolff's comment is consistent with the fact that for
letters to be signed or speeches to be delivered, Einstein often received
drafts from ghostwriters. As Ronald Clark wrote in Einstein: The Life and Times
wrote about what might have happened to Einstein in certain respects, without
the influence of Elsa, his wife.
"He would have ... made a fool of himself more
often than he did, have issued more statements that he had to retract, signed
more documents without reading them properly, and been used more frequently by
men of ill will." [p. 196]
The Official Einstein Archive has an online original
as proof. [see Einstein Archive DB #28-867]
This pertains to the draft of an address Einstein
delivered at (or sent to) the dinner for the Israel
Philharmonic Orchestra in 1950. Interestingly
enough, some Zionists must have drafted the text
gibt es kein Zurück mehr und es muss ausgefochten
werden." [as sent by Barbara Wolff]
19
I was somewhat
confused about this sentence: "All the Arabs are only poor mercenaries who
must carry
their skin to market for that." In an email [July 16,
2006] in response to my question, Barbara Wolff wrote: "The sentence you
highlighted refers to the fact that the Arabs (like the Jews, by the way) were
promised a lot by the Brits, each time according to the British needs and
British politics. But while the Jews had their own agenda etc., the Arabs, less
versed in politics, became more easily the cue ball (?) = the victim, the
mercenaries of the British politics."
20
The original
quote in German: "längst gehegte [...] Ueberzeugung [...], dass für
Palästina eine bi-nationale Regierungsform die einzig gerechte und zweckmässige
ist. Die Verwaltung müsste aber im Wesentlichen auf absehbare Zeit von den
United Nations übernommen werden, da das politische Leben Palästinas gründlich
verfahren und das Land deshalb für politische Unabhängigkeit nicht reif
ist." (August 6, 1947) [as sent by Barbara Wolff]
21
"The name of the journalist who drafted
the letter after having discussed the issue with Einstein is Chaim
Greenberg. He was working for the Jewish Chronicle. This information stems from a note Einstein's
secretary Helen Dukas forwarded, with the copy of the letter, to Otto Nathan,
the co-trustee of Einstein's estate." The preceding information was sent
to me by Barbara Wolff in an email [July 16, 2006].
containing some eulogistic expressions for Israel
the main section of which Einstein crossed out, replacing it with his own
words.
The original draft contained:
"Not only is it the cultural essence of a
country sincerely devoted to freedom of the creative artist in every field, but
also it is the concrete manifestation of the spiritual and moral stamina of the
people of Israel.
The people of America will welcome this great
orchestra because it is sent to us in a spirit of gratitude for the part we
have played in helping to establish a democratic state of Israel. Israel's
contribution to the beauty of living, like all artistic creations, will help
not only Israel, but the entire Middle East."
Einstein crossed out the above part, including the
reference to Israel as "a democratic state" and replaced with his
own, as following:
"The meaning of Israel lay
always and still lies in the spiritual values which it creates and embodies. The new state should only be seen as a means to
serve these ends efficiently, not as an end
in itself or even as an instrument of political ambitions.”22
The significance of this document is that it is
dated almost three years after the letter to Nehru and two years after the
State of Israel was founded. By now readers can draw their conclusion
independently about New York Times' disingenuous claim about "Israel, whose establishment as a state he [i.e. Einstein] had championed".
Some specific questions
a. Did Einstein's
position or attitude change after the establishment of Israel?
By 1949, political Zionism bore its fruit and Israel
as the national homeland for the Jews became a reality. In appraising the
situation, as in The Jews of Israel,
November 27, 1949 (Ideas and Opinions), he still talked about the importance
for this new nation to seek the ideal of "peace, based on understanding
and self-restraint, and not on violence." One has to wonder,
notwithstanding the antipathy of its neighbors, what would Einstein have
thought of Israel’s becoming a nuclear power and a bully of the Middle East.
“When appraising the achievement, however, let us
not lose sight of the cause to be served by this achievement: rescue of our
endangered brethren, dispersed in many lands, by uniting them in Israel;
creation of a community which conforms as closely as possible to the ethical
ideals of our people as they have been formed in the course of a long history.
