000536-140 Riaz 1

To what extent did the Evian Conference in 1938 and the Bermuda Conference in 1943 reflect an anti-Semitic attitude on the part of the American government in the era of World War II?

Burhan RiazDecember 12, 2008Total Word Count: 1751

000536-140 Riaz 2

Plan of Investigation: The purpose of this document is to assess the particular connection between the United States and the United Kingdoms inability to take action against the isolation of Jewish refugees and their connections to anti-Semitism. This document will be limited to the events of the 1920s to the 1940s, an era which displayed the most anti-Semitic and xenophobic behavior in 20th century politics. Some of these events include the reaction from the American Jewish Committee, a New York Times article that summarizes the outcome of the Bermuda conference, and a Germans use of propaganda relating to the Evian conference. Summary of Evidence: To put the Evian and Bermuda conferences into historical context, the Evian conference occurred before the U.S. entered WWII while the Bermuda conference took place during the war (Medoff, 2003). Although the outcomes of both conferences were not in favor of actively assisting Jewish refugees, the reasons for choosing not to act were different in both cases(Medoff, 2003). The Evian conference took place when America was still in its Isolationist phase and the majority of its citizens were anti-interventionists and anti-immigration due to a variety of reasons (Makinda, 2005). Some of these reasons include the nostalgic memories of WWI, national Nativism, and widespread racism and xenophobia (Piotrowski, 1997). The Bermuda conference, however, occurred at a time when America rose from its Isolationist phase. This did not stop the general xenophobia since factories favored hiring new immigrants who would accept lesser wages (Shaw, 2001). The 5 years between these conferences did not change the American mindset and instead accomplished nothing except for declaring that the treatment of Jews in German-invaded territories was immoral (Ratu, 2005). America and Great Britain believed it was better to focus on winning the war which would later fix the problem of Jewish

000536-140 Riaz 3

refugees (Ratu, 2005). What was not publicly stated was that these two countries had a small agreement. The British agreed not to discuss that America was intentionally not meeting its immigration quota while the Americans agreed not to mention that Britain was intentionally restricting Jews from traveling to Palestine (Browning, 2004). It is clear that many Americans, from the common farmer to the well-known politician, held some sort of prejudice against Jews. In fact, the 1930s were the time when Americas eugenics movement started to initialize (Wyman, 1984). Although their forced sterilization plans only affected the mentally retarded and physically disabled people, the Jewish people were classified as an inferior race. Many renowned scientists claimed that they had statistical data proving that Jews and other races were statistically inferior in terms of knowledge and physicality (Wyman, 1984). High school and college textbooks from the 1920s through the 1940s often had chapters publicizing the scientific progress that could occur when applying eugenic programs to the population. By 1928, the American Genetics Association boasted that there were 376 college courses devoted solely to the theory of eugenics (Wyman, 1984). Highschool biology textbooks followed the lead by the mid-1930s, with most containing material approving to the idea of controlling reproduction. Therefore, it would have been difficult to be an even fairly educated reader in the 1920s or 1930s and not have known the benefits of not having people of non-Aryan decent be included in society. Many early scientific journals dedicated to heredity were in fact run by eugenicists and featured eugenics articles about humans alongside studies of heredity in other organisms. After eugenics fell out of scientific eye, most references to eugenics were removed from textbooks and edited from scientific journals. Even the names of some journals changed to fight off controversy. For example, Eugenics Quarterly became Social Biology in 1969, and still runs today (Berkleu, 2005).

000536-140 Riaz 4

This was the founding step that would eventually lead to Germanys eugenic genocide (Piotrowski, 1997). In addition, the failings of the Evian and Bermuda conferences gave the Germans something to include in their propaganda (Shaw, 2001). One German paper ridiculed the Evian conference, Aside from the purely administrative creation of a committee that will maintain contact between the interested governments, the so called Intergovernmental Committee which is to be established either in Paris or in London under American directorship, the results of this conference are very meager (Beobachter, 1938). They told the German citizens that if America and Great Britain did not believe the Jews were worth saving, then they were doing the right thing by capturing the Jews and sending them to concentration camps. Ellen H. Posner, of the American Jewish Committee, wrote in 1943 the reason that FDR did not take action was because Seeing victory for the allies close at hand, the nationalist network seems to have become convinced that it could be bolder and more outspoken with less danger of criticism or imprisonment (Posner, 1944) The Evian Conference of 1938 was conducted in vian-les-Bains, France, and was initiated by Franklin D. Roosevelt. Delegates from 32 countries including various private organizations attended this discussion. Although this was a publicized event, it is interesting to note that not a single high-profiled American or British representative was present during the conference. Similarly, the discussion of the Bermuda conference was dismissed. A New York Times article written in April 30, 1943 and titled "Hopeful Hint Ends Bermuda Sessions", mentioned that the conclusion of the Bermuda conference was that saving the Jewish refugees would hinder the war efforts and it simply was not worth the cost (New York Times, 1943). Just a week later, the American Zionist Committee for a Jewish Army ran an ad on the New York Times which condemned Americas previous promises to help the Jews (New York Times, 1943).

