_________________________________
Leonard wrote in "Book of Mercy"
Israel, and you who call yourself Israel, the Church that calls itself Israel, and the revolt that calls itself Israel, and every nation chosen to be a nation – none of these lands is yours, all of you are thieves of holiness, all of you at war with Mercy. Who will say it? Will America say, We have stolen it, or France step down? Will Russia confess, or Poland say, We have sinned? All bloated on their scraps of destiny, all swaggering in the immunity of superstition.
As a Canadian I want our fair share of the guilt for what has been going on in Gaza. A little bitter searching has led to the following:
Prior to the establishment of Israel in Palestine, the most reasonable, fair and intelligent minds in the world were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state that involved the stealing of land. This was especially true of the Jews who didn't want to be given a land that they only owned 6% of. Jews like Judah Magnes and Martin Buber used the words that Leonard echoed in his poem. They pleaded : "Do not make us thieves of holiness"
Judah Magnes was at the time the most well respected American Jew who had emigrated to Palestine and Martin Buber was the most respected Jewish Bible scholar among other religions. Other Jews who shared this opposition to a Jewish state included Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt.
In 1946 a Committee was formed to make a recommendation to the United Nations on what should be the fate of Palestine. It was called the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry. After hearing the concern of all sides they proposed the establishment of a bi-national country. The land shared by Jews and Arabs with the claims of both sides taken seriously. Harry Truman, the president of the US, told Judah Magnes that he considered the document created by the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry to be of such importance that he kept it in a drawer that he had reserved for his copy of the American Declaration of Independence.
It was considered by the wise as the right thing to do although the politicians of both sides as in the Jewish Agency and the Arab League opposed it and it was well understood that for it to work the land of Palestine would need to remain under trusteeship for a considerable period of time. It was accepted that the job would fall to either England or the US. Truman said that the US would be willing if they did not have to do it alone. No other country came forward.
In May of 1947 the United Nations formed a committee called The United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) that was to make the final recommendation for what was to be the fate of Palestine. Their committee was less knowledgeable than the American-Anglo committee but it contained the members of 11 United Nation member countries.
Canada was one of them.
This committee in turn heard testimony from all interested parties. I consider myself reasonably intelligent and in reading through some of the testimony presented to to UNSCOP and how those hearing it responded that it would be obvious that they would see that Palestine should become a bi-national state and that partitioning the land would lead to decades and decades of violence between Jews and Arabs. This was made absolutely clear to them.
In the early deliberations of the committee the leaning was toward a land shared but then the Canadian involved made his move.
The Canadian was a lawyer named Ivan Rand who became a justice of the Supreme Court of Canada.
On August 6, 1947, Rand prepared his own memorandum for a solution to the problems in Palestine, advocating partition and the establishment of an independent Jewish state. Over the next three weeks, he gradually convinced a majority of the committee members to adopt this position and to give control over the Negev to the Jewish state.
Justice Ivan Rand never wrote an autobiography but from his personal papers which are kept at the University of Western Ontario we learn what influenced his decision. Unlike other members of the committee who tried not to be personally influenced outside of the proceedings, Ivan Rand opened himself to Jewish hospitality and accepted a large number of social invitations by the Jewish community. He wrote often of how well he was being treated by the Jews in Palestine. As far as I know he never mentioned similar contacts with Arabs.
Of specific note was the contact he had with a Rev. William L. Hull who was the only Canadian who he was made aware of that was living in Palestine at the time and who was considered his unofficial advisor. Rev. William L. Hull was a protestant fundamentalist who , if I can borrow Leonard's term, was "swaggering in the immunity of superstition". Rev. William L. Hull was a strong believer in the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and to my thinking suits well Leonard's phrase "bloated on their scraps of destiny" To emphasize the influence that Hull might have had on Justice Ivan Rand here is a quote from a forward to Rev. Hull's books that Ivan wrote:
It was a relief, then, when shortly after my arrival I had the good fortune to meet the author of this book. Here he was, a Canadian,... a clergyman,… a man of goodwill, well known to and knowing the many religious and racial groups in that amazing galaxy of rivalries and antagonisms. Whatever might be said of the soundness of his judgments, here, I thought, was one whom I could trust to express himself with honesty and frankness. Somewhat to my surprise, I listened to words of high admiration of the Jewish people, their standards of life and tremendous work they had done since returning to their ancient homeland.
I can't help but wonder how Justice Rand would have voted if he didn't expose himself to a one sided influence. During the proceedings he often brought forward the Canadian experience of french and english living together in a Commonwealth in Canada.
The final vote was 7 to 4 for the partition of palestine and the establishment of an independent state of Israel. The 4 were for a bi-national state.
Who knows how history will see things? Maybe one day people around the world will honour Justice Ivan Rand as the Canadian who made the state of Israel possible. I can't help but consider the words of Martin Buber when in 1967 he responded to the cries of joy at the success of Israel's army with saying that there will come a day when what we celebrate today will be seen as a very sad detour on the road to humanity.