One of these ideals is peace, based on
understanding and self-restraint, and not on violence. If we are imbued with
this ideal, our joy becomes somewhat mingled with sadness, because our
relations with the Arabs are far from this ideal at the present time. It may
well be that we would have reached this idea, had we been permitted to work
out,
22
The original quote in
German:
"Die Bedeutung Israels lag immer und liegt noch immer in
den geistigen und spirituellen Werten, die es schafft und verkörpert. Der neue
Staat soll nur als ein Mittel angesehen werden, diesen Zielen wirksam zu
dienen, nicht als
Selbstzweck oder gar als ein Instrument politischer
Ambitionen." [as sent by Barbara Wolff]
undisturbed by others, our
relations with our neighbors, for we want peace
and we realize that our future development
depends on peace.
It was much less our own fault or that our neighbors
than of the Mandatory Power that we did not achieve an undivided Palestine in
which Jews and Arabs would live as equals, free, in peace.” [p. 201]
So, did Einstein somehow reconcile himself with the
exclusivist Zionist entity of Israel and soften his position toward it? Hardly.
As he was an avowed pacifist and against nationalism, by now he was more than
disenchanted with the extremist tendency of the core leadership of the Zionist
movement that virtually monopolized the new country's government. Dispossession
of the Palestinians by the extremist groups (blessed by the Zionist government)
for the Greater Israel had already started and the massacre of Deir Yassin had
already been witnessed.
Lilienthal explains the context of the visit of
Menachem Begin to the United States for which a reception committee was
organized and how the Zionist circle manipulated in listing some big names
without their consent.
"Congressman John F. Kennedy from Massachusetts
wired the Chairman of the Committee (that organized the reception for Menachem
Begin), author Louis Bromfield: 'Belatedly and for the record I wish to
withdraw my name from the reception committee for Menachem Begin, former Irgun
Commander. When accepting your invitation, I was ignorant of the true nature of
his activities, and I wish to be disassociated from them completely.' The
office of Congressman Joe Hendricks of Florida revealed that the congressman
had been out of town and thus his name 'mistakenly' had been given to the Begin
Committee. Several other Congressmen could not recall later whether they, or
their office, had ever authorized the use of their names. Dr. Harry C. Byrd,
President of the University of Maryland, said: 'Some people I know asked me if
they could use my name as a member of the reception committee and I said they
could. I didn't know who he was. I am not going to New York.' And so it
went--after the damage had been done." [p. 352]
A number of prominent Jewish voices of conscience
rose to the occasion and sent an Open Letter to New York Times. Lilienthal
discussed and presented the Open Letter in his book.
Albert
Einstein, Sidney Hook, Hannah Arendt, and Seymour Milman were among the
signatories to this letter, which appeared in the Times on December 4, 1948.
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena
of our time is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the
'Freedom Party' . . . a political party closely akin in its organization,
methods, political philosophy, and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist
parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun
Zvai Leumi, a terrorist right-wing chauvinist organization in Palestine.
The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this
party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of
American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement
political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several
Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is
inconceivable that those who opposed fascism throughout the world, if currently
informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their
names and support to the movement he represents . . . A shocking example was their behavior in
the Arab village of Deir Yassin . . . this incident exemplified the
character and actions of the
Freedom Party. Within the Jewish community they have preached an
admixture
of ultra-nationalism, religious mysticism, and
racial superiority. Like other fascist parties, they have been used to break
strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions.
The discrepancies between the bold claims now being
made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine,
bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp
of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike)
and misrepresentation are means, and a 'Leader State' is the goal.
In the light of the foregoing consideration, it is
imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in
this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American
Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin's efforts, or even to expose to
its own constituents the dangers to Israel of support to Begin. The undersigned
therefore take the means publicly presenting a few salient facts concerning
Begin and his party, and of urging all concerned not to support this latest
manifestation of fascism." [pp. 352-353]
A scanned image of this Open Letter from the New
York Times is available at this link.
Einstein's joining such other prominent Jews in
condemnation of the fascist tendencies by some key personalities in Israel just
a month before gaining independence needs to be understood in the context of
Einstein's perspective about the "military mentality." He explained:
"It is characteristic of the military mentality that non-human factors
(atom bombs, strategic bases, weapons of all sorts, the possession of raw
materials, etc.) are held essential, while the human being, his desires and
thoughts--in short, the psychological factors--are considered as unimportant
and secondary." [Ideas and Opinions, pp. 133-134] Even though the Jewish
homeland did not come about in the way and in an atmosphere he desired,
Einstein tried all throughout his life to see that Israel tries to seek its
secured future not through military mentality, but through better dealing with
the human factors, as pertinent to the people dispossessed and the neighbors in
the midst of which Israel would have to live.
b. Was he not involved
with establishment and advancement of Jewish institutions of higher learning in
before and after 1948?
Yes, he was. He was intimately involved with the
founding and development of Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in particular.
