Agudat Yisrael and the religious Zionist movement (Mizrachi) were the two largest and most influential political organizations of Orthodox Jewry during the first half of the twentieth century. Competing for the support of observant Jews, the two movements were enmeshed in bitter ideological and political struggles. Nevertheless, due to the dire situation of European and Palestine Jewries their political representatives met during the late 1930s in Paris and London in order to negotiate possible avenues of cooperation. While these endeavors were unprecedented in the history of the two movements, they eventually failed. Due to their failure, earlier scholarship has dismissed these efforts as a “lost opportunity” for Orthodox Judaism and blamed Agudists for their unwillingness to overcome long-standing rivalries and ideological reservations. This article, in contrast, perceives the negotiations of 1938–1939 as an important window into intra-Orthodox dynamics during the first half of the twentieth century. Rather than stressing the difficulties of overcoming ideological barriers and the failures of non-Zionist Orthodoxy to adapt to the challenges of the modern age, the article argues that it was a careful weighing of political gains and risks on both sides that dominated the negotiations and determined their outcome. The insights gained from this close analysis of intra-Orthodox relations are of significance beyond the question of party politics, as the two rivals were not only influential political movements, but ultimately came to shape the social, cultural, and political realities of traditionalist Jewry in the State of Israel during its early years and well beyond.

中文翻译：

---

重要的失败：两次失败的协议和二战前夕正统犹太政治的动态

Agudat Yisrael 和宗教犹太复国主义运动（Mizrachi）是 20 世纪上半叶东正教犹太人最大和最有影响力的两个政治组织。为争取敏锐的犹太人的支持，这两个运动陷入了激烈的意识形态和政治斗争中。尽管如此，由于欧洲和巴勒斯坦犹太人的严峻形势，他们的政治代表于 1930 年代后期在巴黎和伦敦会面，以协商可能的合作途径。虽然这些努力在两次运动的历史上都是前所未有的，但最终都失败了。由于他们的失败，早期的学者将这些努力视为正统犹太教“失去的机会”，并指责阿古德派不愿克服长期存在的竞争和意识形态保留。相比之下，本文将 1938 年至 1939 年的谈判视为了解 20 世纪上半叶东正教内部动态的重要窗口。这篇文章没有强调克服意识形态障碍的困难以及非犹太复国主义正统派未能适应现代时代的挑战，而是认为是对双方政治收益和风险的仔细权衡主导了谈判并决定了他们的结果。从对东正教内部关系的这种仔细分析中获得的见解的意义超出了政党政治的问题，因为这两个竞争对手不仅是有影响力的政治运动，而且最终塑造了传统主义犹太人的社会、文化和政治现实。以色列国的早期及以后。将 1938 年至 1939 年的谈判视为 20 世纪上半叶东正教内部动态的重要窗口。这篇文章没有强调克服意识形态障碍的困难以及非犹太复国主义正统派未能适应现代时代的挑战，而是认为是对双方政治收益和风险的仔细权衡主导了谈判并决定了他们的结果。从对东正教内部关系的这种仔细分析中获得的见解的意义超出了政党政治的问题，因为这两个竞争对手不仅是有影响力的政治运动，而且最终塑造了传统主义犹太人的社会、文化和政治现实。以色列国的早期及以后。将 1938 年至 1939 年的谈判视为 20 世纪上半叶东正教内部动态的重要窗口。这篇文章没有强调克服意识形态障碍的困难以及非犹太复国主义正统派未能适应现代时代的挑战，而是认为是对双方政治收益和风险的仔细权衡主导了谈判并决定了他们的结果。从对东正教内部关系的这种仔细分析中获得的见解的意义超出了政党政治的问题，因为这两个竞争对手不仅是有影响力的政治运动，而且最终塑造了传统主义犹太人的社会、文化和政治现实。以色列国的早期及以后。