Dan Snow's History Hit - Israel and Palestine: A Jewish Perspective with Daniel Finkelstein

Episode Date: May 21, 2021

As part of our season of programmes looking at the Arab-Israeli conflict Lord Daniel Finklestein joins the podcast to discuss his perspective as a member of the Jewish diaspora. Daniel is a journalist and member of the House of Lords and in this episode, he shares with Dan his family's history before, during and after the holocaust and why this dark period of history is so important in shaping the current situation in Israel.Listen to the previous episode in our series of programmes about the Israel-Palestine conflict: Israel and Palestine: A Palestinian View

Hi everybody, welcome to History Hit. The violence continues in Israel-Palestine and as promised, here's part two of our season looking at the history of Arab-Israeli conflict. Coming up next week we'll have an interview with an Israeli history professor, but today I'm talking to a member of the Jewish diaspora. Lord Daniel Finkelstein is a journalist in the UK. He's a member of the Upper House of Parliament, the House of Lords. He's a very prominent British Jew, and he's been on the podcast before talking about his remarkable family story

before the Second World War, during the Holocaust, and since. In this interview, he reflects as a Jew, as a believer in Israel, on what's going on at the moment and how we got here. If you wish to listen to Lord Finkelstein's previous podcast, you can do so at historyhit.tv. We've got a new history channel, folks. Hundreds of hours on history documentaries, all the back episodes of this pod, they're all available there. on history documentaries, on the back episodes of this pod. They're all available there, historyhit.tv. Please go and check it out. But in the meantime, enjoy this episode with Daniel Finkelstein. Daniel, what is your relationship with Israel and Zionism as a British Jew? Well, I've been researching quite a bit of my

family history, and it's very interesting to learn a bit more about attitudes to Israel before it existed and before the Second World War. Both my grandfathers and my grandmothers had a view that is understandable in that period. It probably doesn't exist in quite the same way in Jewish affairs and Israeli affairs now. There were really three strands of opinion on the creation of Israel in the 1920s and 30s. There were those people who said the Russian pogroms, the L'Avou pogroms, the experience of Jews across Europe and in the Middle East means that we have to create a Jewish state. Theodor Herzl had come up with this idea, having seen the degradation of Dreyfus and been much influenced by that. And that was one strand of opinion,

but probably not the strongest. It was that Judaism is an ethnic identity, and it will never be safe in these countries, which, you know, in the case of Lvov, had a battle between the German identity before the First World War, and then between the Ukrainians and the Poles, and inevitably, each time it changed between those, they ended up blaming and killing Jews. So there were those people who said, we have to have our own state. There were those people who said, the whole idea of states isn't the freedom for Jews. The real freedom for Jews is communism. We need to have an international order. And what's causing this is imperialism and capitalism and the racism that goes with it. And we will liberate people through communism. And the third strand were those people who were nationalists of their own country and believed that Jews

had a future in Europe, and their future would be safe if they, and there were sort of two strands, some people thought they should just assimilate into Europe altogether, and others felt they would be safe even if they asserted their Jewish identity, but remained very strongly part of the countries in which they lived. Both sets of grandparents belong to that third strand, and knowing myself as I do, I'm sure that I would have done as well. And that third strand clashed a lot with the Zionists. Let's leave the communists to one side for the moment because that's rather a different argument. They argued that in the case of my grandfather on my mother's side Alfred Wiener who became one of the great archivists of the

anti-Nazi movement he argued and he wrote a book called Critical Journey Through Palestine. He was an Arabist and he said Jews can go there, but a state is not a good idea. There are people who already live there. We won't have peace there. And in any case, there is a kind of fellow feeling between German-ness and Judaism. Our place is here. And if you want to express that crudely, effectively, he was saying we can't really be safe in this new place. It would be alien to us. It's a speculative project. And I don't think that's a good idea.