Indeed, that university is the host of official Einstein Archive as designated
by Einstein. However, it needs to be recognized that, from the very earliest
stage of his involvement since the 1920s, when he even toured the United States
for such causes, his role was non-political. Otto Nathan and Heinz Norden in
their book Einstein on Peace wrote:
“In 1921, Einstein made his first trip to the United
States. He arrived in New York on April 2, 1921, in the company of Dr. Chaim
Weizmann, leader of the Zionist movement. His pacifist activities were not
widely known in America, and the trip had no
political overtones. It sole purpose
was to raise funds for the projected Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Due in
part to the generosity of the American medical profession, the endeavor proved
successful.” [p. 45]
Who was Otto Nathan?
"Of those at his bedside, it was Otto Nathan,
Einstein's loyal friend and adviser, whom he presumed would carry out his
wishes. Nathan, a former financial counsellor to Germany's Weimar Republic, had
taught economics at Princeton after fleeing the Nazis and was by this time an
economics professor at New York University." [Guardian; edited extract from
Possessing Genius: The Bizarre Odyssey of Einstein's Brain by Carolyn Abraham.
Published by Icon Books in 2004]
It should also be noted that in early 1920s Einstein
traveled extensively. However, as Siegfried Grundmann points out in Einstein
Dossiers: "This does not mean that Einstein's interests coincided with the
goals of his hosts or were identical with the purpose of the trips." [p. 111;
emphasis is Grundmann']
As Grundmann points out:
"As a social animal, Einstein shared certain interests with other persons and groups.
Where necessary, he was ready to serve 'as a
famed bigwig and decoy-bird.' He did so for the German state, the interests
of his Berlin colleagues, the World Zionist organization and other institutions
inside and outside the country." [p. 113; Einstein's own words 'as a famed
bigwig and decoy-bird' is quoted from Letter to Solovine, 8 mar, 1921. In
Einstein, Albert: Briefe an Solovine, Berlin 1960, p. 26]
Einstein was initially not comfortable about the
trip to America for the Zionist cause. He even wrote to Blumenfeld about others
merely using his name. Einstein was also fully aware about his role as, in his
own words, a "decoy-bird".
"He was for a homeland for Jews but not for an independent state. Besides he did
not like the role he was supposed to play on the trip. 'One is only using my
name, which is now the talk of the day,' he replied to Blumenfeld [395]. ...
Finaly, Einstein agreed but less out of sympathy for Zionism than out of
compassion for Jews subjected everywhere to severe persecution. He had no
illusions about the role cut out for him. On 8 March he wrote to Solovine: 'I
don't enjoy going to America at all but I am doing so on behalf of the
Zionists, who have to beg for dollars for the educational institutions in
Jerusalem, for which I must serve as
famed bigwig and decoy-bird. ... On the other hand, I am doing whatever I
can for my clansmen, who are being treated so meanly everywhere.' [Grundmann,
p. 120-121; note #395: Seelig, Carl (ed.): Helle Zeit - Dunkle Zeit. Zurich,
1956, p. 78]
In a letter to Haber, a German Jewish friend, who
tried to dissuade him, Einstein acknowledged that Weizmann was just making use
of his name for propaganda purpose during this trip to America. Einstein wrote:
"I was not needed for my skills, of course, but only for my name."
[Grundmann, p. 122, quoting Einstein from MPG-A, an archive: V rep. 13, Fritz
Haber, no. 978].
The trip to America did bring Einstein closer to the
Jewish causes, and as Zionism, in its various shades, was at the forefront of
the Jewish cause, during the 1920s Einstein was persuaded to become active for the Zionist cause. However, even
when he was most active for the Zionist cause in 1920s and he joined Chaim
Weizmann in the trip to USA, Zionist leaders had no illusion about
Einstein. Moreover, Zionists in America
were warned about Einstein's eccentricities.
