Cabinet Meeting, 8.2.1951
Minister Moshe Sharett: With regard to the matter of Germany: the cabinet is aware of the note we submitted on the settlement of payment for Jewish property.
At the same time there are also claims for compensation submitted by individuals.
I have taken particular care that our note should specifically state that individual compensation for Jews is unrelated to the question of the historical reparations that the German people owe us for all the mental anguish and suffering, destruction and plunder of property which do not come under the procrustean bed of an individual claim, such as one person’s claim for his house, another’s claim for his pension, or a third one’s claim for imprisonment. We have stated that regarding the historical reparations due to us from the German people, we shall submit a separate claim.
I accept the considerations of several cabinet and state officials that the most appropriate moment for submitting this claim will be when the foreign ministers of the four powers convene to discuss the future of Germany.
Whether or not this planned conference will take place is still unclear. If it is postponed indefinitely, or if it becomes clear that there is no likelihood of it convening, we will have to discuss submitting the claim without waiting for this international opportunity.
If the Four-Power Conference convenes, and settlements by Germany appears on the agenda – and there can be no doubt that the Western countries will press for more rapid progress on Germany’s integration into world affairs – it will present us with an opportunity to submit our claim. The Jewish people comes along and says: “Wait, there is something else to be discussed first, and the question of Germany cannot be discussed until it is resolved.” To this end we should enlist all the forces and influence at our disposal.
It is clear that we must submit a very substantial claim. I think it should be a most comprehensive one. In my opinion, the considerations governing our appeals for American grants do not apply here. We cannot approach the United
45
Cabinet, 8.2.1951
States without some chance of receiving a positive response, for a negative one would only demonstrate our failure. However, in the case of Germany I fear no negative result. We owe this very claim of compensation to our history, to our conscience, to our people, to the victims. We must not shirk from submitting this claim, and it would be immeasurably easier, and stands a greater likelihood of success, if we submit it to the powers rather than directly to Germany.
If we submit such a claim it may be said that it can be dealt with in stages and there is no need to determine everything in advance. But I want us to determine the matter in principle. If we submit such a claim and are invited to discuss it, and supposing they say, “Fine, your claim will be accepted” – then what? In my opinion the answer must be we can move on to arranging matters of our relationship with Germany. In other words, we cannot submit such a claim to Germany, even through others, and say that even if our claim is accepted we are exempt from settling our relationship with Germany; that we shall continue the war against the Amalekites forever. Why? Not only because I am keen that we do the right thing vis-à-vis Germany: it has done its share and we must do ours.
It is clear that not only payment to the Jewish people, but also a declaration of reconciliation with the Jewish people must come from the German government.
But if this happens, decency obliges that we accept, not reject it. Moreover, without it we will be pushed into a situation of meeting with the Germans without receiving a thing.
Had we opposed Germany’s membership in the International Wheat Council, spoken against its acceptance and voted against it, only to see it accepted into the Council – would that have caused us to leave it? No. We are sitting there together with them. I have before me a letter from the International Students Association. We oppose Germany’s acceptance into that association, but should it be accepted, will that cause us to leave the International Students Association?
Generally speaking, Germany is turning the corner a lot faster, perhaps, than any other country and is occupying its place in Europe and the world; it will not be long before we are unable to move around in the world while avoiding contact with Germany, be it indirect or direct.
There are questions thrown at me regarding such contacts. Until now the occupying powers, even outside Germany, issued entry visas to Germany. But now a German consulate is functioning in London. Take the case of a Jew who goes to Germany carrying an Israeli passport, approved in a number of countries including Germany, and says he must visit Germany to wind up his affairs, and for this purpose he receives our approval. He reaches London and goes to the Home Office to obtain an entry visa to Germany. Until recently he would have been given the visa by the British and would be in the clear. Now the British will direct him to the German consulate, and then this fellow will go to our consul in London and ask, “Am I allowed, or prohibited, to go to the German consul?” The government of Israel approved his journey to Germany – is he
46 Cabinet, 8.2.1951
now permitted to obtain a visa from the Germans, or does he give up the idea of going to Germany?
Or take another case: The Israel police have begun receiving communications from German police authorities on all kinds of routine matters in which there is inter-force correspondence. A great many matters are subjects of such correspondence without these matters reaching the Foreign Ministry such as that of an escaped criminal whose photograph is sent by the German police to the archives of other countries. There are some cases in which a reply is naturally expected. We receive a letter from the German Polizeiamt [German ministry of police]. Are we permitted to reply? Until now we could have replied: “Correspond with the British or American authorities,” but that is rapidly becoming a fiction.
An element of reciprocity is involved here.
At present we have a consul in Munich. He sends people who approach him not to the German authorities, but to the occupation authorities. But those institutions may soon be disbanded: should we take him out of there? Should we ban travel by Israelis to Germany? We certainly shall not. The occupying powers are withdrawing; we have no relations with Germany. Who will then protect the rights of the Israeli individual there?
