As the furore rages over FIFA’s decision to gift the 2018 World Cup to Russia, and that of 2022 to Qatar; as politicians debate whether they are children of Thatcher or sons of Brown; as the nation is enchanted by another Royal fairytale, a rather significant political development has been a little neglected by the YouTube-Blogspot-Twitter brand of politics.It was announced a few weeks ago that British foreign policy is to shift significantly: the change is to ‘reflect Arab concerns on Middle East’.
It is William Hague's decision ‘to reach out to Gulf states in an effort to secure better diplomatic and trade ties meant Britain had to "take on board" Arab foreign policy goals’.
It goes without saying that a foreign policy which reflects Arab concerns and Arab goals cannot at the same time reflect Israeli concerns and goals.
Not least because the primary Arab foreign policy goal is to wipe Israel off the map.
The Israel lobby must be doing a pretty appalling job in the Foreign Office.
When William Hague called for a ‘durable resolution to the Gaza crisis’, he appeared not to realise that for the majority of Arab nations this means a one-state solution called Palestine with the inconsequential slaughter of the Jews: the ‘two-state’ compromise has been on offer for over a decade and has been consistently rejected by both the PLO and Hamas. They want one state with Jerusalem as their capital.
It might also be observed that there is not an awful lot of reciprocity from Arab countries, and they tend not to be overly tolerant of the Christian communities within their borders: indeed, their governments conveniently turn a blind eye to the appalling persecution and occasional wholesale slaughter endured by non-Muslims.
Yet the President of Israel might be an Arab.
How many Arab states permit a Jew or a Christian even to stand for parliament?
How many Arab states actually possess a parliament?
And yet, according to one British diplomat, ‘we have to respond to what Gulf States want’.
Do we?
Most of them practise and promote discrimination against particular religious or ethnic communities, yet there are no university debates or student protests given over to explore ‘the nature’ of these countries, and no demands by trades unions for boycotts or sanctions against them.
And no UN Resolution condemning them.
The United Kingdom declared the foundation of the the modern state of Israel in 1948. The 1917 Balfour Declaration said:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."It specifically referred to ‘the historical connections of the Jewish people with Palestine’ and to the moral validity of ‘reconstituting their National Home in that country’. The term ‘reconstituting’ evidences recognition of the fact that Palestine had been home to the Jews. Furthermore, the British were instructed to ‘use their best endeavors to facilitate’ Jewish immigration, to encourage settlement on the land and to ‘secure’ the Jewish National Home. The word ‘Arab’ does not appear in the Mandatory award at all.
Israel remains the only democracy in the region; the only free state; the solitary hope; the only light.
While bombs explode from within; missiles rain from without; her borders are breached by terrorists; her seas are besieged by enemy flotillas; and today the moon turns to red in a whirlwind of unprecedented forest fires.
Yet she is abandoned even by the nation which conceived her re-birth.
Have we really sold our soul for a few barrels of oil?