Who doesn't know about Kurt Blumenfeld in the
context of the Zionist movement? What he mentioned about Einstein remains an
eye-opener. The following excerpt is from the book Subtle is the Lord: The
Science and the Life of Albert Einstein (Oxford University Press, 1982) by
Abraham Pais. The author was a renowned theoretical physicist and scientific
historian. He was also involved in the Zionist movement. In Pais' award-winning
biography of Einstein, he wrote:
"There was one person who more than anyone else
contributed to Einstein's awakening:
Kurt Blumenfeld, from 1910 to 1914 secretary general
of the Executive of World Zionist
Organizations, which then had its seat in Berlin, and
from 1924 to 1933 president of the
Union of German Zionists. Ben Gurion called him the
greatest moral revolutionary in the
Zionist
movement. He belonged to the seventh generation of emancipated German
Jewry. In a beautiful essay, Blumenfeld has written
of his discussions with Einstein in 1919, of his efforts 'to try to get out of
a man what is hidden in him, and never to try to instill in a man what is not
in his nature' [B3] It was Blumenfeld whom Einstein often entrusted in later
years with the preparation of statements in his name on Zionist issues. It was
also Blumenfeld who was able to convince Einstein that he ought to join
Weizmann on a visit to the United States (April 2 - May 30, 1921) in order to
raise funds for the planned Hebrew University. Blumenfeld understood the man he
was dealing with. After having convinced Einstein, he wrote to Weizmann, 'As you know, Einstein is no Zionist, and I beg you not to make any attempt to prevail on him
to join our organization. ... I heard ... that you expect Einstein to give
speeches. Please be quite careful with that. Einstein ... often says things out
of naiveté which are unwelcome by us' [B4]." [p. 315]
For political purpose, Einstein's visit was tightly
monitored and controlled by his Zionist organizers of the trop. "As
anticipated, Einstein served as a 'famed bigwig and decoy-bird.' Weizmann
preferred to do the talking himself. The head of the World Zionist organization
did not want to have his plans ruined by any undesirable political statements that escaped from Einstein." [Grundmann,
p. 125; emphasis by Grundmann]
That was in 1920 as Einstein was about to visit
America. He became closer to the movement to further the cause of cultural
Zionism. As the Jewish Virtual Library comments: "Although never a member
of a Zionist organization, in 1924 Einstein did become a member of a Berlin
synagogue to declare his Jewish identity and he served the cause of Zionism
throughout his adult life." [Judaic Treasures of the Library of Congress: Albert Einstein]
However, in the sense Blumenfeld wrote -
"Einstein is no Zionist" - that is, political Zionism, did that
reality about Einstein ever change?
Jessica Heckman further clarifies:
"Though critical of most political
organizations, Einstein was willing to associate himself with certain causes to
solve current, mounting social crises. After World War I he first became
involved with Zionism to counteract the rising anti-Semitism in Germany. In the
1870s, Zionism had emerged as an international movement espousing the creation
of a Jewish state. Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism, believed
this to be the only way Jews could gain acceptance from the world. Einstein’s
friend Kurt Blumenfeld, a German Zionist leader,** claimed credit
for Einstein’s 'conversion' to Zionism in 1920, ... 'Conversion' is a loaded term, implying that
Einstein was inspired by Blumenfeld to place unquestioning faith in the Zionist
project. If we examine Einstein’s own words, however, this is clearly not the
case. Rather, while affiliating himself with Zionism, he preserved a skeptical
distance from it. In 1919 Einstein claimed, 'I am as a human being an opponent
of nationalism, but as a Jew I am from today a supporter of the Jewish Zionist
efforts.'** Einstein here pointedly refers to himself as a
'supporter' of Zionism rather than a 'Zionist' or 'believer' in Zionism,**
thereby aligning himself with the project of founding a Jewish state and at the
same time placing himself at one remove from this project. Furthermore, he
counterbalances support for the Zionist cause with an abiding supranationalism.
This balancing act opened up a space for skepticism that he preserved
throughout his involvement with Zionism." [2005; see the link in the
bibliography; asterisks represent numbered annotations]
The above account is consistent with what Ronald
Clark, a biographer of Einstein, wrote:
Kurt Blumenfeld, who recruited Einstein into the
Zionist cause, shrewdly noted of him to
Weizmann that 'Zionism and Palestine were only
peripheral concerns'; and in 1923 Einstein himself revealed his own view of the
priorities when he told Weizmann that he would give his name and would talk to
people in Berlin but would not 'travel
around or visit congresses, since in order
to preserve my rights as a thinker I have to stay quiet in order to work.' [p.
310]
Einstein's empathy and involvement with the Zionist
cause, yet not being a "Zionist" is best illustrated in his own words
at the Sixteenth Zionist Congress.
Thus Einstein was among those invited to attend, and
to speak at, the crucial Sixteenth Zionist Congress held in Zurich in August,
1929. ...