This is an imbroglio with no way out. We can hold out for a short period, but not for long. We must therefore seek a fair and honorable solution: if our claim is met by Germany, we need to normalize our relations with it.
It is now clear to me too that if we submit a reparations claim to Germany, the issue of compensating the Arabs [Palestinian refugees] is likely to be raised by the Americans and others. They will say: “You are now demanding compensation, but you are also being sued for compensation – are you going to settle this?” We shall answer that the two matters are dissimilar – what Germany perpetrated against us is unlike what happened between us and the Arabs, but the fact remains that Arab people were uprooted from their homes, and we agree, within a certain framework, to pay compensation, and therefore I have said that perhaps we might have to arrange it through American aid and perhaps through the receipt of compensation from Germany, and perhaps through both. In general terms this may appear to be arrogance on Israel’s part: it received a loan from the Bank for Export and Import, an Israeli bond issue in the United States was approved by the administration, it is demanding an American grant, it is demanding $500 million or who knows how much from Germany. I have specified the sum of
$500 million; this is a small percentage of German exports.
I would not be deterred from posing the issue at hand. I think that we must present what we are doing in the correct light. We should underline the fact that we have absorbed more than half a million refugees into Israel, but their absorption still calls for massive investment, and we still have to absorb immigrants from Iraq, Egypt, North Africa and Romania. There was a point when registration for immigration in Bucharest was stopped and was only carried out
47
Cabinet, 8.2.1951
in outlying towns, but registration in Bucharest has been renewed, the age range has improved, so that immigration from Romania is in full flow. The plan for raising the sum of one billion dollars was initiated. But one billion is not simply a slogan to impress others; it is required for a real need. We are talking of $1 billion from the US, but in fact we need $1.5 billion.
I think we must move forward towards announcing our claim from the German people. There is, of course, a complication with the Jewish organizations.
We have read scathing criticism of us in the papers. The government of Israel was criticized for not submitting the claim through the Jewish Agency, for not enlisting American public opinion, and it was said that this entire action is worthless.
Dr. Goldmann is going to see General John J. McCloy, the High Commissioner of the American zone of occupation in Germany. I have cabled Dr. Goldmann – since he is considering coming to Israel at the end of the month, it would be preferable if he postponed his meeting with McCloy until he is on his way back from Israel, and could consult with us first rather than hold it on his way here. It seems to me that we must move forward on this matter and embark on an initiative in the name of the Israeli government. Matters could become complicated without consultations and then nothing will get done. We must inform the various [Jewish] institutions that we are taking this action, and we must enlist their support, but for various reasons this must be an initiative of the Israeli government. There is no comparison between the efficacy of a step taken by the state and steps that may be taken by all kinds of Jewish institutions, including the Jewish Agency, with all due respect to its importance. Mr. David Horowitz has stated that our note has already begun to take effect in Germany. There have been questions and inquiries. There has been criticism of our over-zealous activity at UN headquarters at Lake Success. Let us assume that there is some defective reasoning behind this activity, but there are also reasons to praise it, including the matter of Germany. The fact that the Germans are aware that the State of Israel is a force to be reckoned with at Lake Success is also most beneficial.
The Israeli government has submitted a memorandum to the occupying powers demanding that they do not evade their responsibility for our current interests in Germany. I propose that we now move forward to the second stage and approach the four powers with the Jewish people’s claim from the German people. The political and diplomatic efforts must be directed towards the Four-Power Conference.
I take this opportunity of presenting the question of whether we should link this with the matter of our compensation to the Arabs and say, “If we obtain compensation from Germany it will enable us to pay generous compensation to the Arabs.” If we have claimed compensation from the Germans, we are not ignoring our obligation of compensation to the Arabs.
Prime Minister David Ben Gurion: I asked Mr. Horowitz how much he thinks we can get as compensation from Germany. He said $1 billion over ten years,
48 Cabinet, 8.2.1951
not in cash but in goods. This is not more than three percent of German exports.
We are talking here of compensation to the Jewish people. Individual claims are a different matter. If we could receive this $1 billion over ten years in the form of iron, wood, chemicals, machines, railways, etc., we would have solved half of our import problem. I see no reason to doubt this plan.
It seems to me that we can sum up the main issue. There must be consultations with the Jewish Agency, the World Jewish Congress, the Joint Distribution Committee and others. After these consultations we shall formulate our request to the four powers on the matter of the Jewish people’s claim for compensation from Germany for the six million victims, apart from the individual claims.
It was decided:
The foreign minister will hold consultations with the Jewish Agency and other public bodies on the matter of a further approach to the central governments of the occupying powers on the matter of ensuring compensation from Germany to the Jewish people and the restitution of Jewish property.
49