THE WAR YEARS IN RETROSPECT

After much preparation, a mishlachat to Habonim and Hechalutz in America was organized in the spring of 1939. The first shlichim reached the U.S. that summer, and the entire delegation by spring of 1940. Due to the circumstances of war and the impossibility of returning to Eretz Israel, this delegation remained in the United States for close to seven years and was, therefore, afforded an opportunity of being present during a long and important period in the development of the chalutz youth movement in America.

It was the lot of this delegation to be active during a most dramatic and decisive period in the life of the Jewish people: the World War, the destruction of European Jewry, the crystallization of the Zionist program to establish the Jewish state, the preparations for the political military struggle for the realization of the program for statehood. The leadership of Habonim and the -mishlachat were well aware of the special responsibility which had been placed upon them and did all that was possible to disseminate a perception for this period among Jewish youth and to translate this perception into practical language. A common bond resulted from this period of working and struggling together, a companionship which has continued for close to twenty years; and perhaps it is the fruit of this period which still nurtures the movement until this very day.

In these notes, I wish to recall several memories and to draw attention to several incidents which merit special attention, either because of their educational value or because of their particular character resulting from those times.

                                        *                                    *                                *

Let us transfer ourselves to the realities of late 1938, early 1939, and see what was transpiring in the chalutz youth movement throughout the world and in the kibbutz movement in Eretz Israel.

Several youth movements were very strong and active in the European Diaspora: Gordonia, Hashomer Hatzair, Dror-Hechalutz Hatzair, Netzach. Hashomer Hatzair educated its members toward Kibbutz Artzi; Gordonia, toward Chever Hakvutzot; and the others, toward Kibbutz Hameuchad. Although they were world movements, they were, in essence, concentrated in Europe with modest branches in other countries. (Habonim in England retained its independence.)

In Eretz Israel, despite the organizational affiliation of the youth movements, there was a great deal of confusion and ferment amongst the graduates of the youth movements who were carrying out the work, particularly among those aligned in principle with Mapai. These chaverim claimed that it was necessary to overcome the existing divisions in the kibbutz movement and to unite it into one movement based on a united pioneer youth movement in the Diaspora. Already in 1936 many Kibbutz Hameuchad members demanded immediate unification with Chever Hakvutzot. For three consecutive years this group continued to demand complete and immediate amalgamation. Chever Hakvutzot agreed, but a slight majority within Hakibbutz Hameuchad prevented the implementation of this union.

Those within Hakibbutz Hameuchad and Chever Hakvutzot who were in favor of union found a common meeting ground in Mapai and an ideological leader of great stature in Berl Katzenelson. During meetings and discussions, through unofficial contacts, there developed the idea of a joint educational activity outside the separate organizational frameworks and despite the long-standing tradition of separate movements.

The delegation that was constituted was, therefore, the first which did not represent the various world youth movements but was rather a delegation dedicated to the idea of a union of the kibbutz movement and the chalutz youth movements in the Diaspora. In a sense, this delegation was the first organized effort to pave the way for the unification of the various youth movements.

Part of the delegation met in London, in 1939, en route to the United States. Because of certain tasks which I had to perform, I was there from Passover until September of that year. This was, in effect, the first meeting of the shlichim who were on their way to America. I remember our first discussion. We decided to make a prodigious effort to "forget the past" and to think only in terms of our service to Jewish youth in America. And, even after a period of twenty years, I can still see the joy in the eyes of the shlichim. For, indeed, it called for a certain spiritual effort to be able to make the following simple declaration: "We will leave the tradition on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and start afresh—together!" 

The late Berl Katzencison was also in London in those days. He was very pleased that, finally, the first stage of a combined and united delegation had been realized. His last instructions still ring in my cars: "You are going forth, not only to bring chalutzim to Israel. You must remember that our lives in the Homeland are pieces in the mosaic of experiment, of cultures, of experiences and longings. Try to bring out that which is distinctive in American Jewish youth; and, together with them, you will build the framework for a pioneering Jewish youth." We knew that we were embarking on a unique mission. But we did not know that the World War would separate us from Eretz Israel for a seven-year period nor what was in store for all of us during the course of those fateful years.

                                            *                                    *                                    *

New York shocks every newcomer. Not because of its noise, or its tall buildings, or even because of its huge population. In any case, I was not overwhelmed by all this. The shock comes mainly— or so it seems to me—with the realization of one's solitude in the face of all the overpowering, pulsating city life. Or, more correctly, it is the disproportion between the many possibilities for accomplishment and the little that one person, or even a small group of people, can achieve. At times, one is confronted with the feeling that—after
all, what can one do in order not to disappear completely amidst this stormy sea. . . .