He had been invited to the congress because, as
Weizmann assured him, he would 'greatly enhance the importance of the
proceedings and afford considerable gratification to all supporters.' This was
so, although he also gave great support to Weizmann whose name he quite
justifiably linked with that of Herzl himself and whose past work, he said,
gave him a moral right to influence their future. There had been bitter talk of
'abdication' to the Jewish Agency, and it was claimed that the influential half
of the new organization was concerned only with a much watered-down version of
real Zionism. Little of this argument came through at the congress, although it
is significant that in his speech
Einstein, after speaking of 'the brave and dedicated minority who call themselves
Zionists,' went on to say 'we others ...' " [Clark, p. 401]
c. Has the propaganda about Einstein's support for the State
of Israel stopped?
Not at all. Just like Alfred Lilienthal had his
encounter with the New York Times, I had a brief encounter with The Independent
of United Kingdom. In a letter
to the Independent [January 11, 2005], Dr. Colin Shindler, a lecturer in
Israeli and Modern Jewish Studies and Chair, Centre for Jewish Studies at
University of London, accused me of distorting the history about the
relationship between Einstein and Zionism. He wrote: "He (Einstein) never
renounced his Zionism."
The fact is nowhere on my essay did I state, or
imply, that Einstein had renounced Zionism.
To my surprise when I responded with the above excerpt from Pais' book,
quoting Kurt Blumenfeld that "Einstein is no Zionist," the
editor-in-charge of the section refused to publish it. According to the paper
the refusal was due to the time lapse, after Dr. Shindler’s accusation was
published. Of no consequence did it seem that neither Dr Shindler nor the paper had the courtesy to
notify me of the accusation, which caused the delay.
In short Einstein is still being claimed as a
Zionist and as a patron/champion of Israel, while factual remarks to the
contrary are being suppressed by the media.
d. How in the world Einstein was offered the presidency of
Israel?
In his accusation of me for distortions regarding
Einstein, Dr. Colin Shindler resorted to a circular argument: "If Einstein
wasn't a Zionist, it was a bit odd of Ben-Gurion to ask him to stand as second
President of Israel in 1952."
It projects allusions of a sound argument only by
camouflaging its circular conclusion, which would have been something like:
“Therefore, Einstein was a Zionist.” The offer of the presidency, though
symbolic, was not a small matter, because the state of Israel, a fruit of
political Zionism, stood in sharp contrast with what Einstein essentially stood
for.
"Albert Einstein, the man who had always
decried force, was invited to become President of Israel, that realization of
Zionist hopes, the state which had successfully staked out its frontiers by
force of arms and was defending them against all comes." [Clark, p. 617]
However, it was a great political stunt by the
Israeli leaders. If Einstein didn't accept the offer, as he actually did not,
that as great a person - one of the greatest humanists, scientists, and
pacifists - as Einstein was offered this presidency would bring the state of
Israel some positive publicity. Of course, then, in contrast, if Einstein did
accept the offer, one might presume that it would be a greater joy for the
Israeli leaders. But, ironically, what those Israeli leaders, who made the
offer, thought of if Einstein did accept the offer is quite revealing. In
Albert Einstein: A Biography (Viking, 1997), Albrecht Folsing shares the
following revelation about the offer to Einstein to become Israel's president:
"While Ben-Gurion was awaiting Einstein's decision, he asked his
assistant, the future president Yitzak Navon, over a cup of coffee: 'Tell me what to do if he says yes! I have had to offer the post to him because
it's impossible not to. But if he accepts we're in for trouble.'" [p. 735]
Thus, it is evident that while Israel was trying to
recruit a good name for public diplomacy, it was not a sincere offer. Zionist leaders were in fact quite concerned
if Einstein did decide to accept the offer. It seems reasonable to wonder
whether Dr. Shindler didn’t know about the suspicion expressed by Ben Gurion,
or did he simply choose to ignore it?
In a recently published book Einstein on Race and
Racism, some additional information is available about this offer of
presidency. Two of the chapters in the book are Einstein and Robeson, I and II.
Paul Robeson was an African-American with whom Einstein became a close friend.
The last time they met was at Einstein's home at the host's invitation and the
meeting lasted for almost six hours. Robeson was accompanied by his friend and
colleague Lloyd Brown.
Understanding what happened at that meeting between
Einstein and Robeson is key to appreciating the bond between the two men.
Brown's account gives us some idea of the content of their discussion: they
talked about everything from music ... to why Einstein had recently declined an
invitation to become president of Israel: "Einstein said he had been
opposed to the Jewish State in the beginning. He had been in favor of a
bi-national state. He said, when you have a state then you get an army and he
was sorry the binational state didn't happen. He said that he had written about
this and it was in his book of essays, Out
of My Later Years. [Jerome and Taylor, p. 125]
Einstein's position against political Zionism and
for a bi-national state is well known and he articulated that in earlier works.