000536-140 Riaz 5

Evaluation of Sources: A German writer named Voelkischer Beobachter, titled his article No One Wants To Have Them. He was referring to the embarrassing Evian discussion where nothing was accomplished. His article was part of the massive propaganda plan that was being run in Germany. It added fuel to the fire by saying that since the American/British people did not care for the Jewish people, what they were doing was right. It is not clear whether Voelkischer Beobachter was a Nazi but his paper definitely had a Nazi point of view since all types of media were controlled by the government in Germany. Therefore, for obvious reasons, this article is limited by the anti-Semitic propaganda campaign. The American Jewish Year Book: Volume 46, co-written by Ellen H. Posner, was intended for the American Jewish Committee. This was written shortly after the infamous Bermuda conference and its 600 pages of information covers Jewish related events from a Jewish perspective. Consequentially, this is a type of bias. However, this book gives a clearer picture of anti-Jewish behavior in America which was ignored by most newspapers and other media outlets. It is limited by this Jewish perspective and it does not consider any other reason of Americas unwillingness to help Jews besides anti-Semitism. Besides this bias, it offers much evidence of the medias promotion of xenophobic ideas and eugenic policies. The New York Times article written in April 30, 1943 and titled "Hopeful Hint Ends Bermuda Sessions", described the dismal outcome of the Bermuda conference but failed to mention any anti-Semitist links to the decision. In that respect, the articles failure to mention the xenophobic attitude of Americans is a form of bias. A week after publication, a full-page ad by the Zionist Committee for a Jewish Army condemned America for not acting. This Zionist group would particularly be limited by their beliefs but at the same time they revealed to the Americans

000536-140 Riaz 6

what would not be said on any newspaper. Analysis: The response by the Americans to the Evian conference is not surprising. The country still held onto the popular belief of isolationism. What is surprising is that the mindsets of Americans did not change even in 1943, when the country was already engaged in war. What does make sense is that Roosevelt purposefully chose to not act because of the sensitivity of the issue and closeness of the conferences to the next presidential election. He knew that it was better to have the support of most Americans rather than dividing the interventionists and the anti-interventionists. The war was already on and most Americans saw no need to sacrifice more soldiers to save foreigners. The feeling towards refugees by the government was quite evident since the immigration quotas were not even being met. Similarly, the British were not transporting any Jews to the Palestine territory. This does not directly link America with anti-Semitism but it does link it with Xenophobia. The fact that immigration was limited to these refugees is quite ironic since America was founded by people who did not have a place to stay. What is most interesting is that the Germans were able to use the outcome of these conferences in their propaganda campaign. This shows that America was not adequately taking a stance in this issue in the international world. The inability to take a stance infuriated people like Ellen H. Posner. By reading his book, it is easy to see the frustration of the American Jewish Committee. Their response is another piece of evidence that proves that America was simply not doing enough to meet with its standards. His book details how preachers and politicians would constantly state anti-Semitic remarks. These influential people most definitely had an effect on the American mindset.

000536-140 Riaz 7

The New York Times article bluntly stated that there was too much at risk to save the Jews at the moment and it was better if all resources were focused on the war efforts. This is one way of discounting the theory that the U.S. government was not anti-Semitic. However, one should not forget that the same government was not fulfilling its immigration quotas and was funding Eugenic plans. These Eugenic programs brainwashed many Americans into believing that the Jewish race was scientifically inferior and thus undesirable. Ironically, Germany would use the same tactics as the Americans to brainwash their citizens into anti-Semitists. Conclusion: There is significant evidence that links the American public to anti-Semitism. It is harder to label the American government as anti-Semitist but it is fair to say that it certainly was Xenophobic. The public was largely opposed to allowing Jewish refugees from entering the United States in fear of losing jobs. Influential people from politicians to preachers would state false information about Jews and this would further make Americans worried about immigration. Although slowly the country was leaning away from its isolated policy, it still did not change the minds of Americans. The Evian and Bermuda conferences did not accomplish anything for the Jewish refugees and instead only helped the Germans with their propaganda campaign. There is no doubt that the government of America did not do enough to help rescue the Jewish refugees. Word Count: 1751

000536-140 Riaz 8

Works Cited Beobachter, Voelkischer. "No One Wants To Have Them." North German Edition 13 July 1938. Jewish Virtual Library. The American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. Chevy Chase. . Browning, Christopher R., and Jurgen Matthaus. The Origins of the Final Solution : The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942. New York: University of Nebraska P, 2004. "Hopeful Hint Ends Bermuda Sessions." The New York Times 30 Apr. 1943: 9. Makinda, Sam. "Following postnational signs: the trail of human rights." Thesis. 14 June 2005. School of Politics and International Studies. . Medoff, Rafael. "The Allies' Refugee Conference--A "Cruel Mockery"" The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocost Studies. Apr. 2003. .

000536-140 Riaz 9

Piotrowski, Tadeusz. Poland's Holocaust : Ethnic Strife, Collaboration with Occupying Forces and Genocide in the Second Republic, 1918-1947. Boston: McFarland & Company, Incorporated, 1997. Posner, Ellen H. THE AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK. Vol. 46. Philadelphia, PA: THE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1944. American Jewish Committee. Kanda Software. AJC Information Center and Digital Archives, New York. . Ratu, Sikeli. "Anti-Semitism and American Refugee Immigration Policy during the Holocaust: A reassessment." Thesis. Shaw, Annette. "The Evian Conference - Hitler's Green Light for Genocide." Christian Action for Israel. 2001. . Wyman, David. The Abandonment Of The Jews: America and the Holocaust. New York City, NY: Pantheon Books, 1984.