We had come to a small youth movement, the Young Poale Zion Alliance, scattered all over America. Habonim as a framework for an educational youth movement, was only in its beginnings, and its leaders had little tradition and experience.

It was necessary to strengthen the framework of the movement, to base it on educational age groups with a detailed program of activity which would begin at the age of ten and continue through adolescence and until aliya.

The main point was not the framework, but the introduction of form, content, and a youth movement style, an educational basis, and the adoption of a program of activities which would increase the size of the movement so that, to some extent, it could answer the needs of the American Jewish community.

I shall not detail the activities of the shlichim and the leadership of the movement. Instead, I should like to stress the hypotheses which served as the basis for the development of activities.

Firstly, we assumed that there was a decisive difference between activity in any country in Europe and that in America. They differed in that, in most of the European countries, emigration was—and still is—the solution, or one of the solutions, of the Jewish problem. Aliya is, therefore, the central point in their Zionist activity. This was not so in the United States, whose Jewish inhabitants felt that the focus of their lives was their absorption into the country to which they had come only "yesterday." Therefore, education toward aliya could not be built on the basis of the negation of the surroundings (the fear of anti-Semitism, for example) but on an awareness of the value of a complete Jewish life, whose full realization could be achieved only in Eretz Israel.

Secondly, in the special conditions of the American Jewish community, it was most important that an educational movement accept a program of practical activities. By this I mean, together with ideological and educational activities there must be practical projects which the movement undertakes.

These hypotheses required a great deal of work in consolidating the movement around these basic ideas and in carrying out the day by-day activities of the movement. I should like to particularly stress the second hypothesis. It is not accidental, for instance, that the women's Zionist organizations, Hadassah and the Pioneer Women, have a larger membership than do the men's organizations. Over the course of years American Jewry was educated toward carrying out practical activities, particularly fund-raising projects for Israel, and not merely to express agreement with the idea of Zionism. This "doing something" was a substitute for the precept of aliya which prevailed in Europe and was also an expression of the pragmatism of American life in general. A youth movement built on ideology alone could not hope to be a mass movement unless it included a practical program of activities for Eretz Israel. In our endeavors to relate this theory to reality, we put before the movement certain tasks, such as fund-raising, setting up summer camps for youth, the establishment of educational centers, the popularization of the Hebrew book, and other activities. Not all of the activities were successful, and many of them remained only on paper. However, the very development of such a trend contained educational value in itself.

The question of a chalutz-centered versus a one hundred per cent chalutz movement bothered us no end. The delegation was composed of members of movements for whom a Zionist youth movement could only mean one hundred per cent chalutzim. As shlichim we also knew that it was our task to press in the direction of one hundred per cent chalutziut. Nevertheless, we decided against full chalutziut and accepted the position of the American chaverim that the movement be built as a general youth movement in the spirit of Labor Eretz Israel and that, within it, groups of chalutzim be formed. Looking back on these years, it seems to me that we did not err and that the final results were no less than they would have been had we demanded one hundred per cent chalutziut.

                                                 *                                    *                                    *
The general framework of the Hechalutz was destroyed during the Second World War, and I am certain that the younger members of the youth movements learn of Hechalutz as a movement only when they are told of the history of days gone by.

In 1939, however, and during the War, the concept of Hechalutz was most concrete, and our mishlachat was occupied with the renewal of the activities of Hechalutz in America. Hechalutz between the two World Wars was the only organizational framework within which were included practically all the pioneering movements, chalutzim who did not belong to any movement (stam chalutzim), members of the chalutz youth movements, and members of the senior Zionist parties who wanted to come to Israel as chalutzim. Hechalutz was affiliated with the General Federation of Labor, the Histadrut, and also had a formal position in the World Zionist Organization as the movement representing the chalutzim going to Israel.

Among the different viewpoints prevailing in the various chalutz youth movements, there was also a difference of opinion with regard to the character of Hechalutz. Some saw it as a federation to serve the needs of the youth movements—training farms, money, aliya; and others held the view that Hechalutz itself was to be a movement, in which the various youth movements and their members would also participate. Our mishlachat held the latter opinion and felt that efforts should be made to attract members to Hechalutz not only from the youth movements.

