National Self-interest and the Middle East
The new Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron, has recently been highly critical of the Israeli policy with regard to Gaza, especially its naval blockade. But it's refreshing to see someone from the UK chide Mr. Cameron for so obviously playing to the gallery (in this case the Turkish government and people) based on national self-interest and economic concerns. The person in question is Dr. Calvin L. Smith, Principal of King’s Evangelical Divinity School in Wolverhampton, UK and his comments may be read on his website at www.calvinlsmith.com. Dr. Smith goes even further and laments some of Great Britain's mistakes in its past Middle East foreign policy, mistakes that have played a leading role, unfortunately, in creating the current Middle East crisis. As an American I have to be very careful here because it's easy to be self-righteous and judgmental. I need to say upfront that the US has committed enough sins in fo
reign policy to go around for everyone.
His comments lead me to offer some further thoughts. It should not be forgotten that it was a distinguished British evangelical, Lord Arthur James Balfour, seen here in this photograph, who played a key role in the rebirth of the modern State of Israel. He was instrumental in drafting the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which states: “His majesty’s government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” This declaration was an incredible shot in the arm for the Zionist Movement which had been struggling for several decades to reestablish a Jewish state in the ancestral homeland.
Prior to the Balfour Declaration, Zionism’s most visible spokesperson had been the Austrian born Jew, Theodor Herzl, seen here in this photograph. Herzl, hat in hand, even made a junket to Istanbul requesting permission from the Turkish Sultan to purchase land for a
Jewish state in Palestine. He was of course curtly denied and dismissed. Meanwhile, Baron Edmond Benjamin James de Rothschild (a Frenchman of the Rothschild banking family) underwrote pioneering Jewish settlements in Palestine and bought up any available land from Arab landholders (many of them absentee), however desolate and unproductive, at greatly inflated prices. Herzl spoke widely at public rallies on behalf of Zionism and presided over the first World Jewish Congress in 1897 devoted to the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. These fledgling efforts, however, were more inspirational than substantive.
The Balfour Declaration, on the other hand, was a huge breakthrough. The World Zionist Organization–London Bureau sent out a manifesto addressed to the Jewish People. In this document the Zionist leadership declared that the Balfour Declaration “marks the end of an epoch, and it opens up the beginning of a new era. . . the period which now begins is fulfillment.”
But the buoyancy and optimism of 1917 was soon followed by anti-Jewish riots in May, 1921. Arabs, incited by the anti-Semitic rabble-rouser, Haj Amin el-Husseini, carried out deadly attacks on Jewish communities. Husseini, seen here with a Nazi soldier in Germany, was enthusiatic about the Nazi program to make Germany Judenrein and hoped to do the same in Palestine. In 1929 Arabs nearly wiped out the entire Jewish community of Hebron. The Jews form
ed self-defense units called the Haganah, trained in large part by the British officer, Major Charles Orde Wingate shown here. On the whole, however, the British Mandatory government in Palestine was not sympathetic to the Jewish cause and favored the Arabs. In fact, in May of 1939, the British Secretary of State presented a statement of policy on Palestine, a “white paper,” in which immigration and land purchases by Jews were curtailed. This of course came at the very time when Jews desperately needed a safe haven from the Nazis.
After WWII, in the aftermath of the Holocaust, world Jewry thought surely the British would reopen the gates to Palestine. Instead, the British restricted Jewish immigration even more. The British Foreign Office, with a view to strategic national interests (read here especially OIL), continued a determined policy of currying the favor of the emerging Arab states (hence Dr. Calvin Smith’s comparison to Mr. Cameron). Tragically, the US had also refused to open its doors to Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime in Germany. The US Congress had already passed an immigration law in 1922 that had choked off the influx of Jews to a mere trickle and the national sentiment was overwhelmingly isolationist and strongly opposed to immigration (Hmm. Does this sound vaguely familiar?)
In short, the British government both radically reinterpreted and quietly ignored the Balfour Declaration. If one is guided only by national self-interest, this is perfectly understandable. After all, who would have predicted that a Jewish state could survive anyway in a sea of Islam? Many of
the actions and policies of British officials and military leaders in Palestine during the troubled days following WWII clearly favored the Arab cause. This has been vividly depicted in the book O Jerusalem! by Dominque LaPierre and Larry Collins. I highly recommend this for all who want to understand some of the historical background to the present impasse.
During this period of the Mandate, the British government increasingly found itself caught between a rock and a hard place. Promises made earlier to both Jews and Arabs simply could not be kept which in turn led to bitter recrimination and even terrorism directed at British soldiers and officials in Palestine. In hindsight, the Balfour Declaration contains aspirations that now seem naive. How precisely can one have a Jewish home in Palestine without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine? It would appear that even Solomon in all his wisdom would be hard-pressed to pull this one off!
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. On May 14, 1948 Israel declared herself an independent nation and the very next day was invaded by the armies of six neighboring Arab states. Remarkably, some would even say, miraculously, Israel not only survived but increased its territory initially allotted by the UN Partition Plan. Now here we are, some 62 years and 5 wars later, and there is still no independent Palestinian state. The reasons for this are various and highly disputed. But that is the subject of a future blog.
I leave off with this sad observation: nationalistic self-interest and indifference, whether on the part of the UK or the US, has resulted in great human tragedy for both Arabs and Jews. I fervently hope that in the not too distant future a comprehensive settlement can be implemented with Israel and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace. Surely all evangelicals of whatever nationality and political persuasion can join together and respond to the Psalmist's urgent request: "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem."(Ps 122:6). May it happen speedily and in our day!
