PRINCE CHARMING 
By Israel Shamir 

 (based on talks given in Stanford University, California and American 
 University, Cairo) 
  

 - What has he found in her? - jealously gossip the shrills. - Why does he 
 shower her with gifts? What's she got that we haven't? 
 She costs him a lot of money and good will, she alienated him from his old 
 buddies, and for a good reason: the little murderous bitch, hers is a brand 
 name for every mean trick, but he, usually tight-fisted and penny-pinching, 
 generously cares and stonewalls for her, lays low her enemies and silences 
 her critics. What is the secret behind the peculiar love affair between 
 Daughter of Zion from Middle East and the superpower across the ocean? 
 These questions tease the mind, and call us to explore the source of the 
 great anomaly of our time. Like exploring the source of Nile in preceding 
 century, it requires an ability to look into lions' eyes with a white hunter's 
 disdain for death, and Sherlock Holmes' detective talents. 

 The current favourite explanation is a vaguely defined "strategic interest 
 of American corporations", sometimes deciphered as desire of the US weapon 
 industries to sell their stuff to Arabs. Others prefer America's need to 
 have a base, or a "local cop on the beat" in the troubled area. Idealists 
 believe in Americans' guilt feelings, in the long shadow of Holocaust or 
 psychological similarity. Another prolific school explains the anomaly by 
 oil. Arab oil has to be under American control and who would be better to do 
 the job than ferocious Hassidic Jews? 

 Although, this school explains everything by oil, whether it is the war in 
 Afghanistan, looming American attack on Iraq, tension between India and 
 Pakistan, or trouble in Palestine. They remind me of ancient Greek 
 philosophers who believed in existence of one basic element the world is 
 built of. 

 Thales said, water is the basis of all things. 
 Anaximenes said, air is the basis of all things. 
 Heraclites said, all is fire. 
 It is all pipelines, proclaims a chorus of experts whenever there is a 
 discussion of reasons behind American policies in the Middle East. 
 It seems quite convincing, until one is reminded a cheerful line of Afif 
 Safiye, the witty PNA man in London: "Palestine has a lot of oil. Olive oil". 

 In order to understand the obscure charms of the Daughter of Zion, we should 
 remember that Uncle Sam is but a third lover of the plucky girl. With Bush's 
 predecessors, the British Empire in 1917-1922 and the Soviet Union in 
 1945-1949, we have an advantage of full knowledge of sources and motives. 
 The archive documents were aired, published and analysed by better men, 
 while we can just sum up the fruits of their labour, and find out "what 
 attracts them". 

 II 

 The first Prince Charming to be seduced by her husky voice was British 
 Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour, who promised to turn Palestine into a 
 National Home for the Jews. Britain reneged on promises given to Arabs, 
 seized Palestine, enforced the Jewish rule in the land, killed and exiled 
 every unbending Palestinian leader, destroyed Palestinian economy and 
 trained the future IDF shock troops to deal with natives. They've got 
 preciously little in return. Palestine was an expensive thing to run, and it 
 caused a lot of trouble. Perfide Albion became an object of much dislike in 
 the Middle East. British soldiers and officers were killed by both 
 Palestinians and by not-so-easily placated Zionists. 

 Traditional explanation for their strange behaviour is an identical one to 
 that given for the US support. It is again "imperialism", "oil", "strategic 
 value", "divide and rule" and similar platitudes, (minus guilt and 
 Holocaust, as it happened well before Hitler.) But a neat "collection of the 
 official documents, memoranda and letters of those in power in London and in 
 Palestine" in the decisive years 1917-1922 contains just one reference to 
 economic value of Palestine as perceived by the British statesmen, 
 "Palestine has no strategic value whatsoever ".  There is no "oil" in the 
 index at all. 

 In private discussions behind the closed doors of the Whitehall, one can't 
 find even a shred of imperialist desires to divide and rule. Contrariwise, 
 the British leaders "anticipated great trouble from Zionists" (General 
 Allenby). As Lord Cecil succulently put it, "we (the British) are not going 
 to get anything out of it [of possession of Palestine]". British did not 
 need Palestine, they would love to get rid of the place, but they did not 
 dare. The Palestine Papers put to rest the "imperialist" explanation, leave 
 alone oil, for the tumultuous affair between Zionists and the British 
 Empire. 