When we came to the United States, we realized that, in effect, there was no Hechalutz framework, neither in accordance with one position nor with the other. Only a technical framework existed which supervised the existing training farms. As part of the mission placed upon us, we began to re-establish Hechalutz. It was not an easy job to build up a chalutz movement under the conditions of a World War, with no idea as to when and how the chalutzim would get to Israel, and with conscription to the United States Army beginning. Hechalutz, as it existed then, served as a meeting place for young Zionists from all trends and movements during the war years—for Habonim, Hashomer Hatzair, Masada, Junior Hadassah, and others.

                                                *                                *                                *

The problem of training chalutzim in America has always been a complicated matter, ever since the establishment of Hechalutz. It existed at the time we were there, even as it exists now, but it was easier for us to give the answers to this question during the years when there was no aliya and before the creation of the State of Israel.

Does hachshara mean vocational training? To this question we were forced to give a negative reply. With the limited financial means we had at our disposal, we knew that neither of the training farms, Cream Ridge and Hightstown, could give adequate vocational training. We knew that any effort made in this regard would be poor in comparison to the possibilities available at the agricultural schools and colleges within the immediate vicinity of our training farms in New Jersey. It was clear, therefore, that the purpose of the farms was to awaken interest in agriculture rather than give one a "vocation" in this field.

What, then, is hachshara, if it is not basically vocational training? To this, we answered: At the Hechalutz training farm the garin (nucleus) is formed for future cooperative living in Eretz Israel. Thus hachshara was an experimental laboratory for learning to live a life based on personal self-reliance and to build a group on the basis of manual labor. Of course, this included cultural work, learning Hebrew, and the development of a feeling of identification with life in Eretz Israel. 

We were not completely successful. Parts of the program were only "hints" of our good intentions. We were unsuccessful in giving these farms a general character. Hightstown remained a Hashomer Hatzair farm; and Cream Ridge, a Habonim farm. Nevertheless, despite disappointments, somehow the units of aliya to Eretz Israel were formed and consolidated at these farms.

It must be pointed out that the money for the maintenance of the farms did not come from Zionist budgetary sources. The Histadrut was responsible for a sizable portion of the Hechalutz expenses, and the remainder was gotten from friends. Organized Zionism saw no necessity for supporting farms for training pioneers in America, even during the war years.

Among the many friends who helped maintain the training farms in those days, I should like to mention one in particular: The founder of the Norman Fund—now called the Fund for Cultural Institutions in Israel—was Edward Norman. He was not an "official" Zionist. On the contrary, he was a member of the American Jewish Committee, which was opposed to Zionism at that time. But Mr. Norman was a devotee of the kibbutz movement. He believed that the example of collective living was the most constructive means for overcoming the ills of civilization-—inequality, the lack of creativity of men, and dependence upon social welfare services. He saw in the Hechalutz training farms an American experiment in collective living. He understood that the central idea of the farms was Eretz Israel, but he felt that his support was a synthesis of his non-Zionist Americanism and his Jewish pride. There are, doubtless, very few chalutzim who remember that it was Mr. Norman's support which helped them get their first training for a life in a kibbutz. and in agriculture in Israel.

Naturally, most of the friends and supporters of Hechalutz were Zionists. They were Zionists who saw chalutziut and training farms for chalutzim as the basis of Zionist activity in America and who supported, aided, and guided Hechalutz at all times.

Parallel to the training farms were, of course, the garinim. There is no need for giving details of their activities. Garinim working under war conditions, when there was no aliya to Israel, can in no way serve as an example for normal aliya units. I merely want to point out that, as time went on, Habonim came more and more under the direction and influence of members of Hechalutz, although Habonim itself was not a one hundred per cent chalutz movement.

                                                    *                            *                            *

It is difficult, most difficult, to describe the life of a Zionist youth movement during the Second World War. As is known, the World War began in the wake of the agreement between Molotov, in the name of the U.S.S.R., and Ribbentrop, in the name of Germany. This agreement cast a long shadow on American youth and their attitude toward the war. The debate centered on whether the American people should remain neutral or whether it should prepare for war.

In those days the Communists demonstrated in the streets of American cities demanding that the activities of President Roosevelt be curtailed as he was preparing the nation for war. Hashomer Hatzair made an all-out effort to draw the Zionist and chalutz youth away from any expression of sympathy with Roosevelt's policy. Within Jewish liberal youth circles there was the same discussion.

