Jerusalem
Journeys, (excerpt from Chapter 10)
Sir Herbert Samuel Takes on
an Impossible Task
Activity
- Considering Zionism
Suitable
for older groups
We suggest
the following exercise to examine the above issue.
- The group
is divided into two. One half of the group should
be asked to sit for ten minutes or so in pairs or
trios, and find arguments to back the claim that the
Jews are a religion only, rather than a nation, -
and that, as such, they can be part of any other nation;
(i.e., there are French or English or American Catholics,
Protestants and Jews). The other half of the group
have to find arguments to back the claim that the
Jews are a separate nation.
- At the
end of this time period, the two groups work separately
to sum up their arguments, putting them into a coherent
order according to the strength of the respective
arguments.
- The entire
group should then be told that they are being transported
to a specific situation in another time period and
that they are going to take part in a historic confrontation
that never quite happened. Their task is to see how
the confrontation would have been resolved.
- The educator
should then give an introduction to the circumstances
surrounding the lead-up to the Balfour Declaration.
This should be done, if possible, in the form of an
intelligence or police briefing, referring to "subject
number one", "document number two", "personality number
three", etc., etc.
* There
should be slides of "exhibit A", etc., and of the
different people mentioned.
* Participants should take notes.
This will
need to be prepared carefully; there are many good
sources such as Howard Sacher’s "History of Israel",
Walter Laquer’s "History of Zionism", or Chaim
Weizmann’s "Trial and Error".
|
Among the points that should be emphasized
are:
(Click for
more details)
- The Reasons for the British Interest
in the Declaration
- The Historic Link Between Britain
and Zionism
- The Situation of the Jews in England
and the Progress of Jewish Emancipation
there
The Figures of Chaim Weizmann, Lord Arthur
Balfour, David Lloyd George and Edwin
Montagu |
- Participants
should then be distributed the above piece by Chaim
Weizmann, in which he talks of the near confrontation
with Montagu in the War Cabinet.
* Those who were in the group that prepared arguments
for the Jews being a religious group only, should
be asked to continue in their small groups of two
or three, with arguments they imagine that Montagu
might bring forward to back his case. (They should
concentrate only on the Jewish arguments, leaving
out the strategic arguments.)
* Those in the other group should do the same for
Weizmann.
- Now the
whole group should be divided into pairs, consisting
of one person from each side. They have ten minutes
to debate the issue of whether the Jews of Britain
at the time in question should side with Zionism or
not.
- At this
point stage a debate between Weizmann and Montagu
(both well prepared beforehand) on the question. It
should be a standard debate format with two speakers
in role and the audience able to join in. It should
end in a vote.
- Finally,
there should be an open discussion (out of role) on
the question of what was worrying Montagu, and the
additional question of whose arguments seem to the
group to be most valid in the argument between Weizmann
and Montagu. Are Montagu's concerns valid today? (Perhaps
make reference to the case of Jonathan Pollard in
the United States.)
Background Discussion:
Taking Sides |