In that specific context of declining the presidency, he has referred to his
views against any Jewish state. Later, as he had to contend with the reality of
the emerging state, he firmly advocated a bi-national state. He knew that a
state would have a military, and both from his perspective as a Jew and a
pacifist, he was disappointed. Once again, the comments here are not new, but
the timing and the context are relevant to note.
What he wrote to his stepdaughter in this context of
declining the presidency is also worth mentioning.
When he turned down the offer, Einstein told his
stepdaughter Margot, 'If I were to be president, sometime I would have to say
to the Israeli people things they would not like to hear.' [Jerome, p. 111;
further sources given in p. 307, note #25]
Unfortunately, due to his natural weakness toward
his people and to preempt any harm his views might cause the nascent state,
Einstein was all along too diplomatic. The problem was that those who could
talk to Israel what it needed to be told remained relatively muted. Kissinger
shares an interesting observation of Richard Nixon 15 years later.
Occasionally Nixon was tempted to impose a
settlement. On one of my memoranda in late 1969, informing him of King
Husseing’s pessimism about peace prospects in the face of Israel’s tough stand,
Nixon wrote in longhand: “I am beginning to think we have to have to consider
taking strong steps unilaterally to save Israel from her own destruction.” [p.
372-373]
Just as many a sympathizers who had the moral or
political high ground in regard to Israel have been too diplomatic, after
writing in “longhand”, it was shortly forgotten. “But on further consideration
[Nixon] always stopped short, ...” [p. 373]
Conclusion
Einstein was a universal humanist and also deeply
conscious and proud of his Jewish heritage. He empathized with the Jewish
people that had suffered throughout history, which was only worsening during
his lifetime. Parallel to his life as a scientist, he gradually became attached
to the Jewish plight, active in seeking solution to the Jewish problem. As
early as in the 1920s he came in close contact with prominent Zionist leaders,
such as Kurt Blumenfeld, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, et al. Einstein made sincere efforts
to bring his good name to the cause of his people's plight, but avoided mixing
his empathy for them with the political aspirations of Zionism.
Einstein never identified with political Zionism. He
associated himself with cultural Zionism instead, which was focused on a
spiritual revival of the Jewish heritage. As a universal humanist and an
eminent bridge-builder, he believed that such revival, especially in a
designated place like Palestine, would not only help address the Jewish plight,
but also serve the humanity in general and the people of Palestine in
particular. He categorically rejected
nationalism and the exclusivist political Zionism. He also believed in a
binational solution, where Arabs and Jews would live in harmony as equals in a
single, free society.
Thus, if support for any form of Zionism would be
adequate to label Einstein as a Zionist, he can be labeled so. However, there
is a common tendency to use Zionism and political Zionism synonymously. When it
is used in that way, Einstein was not a Zionist. Of course, Einstein's own
words, as documented in this essay, are sufficient to establish that point.
Also, only in this perspective, one can understand and appreciate the comment
of one of the leading Zionists, Kurt Blumenfeld: "Einstein is no Zionist,"
or as " ... after speaking of 'the brave
and dedicated minority who call themselves
Zionists,' Einstein went on to say 'we others' ".
Is it a small matter, whether we should be careful
and conscientious in using any label for Einstein? Well, Israel's attack on Gaza in February
1955[3] caused the
situation in the Middle East to heat up. Einstein was deeply concerned about
the challenges for Israel and the general potential for much wider conflicts.
He was preparing for a speech to be delivered on the Independence Day of
Israel, May 14. He died in April 1955. "Among his papers were found the
hand-written pages that he had prepared for the opening of his address."
[Brian, p. 156] Consistent with the views he held life-long in regard to
Arab-Jews (which evolved into ArabIsraeli) relationship and its potential to
cause great conflicts and tensions, even a few days before his death, he still
carried the same burden of conscience and agony. He deeply loved his people and
empathized with them. At the same time, his humanist soul was committed to
"truth and justice" for all,
including the Jews and the Arabs. Especially remarkable was his view about
small or great matters in the context of "truth and justice".