Habonim, and the youth groups influenced by the movement, immediately adopted a clear stand with regard to the question. They supported the attitude of the President of the United States; expressed their absolute rejection of the policy of the "neutralist" circles; and, at every opportunity, opposed the strange front, ranging from reactionaries to Communists, which supported the pact between Germany and Russia. The stand of the movement was a direct result of its ideological orientation, which was based on definitive opposition to dictatorship in any form, whether Communist or Hitlerist; on the assumption that true democracy must defend its existence and should not appear as a soft or decadent system; on complete identification with the problems and tribulations of the Jewish nation; and on a belief that the future of the Jewish people would be assured under a system of true democracy.

The central leadership of Habonim and the madrichim throughout the country, together with the mishlachat, "lived" the tragic era of the destruction of Eastern and Central European Jewry. The news that reached us was vague, but it sufficed to keep each heart hinged to events behind the war front. We searched for ways to help.
In those troubled days a group was formed which we named the Teheran Group. At that time the United States Government subcontracted to large private contractors certain public projects in friendly countries. Among them was the paving of roads in Teheran in order to improve the transportation of necessary war materials through Persia. It occurred to us that if we were to send a group of American boys who were well-trained and chalutziut-minded to work in Persia, they would be able to help the Eretz Israel units, who were working in the same area, to establish contact with the Jewish refugees who were gathering on the Persian-Russian border and to bring at least a part of them to Eretz Israel.

We searched for a number of weeks for a Jewish contractor engaged in this type of work and experienced in implementing such huge projects, until we finally found the suitable person. Through him we were given the opportunity of sending a group of boys to work in Persia. I do not want to exaggerate the value of the aid these boys gave in bringing Jews from the Russian border into Eretz Israel; I have no doubt that it was comparatively modest. But for the movement, whose members were thirsty for some sort of practical activity, the Teheran Group was a valuable and important educational force. It was an experience which enabled the movement to feel itself a "partner" in the historic events then transpiring.

With the outbreak of war between Russia and Germany, after the Japanese attack upon the American navy, ideological differences among the Zionist youth organizations were eliminated. Habonim members were conscripted to the army, among them members of the mishlachat. Suitable arrangements were made for the continuation of the movement's activities, and the places of those who left to serve in the army were filled by younger members, who faithfully continued the work until the end of the World War.

I should like to mention a difference of opinion between Hashomer Hatzair and us regarding a question which concerned only a small part of the movement. The question was the establishment of a Jewish fighting unit within the Allied military framework, called the Jewish Brigade. Hashomer Hatzair had, by then, passed through several crises in connection with its attitude towards the war. This influenced their attitude towards the establishment of the Brigade. They declared that we were endangering the very existence of Eretz Israel by taking out a military unit from its borders and that military service should be limited to service within the boundaries of the country. We, of course, wholeheartedly supported the setting-up of a recognized military unit, aligned with the general military effort. Only upon our return to Eretz Israel did we learn of a similar debate which had taken place at the same time among the parties there.

                                                    *                            *                            *

The movement was privileged to be a partner in an historic event at which the struggle for the establishment of the State of Israel began. 

I refer to the Zionist Conference which took place at the Biltmore Hotel in May, 1942, at which the Biltmore Platform, calling for the immediate establishment of a Jewish State in Eretz Israel, was adopted. This resolution, presented by David Ben-Gurion in a detailed and well-reasoned speech, was the first public expression of the determination to establish the independence of the Jewish people in Eretz Israel upon the conclusion of the war.

The words of Ben-Gurion were received with doubt, hesitation, and even derision. Although the resolution was accepted by a majority vote, I do not think I would be mistaken if I said that many of the delegates present viewed the resolution as a general declaration and certainly did not believe that the State of Israel would come into being during their lifetime. Ben-Gurion also expressed the idea that the establishment of the state would entail a political and military struggle, that Israelis independence would not be obtained only by means of a political decision, and that it was imperative to begin preparations for the days to come immediately after the war's end.

A "typical" discussion ensued among those engaged in chalutz and youth movement activities at about that time. We thought that it was our duty to participate in this future struggle and that we should prepare young people who would be ready to travel to Eretz Israel and to serve there in any assignment. There were other chaverim, who felt that it was not our duty, either as Hechalutz or as a chalutz youth movement. After weeks of clarification, the matter was decided: Hechalutz set up plugot (units) whose task was to prepare and train for the coming struggle. For the most part, the chaverim who participated in these plugot were chaverim of Habonim, Masada, Junior Hadassah, and a small number from Hashomer Hatzair.