The new Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron, has recently been highly critical of the Israeli policy with regard to Gaza, especially its naval blockade. But it's refreshing to see someone from the UK chide Mr. Cameron for so obviously playing to the gallery (in this case the Turkish government and people) based on national self-interest and economic concerns. The person in question is Dr. Calvin L. Smith, Principal of King’s Evangelical Divinity School in Wolverhampton, UK and his comments may be read on his website at www.calvinlsmith.com. Dr. Smith goes even further and laments some of Great Britain's mistakes in its past Middle East foreign policy, mistakes that have played a leading role, unfortunately, in creating the current Middle East crisis. As an American I have to be very careful here because it's easy to be self-righteous and judgmental. I need to say upfront that the US has committed enough sins in fo
reign policy to go around for everyone.His comments lead me to offer some further thoughts. It should not be forgotten that it was a distinguished British evangelical, Lord Arthur James Balfour, seen here in this photograph, who played a key role in the rebirth of the modern State of Israel. He was instrumental in drafting the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which states: “His majesty’s government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” This declaration was an incredible shot in the arm for the Zionist Movement which had been struggling for several decades to reestablish a Jewish state in the ancestral homeland.
Prior to the Balfour Declaration, Zionism’s most visible spokesperson had been the Austrian born Jew, Theodor Herzl, seen here in this photograph. Herzl, hat in hand, even made a junket to Istanbul requesting permission from the Turkish Sultan to purchase land for a
Jewish state in Palestine. He was of course curtly denied and dismissed. Meanwhile, Baron Edmond Benjamin James de Rothschild (a Frenchman of the Rothschild banking family) underwrote pioneering Jewish settlements in Palestine and bought up any available land from Arab landholders (many of them absentee), however desolate and unproductive, at greatly inflated prices. Herzl spoke widely at public rallies on behalf of Zionism and presided over the first World Jewish Congress in 1897 devoted to the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. These fledgling efforts, however, were more inspirational than substantive.The Balfour Declaration, on the other hand, was a huge breakthrough. The World Zionist Organization–London Bureau sent out a manifesto addressed to the Jewish People. In this document the Zionist leadership declared that the Balfour Declaration “marks the end of an epoch, and it opens up the beginning of a new era. . . the period which now begins is fulfillment.”
But the buoyancy and optimism of 1917 was soon followed by anti-Jewish riots in May, 1921. Arabs, incited by the anti-Semitic rabble-rouser, Haj Amin el-Husseini, carried out deadly attacks on Jewish communities. Husseini, seen here with a Nazi soldier in Germany, was enthusiatic about the Nazi program to make Germany Judenrein and hoped to do the same in Palestine. In 1929 Arabs nearly wiped out the entire Jewish community of Hebron. The Jews form
ed self-defense units called the Haganah, trained in large part by the British officer, Major Charles Orde Wingate shown here. On the whole, however, the British Mandatory government in Palestine was not sympathetic to the Jewish cause and favored the Arabs. In fact, in May of 1939, the British Secretary of State presented a statement of policy on Palestine, a “white paper,” in which immigration and land purchases by Jews were curtailed. This of course came at the very time when Jews desperately needed a safe haven from the Nazis.After WWII, in the aftermath of the Holocaust, world Jewry thought surely the British would reopen the gates to Palestine. Instead, the British restricted Jewish immigration even more. The British Foreign Office, with a view to strategic national interests (read here especially OIL), continued a determined policy of currying the favor of the emerging Arab states (hence Dr. Calvin Smith’s comparison to Mr. Cameron). Tragically, the US had also refused to open its doors to Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi regime in Germany. The US Congress had already passed an immigration law in 1922 that had choked off the influx of Jews to a mere trickle and the national sentiment was overwhelmingly isolationist and strongly opposed to immigration (Hmm. Does this sound vaguely familiar?)
In short, the British government both radically reinterpreted and quietly ignored the Balfour Declaration. If one is guided only by national self-interest, this is perfectly understandable. After all, who would have predicted that a Jewish state could survive anyway in a sea of Islam? Many of
the actions and policies of British officials and military leaders in Palestine during the troubled days following WWII clearly favored the Arab cause. This has been vividly depicted in the book O Jerusalem! by Dominque LaPierre and Larry Collins. I highly recommend this for all who want to understand some of the historical background to the present impasse.During this period of the Mandate, the British government increasingly found itself caught between a rock and a hard place. Promises made earlier to both Jews and Arabs simply could not be kept which in turn led to bitter recrimination and even terrorism directed at British soldiers and officials in Palestine. In hindsight, the Balfour Declaration contains aspirations that now seem naive. How precisely can one have a Jewish home in Palestine without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine? It would appear that even Solomon in all his wisdom would be hard-pressed to pull this one off!
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. On May 14, 1948 Israel declared herself an independent nation and the very next day was invaded by the armies of six neighboring Arab states. Remarkably, some would even say, miraculously, Israel not only survived but increased its territory initially allotted by the UN Partition Plan. Now here we are, some 62 years and 5 wars later, and there is still no independent Palestinian state. The reasons for this are various and highly disputed. But that is the subject of a future blog.
I leave off with this sad observation: nationalistic self-interest and indifference, whether on the part of the UK or the US, has resulted in great human tragedy for both Arabs and Jews. I fervently hope that in the not too distant future a comprehensive settlement can be implemented with Israel and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace. Surely all evangelicals of whatever nationality and political persuasion can join together and respond to the Psalmist's urgent request: "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem."(Ps 122:6). May it happen speedily and in our day!
No comments:
Post a Comment