He was like his name: Yehudi (a Jew in Hebrew). The kind of Jewalready extinct in Israel. A Jew in the best tradition ofpast generations: a humanitarian, an honest man who hated violence. LikeAlbert Einstein, like Sigmund Freud, like Martin Buber. A carrier of “theJewish Genius” in the best sense of the word, for the good of all ofhumankind.
Three years ago, when we gathered signatures from prominentpersonalities on a manifesto in support of a UnitedJerusalem as a common capital for both the State of Israel and theState of Palestine, I approached Yehudi Menuhin with great reverence, toask him whether he would be willing to sign the proclamation, even thoughhe did not know me. His response was prompt and generous: “Your name is(underlined) familiar to me and I hasten to add my name to yourstatement… May we be prepared to give with a full heart what we wouldexpect to receive. Let us be prepared for reverses on the way, but let uspursue our goal, unhesitatingly.” I was impressed by the signature,spanning the entire width of the page.
I was reminded of this a month ago, when, once again, we weregathering signatures from prominent personalities on amanifesto which stated, “WE SUPPORT the right of thePalestinian nation to declare the establishment of the State ofPalestine in all the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, withunited Jerusalem serving as the capital for both states — West Jerusalemas the capital of Israel and East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine.The co-existence of Israel and Palestine, side by side, is the basis ofpeace, security and reconciliation between the two nations.” Again Iturned to him.
His response was prompt: “Dear Mr. Avnery… I have allowed myself tosuggest a slightly different wording… I do not know if you agree. Ifully realize that at the present time the feelings of fear, of hate, ofmistrust, an ‘independent’ Palestine would at least momentarily satisfythe cravings of the Palestinian people and would no doubt spell a reliefin Israel.
“My own very personal feeling is that the establishment of two states is,in fact, a recipe for a postponed war. I know the euphoria thataccompanies a declaration of independence, whether in Senegal, India,Israel and so many smaller states, but within a few years the hard realityasserts itself. Jerusalem would be, as you indicate, the first bone ofcontention, an outlet to the sea is a second, the sharing of waters is athird; another is Israel’s constant determination to keep the neighboringrival state weak. All these conditions will provide sufficient ground forlasting enmity.
“You are right in stressing that a united Jerusalem must serve as capitalfor both states. On the other hand, the Jewish population, many of whomwould like to get rid of the Palestinian problem, will be the very onesthat hope to do so by excluding the Palestinians permanently fromJerusalem. I would like to know what you feel, but of course I subscribeto the United Jerusalem.
“The following is the wording I would suggest:
“WE SUPPORT the right of the Palestinian people to a United Jerusalemserving as the capital of both and all people dwelling in the Holy Land.The coexistence and friendly cooperation of Jewish and Muslim peoples isthe only basis for peace, security and the sorely needed reconciliationbetween the two cultures.”
This time too, he signed with a broad and confident full signature.
I replied to him in a lengthy letter. It was, of course, not possible tochange the wording of the manifesto after 440 Israelis had already signedit. “The vision of a common state in Palestine –bi-national.multi-national or supra-national — is indeed veryappealing…(But) it seems to me that a dramatic change from a total100-years-old conflict to a state of total peace is impossible. It woulddemand too much of human nature as its present state of development. Agreat prophet, a new Moses, Jesus or Muhammed, could perhaps achieve this,but rare spiritual leaders of this stature do not come on order.”
I added that “there must be an interim stage, perhaps lasting fora generation, in which the craving for national symbols, pride anddignity must be satisfied. Without those, the Palestinianpeople would feel that they have been robbed of something everyother nation has been granted. Also, with the present immensepreponderance of Israel in all economic, technological andsocial fields, a joint state may well turn, at this stage, into a newreplica of the old South Africa.
“The two states – Israel and Palestine – living side-by-side, with anintimate relationship imposed on them by geography and economics, mightslowly create a feeling of equality and confidence which is a necessaryfoundation for any step forward. The sheer necessity of working together,in order to create new water resources, for example, might be beneficial.I hope that the two states will quickly grow together, on the Europeanmodel…”
Menuhin replied to this in a short message by fax: “I do agree withwhat you say, but how are we going to handle the interim period with twostates? One Jerusalem, however, would already be a blessing.”
The signature was different this time: “Yehudi Menuhin. Dictated by LordMenuhin and signed in his absence.”
The letter was dated March 2, 1999. Maybe it was his last letter. Tendays later the great Jew passed away.