The basis of activity for these plugot was the establishment of a flight unit. Two small Piper Cub airplanes were purchased with the help of a small fund obtained by David Ben-Gurion and the contributions of friends, and a training base was set up at the Cream Ridge Farm. Two units, numbering about twenty members, began their flight training at an airfield close to the farm. Part of the group were trained in flight, and part in theory. This training continued until the United States entered the war, at which time all civilian flying was prohibited. The members of this unit joined the air services of the Allied armies, and we can point with satisfaction to the fact that many of them are in Israel today. Moreover, several of them were instrumental in helping to establish the air force in Israel at the beginning of the War of Liberation.

The other units were also organized, a communication unit and a first-aid unit. These were less important than the flying unit, but they also had great value in that they gave practical preparation to the members for the tasks ahead.
                                                    *                            *                            *

The points I want to make in this section are not particularly connected with Habonim. They pertain to the problem of Zionist youth in America, and if I mention them here it is mainly from my experience during the period of our work in Habonim.

Is the "senior movement" interested in the existence of a Zionist youth movement? The answer to this question can be given clearly and unequivocally. All the organizations and all the parties are in favor of the existence of an educational Zionist youth movement. They invest sizable sums to help the youth movements and give a great deal of attention to their problems, in any case, not less—comparatively speaking—than did the Zionist parties in Europe.

The main difference between the attitude of the "seniors" in America and the parties in Europe is that the movements in America know exactly what they want of the youth and thereby delimit their activities. They do not want their youth to be chalutzic and to go on aliya to Israel. They do not want the youth to be concerned with ideology and to establish a world outlook of their own. They want the youth to be concerned primarily with activities which will help integrate them in the "senior" Zionist movement in America when they reach adulthood, they want their help in fund-raising activities, and they want the youth movements to serve as an instrument to combat assimilation.

If we take into account this attitude on the part of organized Zionism towards the problems of youth and remember the general Jewish cultural background of the American Jewish community, we will begin to understand the reasons for the numerical weakness of the Zionist youth organizations in the United States.
During World War II, the Zionist youth movement in America numbered about fifty thousand members, including Young Judaea, which actually was an association of clubs for youth from ten to fifteen and not a movement. This, in contrast to almost five hundred thousand Zionists organized in various frameworks! If only the children of the organized Zionists had belonged to youth movements, we could have reached much greater proportions. The Labor Zionist movement membership totaled almost fifty thousand, but Habonim at its height reached a registered membership of only four thousand.

During my wanderings in the various cities, I had countless discussions with Zionist leaders concerning the problems of the youth. It seems to me that a typical discussion is the frank one I had in Boston: One of the Zionist leaders explained, "In a country of immigration, and America is a country of immigration, there are always problems of lack of acclimatization. There are people who feel themselves estranged. You will be able to carry out your activities primarily among the youth who feel themselves strangers in this country, and only among them will you find understanding." His opinion, although extreme and, in my opinion, not in keeping with reality, is an example of the viewpoint of influential Zionist leaders. It was symbolic of the attitude toward the activities of Zionist youth, despite the many fine words that were spoken. Of course, from time to time I did meet people who sincerely wanted to help and did render every possible assistance.

One can question, of course, why American Jewish youth itself did not revolt. Why did it permit itself to be influenced by the attitude of the "seniors"? To this there is only one answer. Where there is no rebellion, one cannot "create" rebellion. I am convinced that the time will come when American Jewish youth will make its distinctive contribution to the American Jewish community and to the Zionist movement.

Together with my criticism, I feel obliged to stress the fact that the Labor Zionist movement's attitude to Habonim was one of sympathy and understanding. The "senior movement" was always prepared to help Habonim in its development and growth. Labor Zionists could not counteract the general atmosphere of American Zionism, which caused the impoverishment of the entire chalutz youth movement.

                                                *                            *                            *

It was not my intention in writing these reminiscences to present a general "historical survey." I regret that I was not able to mention the names of the many chaverim with whom we worked in the movement. I wrote in this way because I was not able to get all the necessary material, and I did not want to mention some and forget others. To the younger members of Habonim, to you who entered the movement after the establishment of the State of Israel, I can only say: Would that it be granted that the new generations of Habonim be as devoted, as loyal, and as responsible as were the many chaverim who worked and built the movement during the years of the Second World War.

YOSEF ISRAELI, Afikim, 1960