"His unspoken text began: 'What I am trying to do is
simply to serve truth and justice with my modest
strength. You may think that the conflict between Israel and Egypt is a small
and unimportant problem. 'We have more important concerns,' you might say. That
is not the case. When it comes to truth and
justice there is no difference between the small
and great problems. Whosoever fails to take small matters seriously in a
spirit of truth cannot be trusted in great affairs." [Brian, p. 156]
It is interesting that we hear so much about the
need for "peace and stability." Maybe if we paid attention to
"truth and justice," peace and stability wouldn't be as difficult to
achieve. Isn't there a message of
enduring value in that unspoken draft that lay beside the death-bed of this
great soul?24
So, was Einstein a Zionist or not? Well, for his
involvement and association with well-known Zionists, all the support he has
extended to the Zionist/Jewish cause, for all his "debt" to Zionism,
to make a blanket claim or assertion by a person like me that he was not a
Zionist would be inaccurate. However, to plainly label him as a Zionist would
be even more inaccurate, if not disingenuous. Therefore, whether he was a
Zionist or not a Zionist, let me defer it to the readers for their own judgment.
However, the last word on this might be given to the most important
organization of Zionism, the Zionist General Council. It is the supreme
institution of the global Zionist movement or World Zionist Organization.
"To mark the centennial of the First Zionist Congress held in Basel and
the founding of the World Zionist Organization (WZO) there, and in wake of the
Government decision to declare 1996-97 as the 'Year of Zionism', the
Zionist General Council published a booklet [1997]. The booklet, World Zionist Organization:
The National Institutions,
Structure and Functions, provides a synopsis of the movement and the
organization's history and structure.
In that official document, it is mentioned that
Einstein participated in the Sixteenth Zionist Congress in 1929. How WZO
described Einstein as a participant at that 1929 Congress in a document
published in 1997 is rather revealing. They ought to know who was a
Zionist and who was not.
The Sixteenth Zionist Congress (1929) decided on the
establishment of the Jewish Agency for Israel, which would be a joint body of
the World Zionist Organization and those known as "non-Zionists" in the belief that all Jews wished to
participate in building the National Home. Upon conclusion of the Congress,
Board of the Jewish Agency convened. Of its 224 members, 112 were Zionists
(members of the World Zionist Organization) including Prof. Chaim Weizmann who
was elected as President of the
Jewish Agency, Nahum Sokolow, Menahem
Ussishkin, Shemaryahu Levin, David
BenGurion, Rabbi Uziel; the 112 "non-Zionist"
members included Louis Marshall, Shalom Asch, Albert Einstein, Leon Blum, and
members of the Rothschild family. [p. 47; emphases are mine. However,
"non-Zionists" within quotation marks is from the original document.]
24
Over the years,
Einstein became quite close to Bertrand Russell. As Einstein became
passionately
committed toward peace in the nuclear age, he tirelessly
worked to engage prominent voices among the scientists and intellectuals in a
movement. Russell was one such person who became so closely associated with
Einstein in this regard that “on 9 July 1955, Bertrand Russell read
what became known as the Russell-Einstein Manifesto to the world’s press
assembled in London. He [Russell] explained that signing the appeal was the
last thing Einstein had done before he died.” [Russell’s Autobiography, p. 27]
This same Russell, a partner and confidant of Einstein in service to “truth and
justice”:
“Just two days before his death in 1970 in his ninety-eights
year, Bertrand Russell, still fighting for justice for all peoples and
particularly concerned about the fate of the Palestinians, wrote: ‘We are
frequently told that we must sympathize with Israel because of the suffering of
the Jews in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. ... What Israel is doing today
cannot be condoned, and to invoke the horror of the past to justify those of
the present is gross hypocrisy.’ And the famed philosopher asked this question:
‘How much longer is the world willing to allow this spectacle of wanton
cruelty?’ [Lillienthal, p. 204, quoting Alistair Cook, “Six Men,” (New York:
Knopfm 1977), p. 180]
For those who are interested in labeling, WZO has
the answer. For those who are not enamored with labeling, Einstein,
notwithstanding his deep empathy for and commitment to his own people of Jewish
background, was a humanist, a bridge-builder, a pacifist and, in his own words,
a servant of "truth and justice" - "truth and justice" for
all. He was an important icon of the spirit of global-belonging.[4]
Also, beyond any labeling, what is of even greater
importance are the dreams of Einstein that still remain unfulfilled. I have to
echo John Stachel:
Einstein's lifelong devotion to humanist ideals and
his attempts to apply them to the complex social problems of his time demand
the highest respect. In spite of any weaknesses one may find in his outlook,
Einstein's call for Jewish self-respect in the lands of the diaspora, his
support of a secular, humanistic Judaism, his conciliatory views on Jewish-Arab
relations, and his suggestions on finding the path to peace in the Middle East
are still of more than purely historical interest - particularly to his fellow
Jews. Rather than unthinking adulation of his every word, or cynical
manipulation of the Einstein myth, we can honor him best by reading and
pondering his words, modifying or rejecting what we find to be obsolete, and
using in our current struggles what we find to be of lasting value." [p.
