In the
aftermath of VE Day the allied forces
faced the huge humanitarian task
of housing, feeding and clothing
displaced persons who had been left deprived and aimless. The number of such DPs wandering within the
boundaries of pre-war Germany was estimated as at least 3,000,000 and included
85,000 Jewish survivors - less than one
half of the core community which had been there
at the outbreak of WW2.
Yet,
despite the revelations by newsreels of the immense suffering of the inmates
liberated from the concentration camps
of the Third Reich, precious little sympathy was shown or aid given and their
initial jubilation soon gave way to hopelessness and a desire to move anywhere
without the European abyss.
The
official Harrison report released by the White House in September 1945 recorded
: “ As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis
treated them, except that we do not exterminate them.” And indeed the Jews continued to live in
unsanitary conditions behind barbed wire fences and “guarded” by the German
police who had been re-armed with the latest American carbines.
But
more telling was the well publicised statement of General Sir Frederick Morgan,
the head of the U.N. Relief and Rehabilitation operations in Germany who stated
that the talk of pogroms in Poland was exaggerated and that the large number of
Jewish “infiltrees” flocking into Berlin “did not look like persecuted people ;
they are well dressed, well fed, rosy-cheeked and wealthy.” He predicted that “within one year there
would be a hard core of at least 300,000 Jews in Germany thus sowing the seeds
of World War III”. In response to
protests from the World Jewish Congress and others, Morgan was suspended and
recalled to UNRRA headquarters in Washington where an investigation conducted
by Herbert Lehman found that he “was not anti-Semitic nor did he have racial or
political bias” .
Morgan
appears to have been influenced in his assessment by reports that several
hundred thousand Jews of east European origin (who had fled to the Soviet Union
in 1941 with remnants of the retreating Red Army) were seeking
to return home and reclaim possession of their properties . They had served the Soviets well ; 124,800
having received decorations ranging from the Order of Lenin to the highest
status of Heroes of the Soviet Union for services in the war effort both as factory
managers and as combatants. Now they were to become the administrators of the reoccupied countries. In what was left of war torn Poland they
were badly received and it was reported that more than two hundred were
exterminated by elements of the para
military wing of the nationalist ENKAN
party while other Jews who had been
“liberated” from the ordeals of the death camps died of malnutrition.
It was
the same ENKAN movement which controlled
the Polish Government in exile and its
Free Army based in Scotland . Despite
its renowned antisemitism, adult Jews who had arrived in Britain by devious
routes were drafted , as nationals of Poland, to these bases Early in 1944 more than three hundred
rebelled against the insults and repression and requested that they be
assimilated to the British army. A few
were granted admission mainly to Intelligence duties but almost all were handed
stiff prison sentences . It was only by
the intervention of Tom Driberg M.P. that the authorities were persuaded to use their labour as Bevin Boys in the coal
mines and for other non-combatant duties.
Antisemitism
in Britain was in a somewhat different
key to that of the judenhasse which was endemic across continental Europe. It was confined to mainly city areas and
based on suspicions that Jews were the
spivs and drones of the black markets and had been involved in extortionate
moneylending to widows and
victims of war. In the naval ports of Portsmouth and
Chatham there were scandals concerning
the alleged activities of licensed victuallers
who had bribed senior naval officers to accept supplies of sub-standard
food and equipment. One well-known
Queen´s Counsel was convicted of conspiracy for “the unlawful supply of goods
contrary to wartime regulations”
In
1944 the recognised Jewish communities in Britain numbered about 400,000 souls. Of these
some 60,000 were seen as an elitist and very wealthy group of
mainly Sephardic heritage who for three centuries had wielded an influence well
beyond their numbers in the financial
and commercial sectors. They had
assimilated well in Society and names such as Sassoon, Montefiore, d´ Avigdor Goldschmid and, of course, Rothschild were
respected by successive conservative governments. Following the termination by the Board of
Deputies of its agreement with the Anglo-Jewish Association concerning a communal
policy towards “foreign affairs”, it was this group which formed the Jewish
Fellowship. They were to pursue a policy of opposition to the creation of a Jewish
political state anywhere while encouraging an increased immigration into
Palestine thus opposing directly the declared Zionist intentions of the Board.
In
these uncertain circumstances it is astounding that no less than 10% of the 603
candidates fielded by the Labour party in the General election of 05 July 1945
were professed Jews. Brandishing the
socialist manifesto “Let us Face the Future”
and declaring their intention to serve constituents with a programme of
secular, social reform they achieved a representation of twenty-seven seats and
provided three ministers (George
Strauss, Lewis Silkin and Emanuel Shinwell) for the government led by the
astute Clement Attlee. Two Jews were
also elected as M.Ps ; one an independent Conservative and Harry Pollitt as a
Communist. None of the Jewish
Fellowship candidates was successful .
During
the election campaign, worried Tory propagandists launched rumours that the Labour Party was
philosemitic and suggested that the pro-Zionism espoused by most of the
candidates was due to their being the progeny of the “recent arrivals” : 200,000
from Eastern Europe during the thirty years of pogroms
which had preceded WW1 and 70,000 from Western Europe during the 1930s.
These people had settled in the working class districts of London and major
provincial centres . Commencing
initially as artisans, they gradually improved their lot as entrepreneurs and
owners of small factories. Their
natural allegiance was to the left but voters were darkly reminded that the
Russian Politburo had been founded by
the Jews Lenin, Trotsky and Zinoviev and suggested that red socialism was
communism in disguise and that the forecast of General Morgan should be taken
very seriously.
Emigration of Jews to British mandated Palestine was
limited to 1,500 monthly which caused a seething of discontent. The Americans , anxious to prevent an
influx to the U.S., put pressure on Britain to
immediately accept 100,000 DPs to be followed by further large numbers
until all who wished to leave Europe
had been accommodated. The British
Foreign Secretary, Ernest Bevin, rejected this for two reasons : (1) that such a sudden surge would upset the
entire political balance of the Middle East and (2) that this would be a
fulfilment of the Nazi plan for a “Jew Free Europe” . Instead he proposed that aid should be vastly increased to enable resettlement in former homes and that ex-army holding camps should be established
on the island of Crete pending a gradual increase in the monthly quota. Reactions from the Board of Deputies,
Anglo-Jewish Association and the Fellowship were mixed but, after much debate, a consensus was
reached to support this policy as a temporary measure until such time as
reparations from the Axis and aid from the USA could improve matters.
But
such good intentions were brought to an end with the murder and mutilation
in July 1947 of two British army sergeants by Zionist
terrorists of the Irgun gang which resulted in riots for five days
across Britain with the widespread destruction of Jewish property and
assaults of its populace. Swiftly, Britain
resigned its mandate and ten months later , on 14 May 1948, the State of Israel
was created.
N.B. This a revised version of an essay written
in 2020 for publication in an international journal. It has been submitted now to The Portugal
News because of the comparable present situation in Europe where “displaced
persons” are represented by refugees from conflict and by economic migrants.