And the Zionists were responding, we can't stay here because we're not safe here. And the great tragedy is that they were both correct. My grandfather, as part of his collection of German Nazi propaganda, one of the things that the library has, and it can be still seen in its home in Russell Square, is a board game in which young children are supposed to collect Jewish pieces with hooked noses using their white pieces to take these Jews to collection points. And one of the slogans on the game is, go to Palestine. Because one of the solutions that

the Nazis had developed was that Jews would simply get out. And they thought maybe they could go there, right? And now all over Europe, the slogans are Jews get out of Palestine. And I think it's not possible to understand Jewish views about Israel without understanding that. The way that I see it is that the Second World War rather settled the battle between those three groupings. Communism did not emerge as an attractive alternative to anybody, certainly not to my father. You know, his grandfather was in the Gulag. He ended up nearly being killed in a state collective farm. And so that was certainly not ever a solution to the problem of Jewish liberation. But the truth is that remaining in Poland or returning to Poland as a Jew or as a capitalist was impossible after the Second World

War. In fact, their home isn't even in Poland. You can go on Google and you can find my grandfather's home, which is still called the Villa Adolf Finkelstein, in which leading members of the Communist Party and the president of Ukraine ended up living. So that wasn't an option for them. It remained the case that my family was more attracted to the idea of European diaspora living, and that's why I'm living here. But the argument over whether or not it would be necessary or desirable to have a state of Israel was settled by that. And I think that all of the new research on the creation of the state of Israel absolutely demonstrates that it was not a bloodless process. People were dispossessed, not everybody, because some people sold their land, some people left voluntarily, but some

people did not, because in 1948 they had a, and a refugee problem was created as a result of that war, when the people who started the war didn't win it. And that did create real injustices. And for the children of those people, and the grandchildren and great-grandchildren, as we now are, I completely understand their view. I've never failed to understand why the Palestinians rejected the idea of a two-state solution, didn't want the Jews to be there. But at the same time, from my historical experience, it was essential that it be somewhere. And where else was it going to be?

And people who were trying to get their heads around why it seems that everybody's shouting each other and nobody has a solution need to understand that there isn't one. Because ultimately, at the end, you end up thinking, well, how are we going to compromise and how are we going to pick? And even the compromises will be inadequate. And so that probably gives you an understanding of my historical relationship. I have never been starry-eyed about Israel. I'm not an Israeli, but I've always believed that the existence and security of a state of Israel

is essential to the Jewish people, even though I understand that it's been the creation of various wars, and those are never nice creations. But just in the same way that the facts have meant that there exists a house called the Villa Adolf Finkelstein that sits in the middle of something called Lviv, in which my father didn't live, a place that now no longer has any Poles or any Jews in it. And nobody realistically thinks that I'm going to go and live there. And just as I feel a sense of injustice about that and think somebody probably ought to compensate us for that, they're not going to. Facts exist on the ground and you have to look at what we would now do about that.

Hi everyone, you're listening to Dan Snow's History Hit. My teeth are on the mend, slowly. We're talking to Daniel Finkelstein about Israel and Palestine. More after this. Land a Viking longship on island shores, scramble over the dunes of ancient Egypt, and avoid the Poisoner's Cup in Renaissance Florence. Each week on Echoes of History, we uncover the epic stories that inspire Assassin's Creed. We're stepping into feudal Japan in our special series Chasing Shadows, where samurai warlords and shinobi spies teach us the tactics and skills needed not only to survive, but to conquer. Whether you're preparing for Assassin's Creed Shadows or fascinated by history and great stories, listen to Echoes of History, a Ubisoft podcast brought to you by History Hits.

There are new episodes every week. When we were messaging over the weekend, you pointed out something that really stuck with me. The facts on the ground appear understandably unfair to the Palestinians and yet their refusal to accept them makes their situation ever worse. That's absolutely true. They unquestionably would have been in a better position if they had accepted before 1948 the existence of a two-state solution but I do understand why they didn't want to do that, why they did not do that. Anybody who thinks that the free Palestine or Palestinian human rights argument is the result

of some recent incursion by the Israelis somewhere or some recent dispute has to remember that all these battles have been happening since 1948 and since before the creation of the state of Israel. If the occupation was the reason why Palestinians have a just cause in which they fight Israelis, then there wouldn't have been the occupation in the first place because the occupation was created by a war that took place in 1967 and 1973. As I always put it, when people say, you know, Israel should go back to before its 1967 borders. Well, the time when it was inside its 1967 borders was 1966, right? Why did we then have the 1967 war at all? The truth is, it isn't a row about the occupation,

