American Jewish History

Modern Jewish historiography abounds with national histories. We turn out countless books on the history of the Jews in England, France, Germany, and the United States. I would like to suggest that historians focus more specifically on the international dimension of those national histories, that is, on how the links between Jews in country A and those in country B influenced Jewish policy and behavior in both A and B. To be sure, some subjects by definition, like the well-known stories of Zionism or relief for the persecuted Jews in czarist Russia, were international in scope and involved Jews worldwide. But other subjects ranging from the arts to religious responsa beg for greater attention. We need to evaluate the role of individuals and organizations who consciously looked to foreign sources for guidance and aid, as well as the role of impersonal social and intellectual forces, such as anti-Semitism or biblical criticism, that transcended national boundaries.

When our focus is on the transnational connections of individuals and organizations, the international dimension is manifested in a variety of ways. Two examples: 1) A common pattern is that of teacher-student, which posits that the student seeks and follows the guidance of the [End Page 353] teacher. In such instances we face obvious questions. Why did the student pick that specific mentor; does the instruction he receives take the form of example, advice, or outright directive; what is the impact or effect of the lesson on subsequent student behavior? 2) On an entirely different level, the transnational connection can connote the cooperation of equals. Here we need to determine the reasons why each of the two parties sought out the other and what their shared characteristics and objectives were. Among other things, we question how well the two contenders were matched and to what extent cooperation replaced independent action by the partners; we also consider the immediate or long-range advantages (or disadvantages) that an alliance brought to each. These examples, although hardly exhaustive, indicate the many ways in which the international dimension can be explored.

My plan here is to discuss an episode that illustrates one facet of the transatlantic connection in American Jewish history. Specifically, I deal with the cooperation of equals, namely the coordinated defense of German Jews during the first years of Nazi rule (1933-1937) by the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the Joint Foreign Committee (JFC) of England. I concentrate on the objectives and tactics of the defenders represented by Morris D. Waldman for the AJC and Neville Laski for the JFC. For those purposes, the fact that they repeatedly failed to stem the tide of Nazi antisemitism is less important than the methods and significance of their joint operations.

Hopefully, the discussion will alert us to tangential issues: How does the strategy of the partners jibe with the foreign or domestic policy of their respective governments? What type of leadership, i.e. lay or professional, characterizes the constituencies and Jewish communities of the partners? How does cooperation shed light on the status of the English and American Jews at that time? Does cooperation reflect an awareness of non-Jewish public opinion? Did teamwork strengthen or weaken Jewish defense, as well as the organizations involved? My short essay does not fully answer all these questions. Rather, it suggests how deeper probes into the international dimension can enrich our understanding of American Jewish history.

Until the Nuremberg laws of 1935, Western Jews preferred to close their eyes to the long-term danger of Nazism to their fellow-Jews in Europe. The AJC had monitored the progress of Hitler since 1923, when President Louis Marshall had alerted Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes to the Nazi threat. The Committee corresponded with, and contributed to, the Central Verein, the defense organization of German Jews; it underwrote a...