 Now, a thoughtful Israeli writer, Tom Segev, has proposed quite different 
 motive in his best-selling book One Palestine, Complete. Published in 
 English last year, it was acclaimed by the Jewish pundits of America as 
 "thoroughly researched" (Jewish week), "fascinating" (Hadassa Magazine), 
 "landmark of information" (Houston Jewish Herald), while this great admirer 
 of Sharon, Ron Grossman of Chicago Tribune called it "brilliant. an utterly 
 fascinating narrative of the period". 

 Segev does not mince words. He rejects oil-strategy explanations and in the 
 very beginning of his book, he affirms: England did it because its rulers 
 "certainly believed in great power of the World Jewry to influence world 
 events, whether in the US or in revolutionary Russia." British government had 
 come to conclusion that it is worth their while to conquer Palestine, to 
 suppress its people and to give it to Zionists in order to curry favour with 
 the World Jewry. 

 The Prime Minister, Lloyd George "feared Jews", and in his memoirs he 
 explained his momentous decision to support Zionists by urgent need to form 
 an alliance, "a contract with Jewry", "a highly influential power whose 
 goodwill was worth paying for", in order to win the war. "The Jews had every 
 intention of determining the outcome of the WWI. They could influence the US 
 to intensify their involvement in the war, and as the real movers behind the 
 Russian revolution, they also controlled Russia's attitude towards Germany. 
 The Jews offered themselves to the highest bidder, and unless Britain would 
 clinch the deal first, the Germans would have bought them". 

 The astute Lloyd George based his opinion on the reports of British 
 ambassadors, who were unequivocal. "The influence of the Jews is very 
 great," noted his man in Washington. "They are well-organised and 
 especially in press, in finance, and in politics their influence is 
 considerable". The ambassador in Turkey reported that an international 
 connection of Jews was the real power behind Ataturk's revolution. The 
 Foreign Office undersecretary Lord Cecil summed it up, "I do not think it is 
 easy to exaggerate the international power of the Jews". The Royal Institute 
 of International Affairs asserted that "the sympathy of Jews was vital to 
 winning the war". 

 Jews fully shared this vision of united and powerful Jewry, writes Segev. 
 The postmaster general Herbert Samuel, a Jew and a Zionist, proposed in 1915 
 to give Palestine to Jews so "millions of Jews scattered around the world, 
 including the two million in the US, would show lasting gratitude for all 
 generations". (It actually lasted less than 20 years until the beginning of 
 Zionist anti-British terror) In a proper British understatement, Samuel 
 wrote, "the goodwill of the whole Jewish race may not be without its value". 
 The Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann "did his best to encourage this 
  impression", says Segev. He "conjured up the myth of Jewish power" and 
 "reinforced British predilection for seeing the Jews everywhere and behind 
 every decisive event". But Brits were not biting - until, in 1917, their 
 military situation became desperate. Russian front had been collapsing under 
 the influence of Bolsheviks, and Germans transferred divisions to the 
 Western front. Britain decided to deal with the Jews so they will push 
 America into European war. 

 III

 Now, Tom Segev did not discover America, but he has introduced a much-needed 
 rhetoric device, called "perception". Wisely, he does not say, "Jews wielded 
 such a power that Britain preferred to deal with them and surrender 
 Palestine sacrificing thousands of British soldiers and millions of 
 Palestinians". Instead, the Israeli writer Tom Segev uses a formula 
 perfectly acceptable even to severe Political Correctness enforcement 
 officers. Not "Jewish power", but "perception of Jewish power". "Belief in 
 Jewish power" was the moving factor, akin to belief in witchcraft. His 
 device and its application allow us to continue to deal with our subject 
 peacefully, leaving the adjacent but troublesome question of reality vs. 
 perception to some other time. 