it's a row about whether Israel can exist. And my view is there was always a strong case for that, because there was a case for the jews having a state which i think was almost undeniable and which the un accepted and there was a very good case for it being there i understand why it was resisted but i also understand why it was created but you also have to look at the situation now and ask yourself are people seriously suggesting one that we simply turf the Jews out of Israel, right? Where are those people going to go? Or are they actually also seriously suggesting that we create a Palestinian state simply leaving those people there? And given that even the Palestinians aren't

safe in the areas in which they govern, I don't think the Jews would be. And the important thing is that it's not just that I think that, which is contentious, and people listening to this may be infuriated by it, but the thing to understand is the Israelis aren't going to do that, because the core of Zionism was world opinion won't save us. World opinion may read Anne Frank's diary, but she still died. And world opinion may have abhorred what happened to my mother, but she still ended up in Belsen, and my grandmother still starved to death.

And the creation of a state of Israel is about attempting to create a place where people could go. I think you would agree with this, Dan, that one of the techniques of the Nazis, anybody who's interested in that, Hannah Arendt makes this point quite well in her Eichmann in Jerusalem book. The first move the Nazis made in all the countries in which they then oppressed the Jews was to make them stateless.

And there's a good reason for that, because then they had no place that was responsible for protecting them, and upon whom war was being made by infringing on the civil rights of these individuals. And they had no places to go. And I do understand the argument that says, well, now that's an older, but this was made to me only by a very articulate Jewish opponent of Israel, Rivka Brown, who said, that is a generational view. You're close to the Holocaust. She's one further generation away, so doesn't have the same experience. And we are now safe in Britain. Well, first of all, I think that is blithe about what's happening all over the world, including in the United States and in Eastern and Central Europe. But secondly, I'm a statistician. If you look at

Simon Sharma's history of the Jews for a couple of thousand years, in every generation recurring over and over again, the Jews are annihilated, oppressed or killed. How likely is it that we've reached the end of that process? Not very likely. Yeah, it feels like it would be a hell of a gamble, that's for sure. I also completely agree with you that the argument isn't actually about the 67 borders, but it is about the existence of Israel itself. And I'm very interested in how practical you appear to be. You're not talking about, you don't seem to be hugely motivated by the kind of millennia-old claim to the Holy Land, the Kingdom of David.

It sounds like you'd have been happy with some of the other suggestions of 100 years ago. Madagascar, for example. Is that fair? I think you're characterising my view correctly, and that's why it's not the only view. So I definitely am my grandfather's grandson. Alfred and Adolf, actually, my paternal grandfather, Dolu, neither Alfred or Dolu bought that argument, that there was some historic reason why Jews should all congregate in the Middle East and live in Jerusalem and near there. They saw it in practical terms,

and I'm the inheritor of that. But it's one of the reasons why it took place there. It is a bit of a response to the idea that it's mere colonial settler behaviour. The Jewish people were expelled from that part of the world. And now they're returning. I see the pull of that. And I see the reason why Zionism was created there. But I don't struggle to understand my grandfather's ambivalence to the Zionists. I think I would have had that view too. I'm not for great speculative projects. I am definitely from what I regard as a British pragmatic tradition, and I would have definitely had the reaction that that wasn't the way forward for the Jews. But as a practical matter, it ended up being, you know, well, here's a direct story. One of the reasons

that I'm here at all is my mother survived the war, and she survived the war because she had a Latin American passport. She had a Paraguayan passport. And that was actually purchased from a Swiss man who was the Paraguayan consul, and he was selling them effectively, and the Polish operation was created to procure these and to provide them to Jews. And that meant she could be part of Himmler's idea that there would be a great exchange. And he created groups of Jews who were called exchange Jews, and they might be exchanged, he hoped, for Germans who were captured by the Allies or for equipment or for money. And one group of these people had Latin American passports, but they also had Palestine certificates. Because although the Latin American documents were quite good for getting them out of somewhere,