76]
*This is an updated version of the original write-up in January 2000.
Acknowledgment: I am thankful to Syed Munir Islam
for his editorial assistance. I am also grateful to
Jacques Chauveheid (a Belgian physicist) for a key piece of
information, Barbara Wolff (a staff with Einstein Archive at Hebrew University
of Jerusalem) for sharing some valuable information and/or perspective
pertinent to this article (inlucding some material from the Einstein archive
that might not be available yet to the public), and to Aaron Bicknese (a
teacher of German at North Fayette High School, West Union, Iowa) for help with
the translation of some of the excerpts in German.
Bibliography
Eugene Borowitz. Excerpts from Exploring Jewish Ethics, Papers on
Covenant Responsibility (Detroit: Wayne State University, 1990): pp. 26-36, in
the Journal of Textual Reasoning, Vol. 1, July 1, 1991.
Denis Brian. The Unexpected Einstein: The Real man
Behind the Icon [John Wiley, 2005]
Ronald W. Clark. Einstein: The Life and Times [New
York: The World Publishing Company, 1971]
Albert Einstein. Ideas and Opinions [New York:
Bonanza Books, 1986]
Albert Einstein. Out of My Later Years [New York:
Philosophical Library, 1950]
Nahum Goldmann. "Zionist Ideology and the
Reality of Israel," Foreign Affairs,
Fall 1978.
Nahum Goldmann. The Jewish Paradox [New York: Fred
Jordan, 1978]
Siegfried Grundmann. The Einstein Dossiers: Science
and Politics - Einstein's Berlin Period with an Appendix on Einstein's FBI File
[Springer, 2006]
Jessica Heckman. "Action at a Distance: Einstein as Activist,"
Vassar College Archive and Special Collections, 2005.
Banesh Hoffmann. "Einstein and Zionism,"
in G. Shaviv and J. Rosen (eds.), General Relativity and Graviation [New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1975], pp. 233-242.
Gerald Holton and Yehuda Elkana (eds.). Albert
Einstein: Historical and Cultural Perspectives: The Centennial Symposium in
Jerusalem [Princeton University Press, 1982]
Fred Jerome. The Einstein File: J. Edgar Hoover's
Secret War Against the World's Most Famous Scientist [St. Martin's Press, 2002]
Fred Jerome and Rodger Taylor. Einstein on Race and
Racism [Rutgers University Press, 2005]
Henry Kissinger. White House Years [Little Brown,
1979]
Alfred Lilienthal. The Zionist Connection: What
Price Peace? [New York: Middle East Perspectives, 1979]
Otto Nathan and Heinz Norden (eds.). Einstein on
Peace [New York: Avenel Books, 1968]
Harvey Sicherman.
"The Sacred and
the Profane: Judaism and International Relations," Volume 10,
Number 1, January 2002.
John Stachel. Einstein from 'B' to 'Z' [Boston:
Birksauser, 2002]
U.S. Library of Congress_1. "Political Zionism"
[Country Studies; Online]
U.S. Library of Congress_2. "Cultural Zionism"
[Country Studies; Online]
Additional
reading:
1. The 1948 Letter of some
Eminent Jews to New York Times (Albert Einstein was one of the
signatories condemning the Fascist and Nazi-like nature of the new State of
Israel)
2. Letter to the Editor
of the Palestinian Arab Newspaper "Falastin" [January 28, 1930]
3. Excerpt from
'Subtle is the Lord...': The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein.
4. Criticism
of the above essay in a Letter
by Dr. Colin Shindler (University of London) in The Independent
5. My response
sent to the Independent on October 12, 2005
[1] There were other notable people of among the
Jews who were not involved in the struggle for establishing
the state but later had to contend with the
state of Israel. One such person was Henry Kissinger. Their hindsight is quite
revealing. Nahum Goldmann, the long-time president of World Zionist
Organization, wrote: "He [Kissinger] used
[2] Some Links: Neturei
Karta International; JewishSpeak; Self-Hating Jews.
[3] For this attack, UN Security Council
unanimously adopted Resolution 106 condemning Israel on March
17, 1955.
[4] Mohammad Omar Farooq. “The Spirit of Global Belonging: Perspectives from Some
Humanity-Oriented Icons,”
Unpublished essay, September 2006.
No comments:
Post a Comment