 A perception is almost as good as a real thing, wrote Mark Twain in his $1 
 million Bill. An American hero of this short story is universally accepted 
 for a millionaire, though he has not a penny on his soul, and he still makes 
 millions on the base of the perception. 

 The New York Times review of Tom Segev's book describes Balfour and other 
 British supporters of Zionists as "acting from anti-Semitic reasons". It is 
 an interesting definition: even devout Christian Zionists fully supportive 
 of the Jewish state, are considered "anti-Semites", if they perceive and 
 refer to the power of Jews. Before WWII, an anti-Semite would consider 
 Jewish power to be a negative force. After the war, in order to be innocent, 
 one should not even notice Jews. That is why an open, no-holds-barred debate 
 of real extent of Jewish power would not be an easy one, as it is 
 notoriously hard to measure and prove influence and no newspaper or TV 
 network of the Western world would touch it with a barge pole. 
 Segev further protects himself by attributing to the Brits a silly belief 
 that "the Jews control the world" . No sane person, from Lloyd George to 
 Hitler, ever thought so. The world is too big and complex to control. But 
 the Jewish apologists usually attribute this exaggerated claim to their 
 opponents, refute it and consider the case closed. We shan't fall for it, 
 and keep the case open a bit longer. 

 Segev does not reason why hard-nosed British politicians and civil servants 
 succumbed to such an illusion, why they did not ascribe the "decisive 
 influence" to West African witch doctors or Chinese Tao masters, but to the 
 Jews. This lacuna is filled by a thick volume by University of California 
 Professor Alfred S. Lindemann published by Cambridge University Press, Esau's Tears. 

 Lindemann refers to the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, when Jacob H. Schiff, 
 the American financier, blocked the Russian attempt to obtain bonds they 
 sought in the international markets to finance the war, and provided 
 financial support for Japan, eventually causing humiliating defeat of 
 Russia. Afterwards, Schiff boasted that "international Jewry is a power 
 after all".   Simon Wolf, another important American Jewish leader, confidant 
 of presidents, lectured the Russians: "The Jews of the world control much of 
 it. There is no use in disguising the fact that in the US, the Jews form an 
 important factor in the formation of the public opinion and in the control 
 of finances. they exercise an all-potent and powerful influence". In 1905, 
 after the Russo-Japanese war, their boasts were accepted as justified. 
 Winston Churchill and Theodore Herzl firmly believed that international 
 Jewry has enormous power in international relations. Professor Lindemann 
 concludes, "they were not wrong in believing that Jews were a power in the 
 world, and a rising one, particularly because of influence they could 
 exercise in the up-and-coming US". 

 Lindemann concurs that the reason behind the Balfour declaration was Balfour's 
 and the US President Wilson's fear that the Germans might make such a 
 declaration, rally influential Jews to the cause of the Central Powers and 
 put paid to the Anglo-American war effort. That is why English rushed to 
 outbid other potential buyers of the perceived Jewish influence. 

 IV

 It is well outside the scope of this piece to decide or even discuss whether 
 the Jews actually delivered the goods as promised, or were they able to do 
 it, or even whether the Jews exist. It would suffice to say that it 
 certainly appears so. America threw its fresh forces to the battlefields of 
 Europe, tired German armies were defeated, Treaty of Versailles sealed the 
 fate of Germany and Palestine. Long standing traditionally good relations 
 between German Jews and Germans were irrevocably ruined by the perceived 
 alliance of the Jews with the enemy of Germany. Eventually, ordinary Jews, 
 ordinary Germans and ordinary Palestinians were made to pay a terrible price 
 for the ambitions of the American Jewish leadership. 

 The British did not dare to cheat on the Jews after the war, as they were 
 threatened again by possible Jewish desertion, this time to the Russian 
 cause. Head of British Military Intelligence General MacDonogh warned the 
 highest circles of the Empire, "The most important thing about Palestine is 
 not its topographical relation to Syria or anything else, but that it 
 interests the whole of the Jews all over the world. Zionists tell me that if 
 the Jewish people did not get what they were asking for in Palestine, we 
 should have the whole of Jewry turning Bolsheviks and supporting Bolshevism 
 in all the other countries as they have done in Russia".

