Haavara Agreement Youtube

The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine is a book by author Edwin Black that documents the “Haavara Agreement” between Zionist organizations and Nazi Germany to transfer a number of Jews and their property to Palestine. Shortly after Samuel Untermyer returned from Germany to the United States in 1933, front-page newspaper articles in London and New York stated, “Judea declares war on Germany.” This led to an effective boycott of German products in many countries, which greatly affected German exports. The agreement was partly inspired by the boycott, which seemed to threaten the Empire. [1] Controversial, as can be seen after the fact, it marked one of the few salvations of the Jews and their fortunes in the years leading up to the Holocaust. [2] The book also documents controversy within the Zionist movement and the Jewish diaspora about the agreement that shows schwarz to “tear the Jewish world apart in the run-up to the Second World War.” In particular, it describes the conflict between German Zionists and local German elected officials in the United States who argued for the agreement and, on the other hand, the traditional Eastern European leaders of American Jewish Zionists (such as the American Jewish Committee and Denjewish War Veterans) who opposed the agreement and called for a total boycott of Nazi Germany. This book documents the agreement between Nazi Germany and an organization of German Zionists in 1933 to save certain Judeo-German property and the voluntary emigration of German Jews to Palestine, before the Third Reich proceeded with expulsion and extermination. The transfer contract saved about 60,000 German Jews. A global economic boycott of Germany by the Jews contributed to an agreement between the Nazis and the Zionists. [3] The book has been criticized on several fronts. Historian Richard S. Levy wrote in Commentary: “He relies on outdated works, makes many mistakes and distorts his subject” and “Black`s neglect in secondary scientific literature is perverse and leads him to his most serious error of judgment – a drastic overestimation of the political and economic effectiveness of the boycott weapon,” describing the book as a “conspiracy-monering , innuendo and fiery.” [4].