Rahul M wrote:swamy saar, I am still waiting for your reply on how both pakistan and israel were created by european powers to further their interests.
No doubt, the British restricted the Jewish immigration into Palestine in the late 1930s. However like you rightly point out, the British did allow wealthy Jews to migrate into the territory - for capital. However, after WWI, the British did allow Jewish immigration into Palestine until the release of White Paper in 1939. Israeli-Europe relationship is complex. The Holocaust created a "collective guilt" in Europe, and they washed away their sins by helping the creation of Israel. Not all subscribe to this charge of "collective guilt"; however in my opinion the
pryachirtam of Europe did go on to confer the big benefit of washing the guilt. Jews had began their immigration long before the Holocaust. The blood of Jews was clearly on the Christian Europe. They let it happen. The Arabs in the region did not like it. Eventually Israel was created
for Jews, similar to Pakistan's creation
for the Muslims of British India. Two countries created as homeland for two sets of people.
Thousands of essays and books have been written on the history, let us broadly look at what happened:
1914
Britain promises independence for the Arab countries.
1915-16 Hussein-McMahon Correspondence
Correspondence between McMahon and Sharif of Mecca concerning the future of territories under the Ottoman Empire.
1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement
Secret agreement between Britain and France that essentially decided on their spheres of control in the region after the fall of Ottoman Empire.
1917 Balfour Declaration
Britain's announcement of supporting a Jewish Home.
1919 Feisal-Weizmann Agreement (with Feisal's reservation)
A peace conference between Dr.Weizmamann and Emir Feisal agreeing Arab support for Jewish Home contingent upon British honoring/favoring the Arab State. Britain was encouraging the Arabs to revolt against the Ottoman Empire. But they go back on their words because of Sykes-Picot agreement. Feisal, in turn, goes back on his agreement.
1919 - King-Crane Commission
Enter the Americans, they say well Syria - a geographical entity that has its own share of history and controversy - can not be effectively controlled by France and Britain, and bulk of the population in Syria (which was supposed to comprise several of the existing modern states) do not support the idea of Jewish State. So they say, America should move in and have a mandate, because America alone could pave the way for the people to create a State of their choice - liberal, democratic and whatnot. Naturally Britain and France are peeved. American is forced to come out and say it harbors no territorial ambitions.
1920
Britain establishes Palestine Mandate & France establishes its Syrian Mandate, as per their Sykes-Picot agreement.
1936-1939
Arabs revolt in Palestine against British Imperialism and Jewish mass immigration.
1937 - Peel Commission
First time the talk of partitioning the British Mandate of Palestine is mentioned. Zionists, British Government and Arabs reject it.
1938 - Woodhead Commission
Britain tried to wash its hands off the emerging conflict, after it had played both sides. There is talk of creating a Jewish State, an Arab State and British Mandate. Jews and Arabs again oppose this.
1939
Britain releases White Paper limiting the immigration of Jews into Palestine. The Peel and Woodhead Commission are tossed out; and there is talk of creating a new Palestine State to be ruled by Arabs and Jews. Policies were recommended to control the immigration.
In summary, Europe as usual was fighting among themselves and viewed Asia on the benefits it offered. The Ottoman Empire supported the Germans. So the British supported Arabs against Ottoman Empire and supports a Jewish State as well. Then goes behind both these groups and enters into a secret treaty with France to split the region among themselves. And then one adds the guilt and American support to the already simmering conflict, one has the perfect recipe for a disaster that will continue to haunt the World for decades if not a century. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are the three primary religions among the warring and treacherous lot. We even have "Christian Zionism" denoting the Evangelical Christians supporting the migration of Jews to Israel to hasten the second coming. All groups use their religion & ethnicity to whip up emotions of the people. Add the concept of nationalism, and the mixture is potent. How many fears were unfounded? How many fears were legitimate? Well nobody can say for sure, because of the duplicity of all the parties involved. So who do we blame? The Jews? The Arabs? The Europeans? I blame all the three. Unlike in the Indian partition, where one cannot blame the Hindus. The seed of hatred was fanned by the British. They worked on the existing angst and fissures.
What I laid out above is a snapshot of important events to show how Europe acted for its benefit. Britain played the people just like it played the people in the Indian Subcontinent; and to achieve its goals, i.e. benefits. Britain, France and America play important roles, it is not that the other Europeans had stellar character - it was just that they had been defeated in wars. As you would have observed I do not even discuss the diversity of population in that region over thousands and thousands of years, which only makes the creation of Israel for Jews a controversial agenda in my opinion.
All this hungama by France and Britain reminds me of the hungama they created in South India - especially the Madras Presidency, playing one Kingdom against the other - essentially they transferred their war from Europe to Madras Presidency.