 Quite recently, Israeli right-wing, notably Sharon, Lieberman and Netanyahu, 
 repeatedly stated that "if the Jewish people didn't get what they were 
 asking for in Palestine", they will switch their support to Russia of 
 President Putin. It took a few trips by Israeli ministers to Russia to 
 enforce the American leadership's commitment to support Israel, although it 
 was an empty threat. Now, for a first time in centuries, the Jews lost their 
 perceived position of power brokers between two powers. Putin's Russia is 
 too weak to threaten America; radical Left is rather weak and has no 
 identifiable Jews; European Jews did not recover after the WWII. It is luck 
 (or skill) of Israeli leaders that the US is lead by nincompoop Bush, not by 
 people like President Nixon, or Lord Curzon, the man who said in March 1920: 
 "The Zionists are after a Jewish state with the Arabs as hewers of wood and 
 drawers of water. That is not my view. I want the Arabs to have a chance and 
 I do not want a Jewish State".  But Nixon has been impeached through the 
 efforts of Jewish-owned Washington Post, and Lord Curzon perished in strange 
 circumstances. 

 As he predicted, British Empire got very little good out of the deal with 
 the Jews even in the medium run. British victory over Germany in 1918 was a 
 Pyrrhic one, as it accelerated the decline of the Empire. Many politicians 
 moaned that instead of begging for Zionist alliance and pushing for victory 
 in 1915-1917, it would be better for the British if they would make peace 
 with Germany. 

 British rule in Palestine gave England no influence, no profits, no 
 strategic advantage, it did not even guarantee the Jewish support, leave 
 alone gratitude. Organised mainstream Jewry supported America, Jewish 
 communists supported Russia, while Jewish right-wing looked towards 
 Mussolini and Hitler for inspiration and assistance. Zionist militant 
 organisations, Hagana, Irgun and Stern Gang humiliated, terrorised and 
 murdered British soldiers, officials and statesmen. Very soon, the English 
 understood that they made a big mistake to enter the deal.  They discovered, 
 as many leaders before them and after them, until Yasser Arafat, that one 
 needs a very long spoon to eat with Devil from the same pot. 

 V 

 The love affair between English Prince Charming and Daughter of Zion was 
 over, but she did not remain lonely and deserted. The place of the British 
 gentleman was taken by Joseph Stalin. In 1945-1949, the Soviet Union became 
 the strong supporter of the fledging Jewish state. Russia voted for 
 partition of Palestine, was first to recognise Israel, and was the main 
 supplier of arms to Zionists (via their Czech satellite)  while the West 
 imposed its blockade on the Palestinian side. Eventually, the Russian 
 admirer dumped the girl, like his British predecessor, and returned to 
 support the Palestinian cause. The strange zigzag of Russian policy 
 intrigued politicians and scholars, who offered predictable explanations: 
 "Stalin's desire for Middle East foothold", "Soviet belief in pro-Communist 
 sympathies of Jews in Palestine", "Russia's trying to undermine British 
 imperialism" and surely, "oil", "expansionism" and "imperialism". 

  All these explanations seem plausible. For us, the Israelis, the most 
 favourite one connected Russia's move with the Israeli Left. In 1948, the 
 fighters of Palmach imitated the Red Army, sung Russian songs; some of them 
 had Russian or Polish Communist background. Geo-strategists preferred the 
 Russian search for a harbour in the Mediterranean, while political 
 scientists saw it as the struggle the between Russian Bear and the British 
 Lion for the influence in the Middle East. 

 We would not know the right answer, but last year the Foreign Offices of 
 Moscow and Tel Aviv jointly published two heavy (I know, I carried them) 
 volumes of documents pertaining to this period.  It contains secret and 
 confidential letters by Stalin and to Stalin, and provides a full insight 
 into the Second Lover's Tale. 

 "Yes, our support of Zionist state is a complete break with the 
 long-standing Soviet tradition of supporting anti-colonial and 
 anti-imperialist movements. Yes, this decision of ours will poison relations 
 with the Arab world. Yes, it will enslave the native people of Palestine. 
 But it can sway the American Jews to the side of the Soviet Union, and the 
 American Jews will deliver the US to us" - that was the true reasoning of 
 Stalin and his men. 