they weren't very useful for getting them into anywhere anywhere because the Paraguayans may be willing to stand by their passports as documents, but they weren't willing to actually take in the people who helped them. And so the Palestinian certificates were somewhere where people could go. And several people were put on this list, mainly people who had relatives who lived there, but the Jewish communities were able to create a list of what were euphemistically called veteran Zionists. They weren't Zionists at all. And one of the reasons you know that is my grandmother was one of the people on that list, and she wasn't a Zionist, right? And they never were able to go to Palestine. The British mandate wouldn't let in very many people, because after

the Middle East Arab Revolt, they were worried about letting too many Jews go to Palestine, the Middle East Arab Revolt, they were worried about letting too many Jews go to Palestine, right? So just to be clear, directly during the Holocaust, as a result of Arab rejection of the idea of Jews living in Israel, people died in the Holocaust directly, right? Just so that people are clear that this isn't some sort of made-up argument. My grandmother didn't end up using that, but it's very interesting to me that that was one of the few places that acted in any way as a possible defence, because there were no other states, the Americans or the British. Anthony Eden opposed the idea of prisoner exchanges from the Germans on one ground, a strong ground, that he was worried the Jews would go to live in Palestine. And actually, ultimately, very few people ever were on an exchange. This is, by the way, not speculative. He wrote it down. What's it like for you at the moment? I've got Jewish

friends and colleagues who regard being questioned about Israel as a form of prejudice in itself. What's it like as you watch the reaction, the overreaction of, say, the Israeli army, the Israeli state? Nobody should be required to take responsibility for something that somebody else in their ethnic group may do. But obviously, people must take responsibility for the consequences of their political views. So for instance, I was always very frank about the cost to public services or welfare budgets of my view on austerity, and I was quite willing to discuss that and what the moral alternatives were. So anybody who holds the view that I do, that it's important that there be a state for Jews and that the right place to maintain it is Israel, I think does have to defend it,

not because I'm Jewish, but because it's my political stance, one in which I hope many non-Jewish people will join, and therefore they will share my responsibility for it. No Jew is required to make that argument. I would argue with them that they ought. And then within the Jewish community, there's all sorts of arguments about what the best ways of advancing that argument and about the rights and wrongs of the situation. I believe that the occupation has proven a strategic and moral disaster. I worry that Israel is giving up on the idea of a two-state solution, but it is open that argument to the response, well, the Palestinians have never been for a two-state solution ever. Being in favour of a two-state solution is an impossible dream. And what matters is therefore ensuring that Israel can live in the land that it's living in, in some sort of security,

and therefore moving towards a one-state solution with the settlement policy that implies. Again, I think that is a moral and strategic disaster, actually. It's certainly an error. My view isn't shared by all Jews, nor do I require it to be. And they can't require me to hold a different view. It's just a view about what the rights and wrongs are. I do acknowledge that my view that we must carry on pressing for a two-state solution is in the face of all the evidence about whether or not it will be created. And it's so important to understand that when these free Palestine statements come with

from the river to the sea, it is not just about creating a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, something that is absolutely negotiable and available to the Palestinians, in my opinion, for all the unreason of Netanyahu's position, and for all the existence of far-right people in any country, but including Israel, even including the fact that Israel worries that that state that would be created would be dominated by Hamas at worst, and at best would be like another Egypt. For all that, I still think that's a negotiable, and I still hope that it can happen. But I do think the argument these people are calling for a from the river to the sea is pretty strong. And it basically means is drive out all of the Jews from Israel.

And that is millions of Jews, unless you think they can be safely included in a multi-ethnic Hamas or Palestinian Authority-dominated Palestine, which I just think is self-evidently not true. Lord Daniel Finkelstein, thank you so much for coming on the podcast again. Thank you. This part of the history of our country, all were gone and finished. go to iTunes or wherever you get your podcast. If you give it a five-star rating and give it an absolutely glowing review, purge yourself, give it a glowing review.

I'd really appreciate that. It's tough weather, the law of the jungle out there and I need all the fire support I can get. So that will boost it up the charts. It's so tiresome, but if you could do it, I'd be very, very grateful. Thank you.