 In those years, strong sympathies of the American Jews to the Soviet cause 
 led to the Rosenberg Trial, and Senator McCarthy already felt it in the air. 
 Stalin, as the Brits before him, did not care much about Palestine. He did 
 not consider the British Empire an important enemy - after two world wars, 
 England was ruined. He was not interested in oil. He thought, as the Brits, 
 to make a contract with the Jewry, to give the Jews what they want and to 
 get their support in return. 

 It took him some time to understand his mistake. Israeli strongman David Ben 
 Gurion disabused potential friends of Moscow and stressed that the first and 
 most important friend and master of Israel remains the American Jewish 
 leadership. When the first ambassador of Israel, Golda Meir, arrived in 
 Moscow, Stalin witnessed incredible surge of Jewish solidarity. The Jewish 
 wives of Kremlin commissars, from Mrs Molotov to Mrs Whatshisname, rushed in 
 tears to Mrs Meir as to their long lost sister. The Jews in Russia occupied 
 too many too important positions, and thousands of them crowded the streets 
 in front of the Israeli embassy. Stalin hoped his support of Israel would 
 have helped him to captivate the mind of American Jews, but now he had 
 realised that, by means of Israel, the leaders of American Jews captivated 
 the mind of Russian Jews. Instead of getting the Fifth Column in New York, 
 he allowed Americans (via their Israeli ally) to activate their Fifth Column 
 in Moscow. Stalin underestimated the hold Israel has over Jewish mind. He 
 looked into this abyss and retreated as soon as possible. 

 VI 

 Two previous important partners of the Jewish state supported it as they 
 perceived Jewish influence in America being a joystick to the superpower 
 control board. They believed: give to Jews what they want (Palestine), and 
 they will give you what you want (America). For real or for perception, they 
 came to grief. In a classic English story, A Monkey Paw, a magic tool 
 fulfills the owner's wish but in such a horrible way that he has a reason to 
 regret asking for it. The alliance with Jews had a similar effect. They got 
 what they asked for, - victory in war or pro-Russian stand of American Jews, 
 but came to regret it. 

 Still the belief in Jewish power is the most common one among the elites of 
 the world. That is why many countries send to Tel Aviv their best and most 
 experienced ambassadors, usually on their way to or from Washington Embassy. 
 That is why, whenever a country wishes to beseech Washington, it sends an 
 envoy to Tel Aviv. The Israelis pass the request to the right people in the 
 US, and apparently it works. 

 This belief is the most common one in the US, as well. American politicians 
 support Israel because they share the opinion of Lloyd George and Herzl. 
 They also respect the condition demanded by heirs of Jacob Schiff and never, 
 but never mention the dreadful words, "Jewish power". In the world free of 
 taboos, a new Henry Miller can't shock his readers referring to sex, but to 
 the Jews and their unseen might. 

 Is it only a perception? Perhaps. But the American traditional elites pay 
 for it a real double price: they send their folks to fight a third war 
 within the last hundred years for somebody's else perceived interests, and 
 their positions at the top table disappear daily. This perception bleeds 
 Iraq and Palestine, sends money to Israel, distorts the public discourse. 
 Not in vain, Mark Twain used to say, a perception is almost as good as a 
 real thing. 
 ____________________________________________________________________________ 

 Notes: 
   Palestine Papers, Seeds of Conflict, compiled and annotated by Doreen 
 Ingrams., published John Murray, London 1972 page 77 
   Tom Segev, One Palestine, Complete published by Henry Holt, New York 2001, 
 p 36 
   page 33 
   Cambridge University Press, 1997 
   p 302 
   p 417 
   PRO.CAB. 27/24 quoted by the Palestine Papers. 
   C20/3 quoted by Palestine Papers. 

 Israel Shamir is an Israeli writer based in Jaffa. This article can be 
 freely displayed and transmitted by electronic means. For permission to 
 publish hard copy, to subscribe or unsubscribe to this list, write to 
 shamir@home.se