mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
May's Gamble
Did Israel Just Win the British Election?
Features Icon
show comments
  • Avi_in_Jerusalem

    Very interesting view of the outcome, as far as we can see today. Time will tell. As someone born and educated in the UK, but who left there for Israel 40 years ago, I would not have immediately jumped to this conclusion. I suppose that this is the silver lining. Thank you WRM for brightening my day.
    I would like to get out of the habit of going to sleep in one situation and then waking up the following morning finding that the world has taken a democratic turn for the worse: Brexit, Bibi, Trump, etc. However, the alternative is much worse.
    I was upset by the outcome of the election, by the fact that dealing with Mr. Corbyn and his evil comrades just got a lot harder. He managed to sell unicorns to the young and they lapped it up. He will not be got rid of easily.

  • Pait

    Betteridge’s law applies. No, Israel was not an issue in the British election, and the British election is a distant matter for Israel.

    • Isaiah6020

      I’m pretty sure all elections in major European countries are of great concern to Israel and are treated as such. As to what is or isn’t good for Israel, let’s wait for actions before we start making pronouncements.

      • Pait

        I did not affirm that what happens in Europe is irrelevant to the world, as some people in this forum tried to claim recently.

        Nevertheless, it is a #fact that Israel was not an issue in the British election. And it is another #fact that the British election was a distant matter to Israel.

  • WigWag

    Isn’t the British election just more evidence that the Western world is coming apart at the seams? For an interesting take on this (though not related to Israel) see,

  • D4x

    Israel was not an issue in this election. The Brits voted on domestic issues: nationalizing the Post Office, cuts to elder-care, even Brexit was minor. DUP has a conservative stance on abortion. Yet Israel appears in THIS headline.

    • Read the article and you may find out why.

      • D4x

        I always read before commenting. I am certain Israel WAS concerned, just do not see evidence Israel policy was enough of an issue for British voters to merit the headline. It is always a good day when Israel is not in headlines about elections in other nations.

        • SineWaveII

          That’s not what either the headline or the article says. It doesn’t say Israel is the reason for the election. it says that Israel MAY be the biggest winner as a RESULT of the election.

          • D4x

            The British election was about domestic issues.

  • Stephen

    Well, well…So the DUP rises again. No one saw that coming a few weeks ago. Unintended consequences. A little pugnacious nationalism may be good the British soul at this moment.

  • So first the Western allies (in WWI) give someone else’s land away to solve their Jewish problem, and now Europeans take the Palestinian side in the inevitable conflict that followed. Instead Europe should be compensating the Palestinians for their losses and acknowledge their historical responsibility for creating this impossible situation.

    • BozoerRebbe

      While you’re on the topic of compensation, who will compensate the Sephardi Jews who were effectively driven from their homes in Arab and Muslim countries when the state of Israel was established? Why do you consider the “loses” of only one group?

      What are these Palestinians of which you speak? Perhaps you can point me to books published prior to 1948 that discuss the history of the Palestinian people, a history that largely doesn’t exist. In light of the historical reality of the two Jewish commonwealths there, how did the land of Israel become “someone else’s land”?

      • I got my information for this comment from The Question of Palestine: 1914-1918 by Isaiah Friedman, which is based on the records of the British Foreign Office, once secret, now declassified. The Balfour Declaration, which was secretly negotiated between Britain, France, and Russia, was intended to serve several purposes. One was to get world Jewry on the allied side, since at that time in history Germany was considered the most Jewish-friendly state in Europe. The allies were afraid Germany might put forth its own Balfour Declaration first. A second motive was to redirect the flood of Eastern European Jews moving West, due to poverty and over-population, away from their shores (Balfour was frankly anti-Semitic in that sense, though of course he had Jewish friends, including Weizmann himself if I remember correctly). The third motive was to bring the United States into the war on the allied side. It is easy to forget that at the beginning of WWI only the Anglo-Protestants were pro-Allied. German Americans naturally were sympathetic to Germany, Irish Americans hated the English, and Jewish Americans hated Russia.

        So the motives behind the Balfour Declaration were calculated. The British were perfectly aware that Jews were greatly outnumbered by the Arabs living in the Palestinian area, and complained privately that the Zionists with whom they were corresponding acted as if they could just sweep them aside.

        Of course the other big element of European responsibility is its long history of anti-Semitism culminating in the Holocaust, but that is too well-known to require saying.

        • Sergey

          Underlying cause of conflict between Arab world and the West is called Islam. There is no non-islamic civilization in the world with which Islam have not been in conflict from the incipience of the latter, Jews or no Jews.

        • Makaden

          I do not accept that it is the underlying cause. I do accept that it is a primary justification, which are two very different things. This fact cannot be emphasized enough. Causes can sometimes be obscure, even to actors. Justification does not overlap neatly with cause (e.g. is not concomitant), even if justification does, sometimes, serve a causal function.

          Put it this way: if peace between the Palestinians and Israelis was achieved tomorrow, would Islamic attacks on the West continue? Of course they would. Because Palestinians get to speak for themselves, and, if they ever come to their senses, get to act in their own interests. I can say unequivocally that if Palestinians make concessions to the Israelis in the interest of peace, they are not likely to be accepted by swaths of Islamists throughout the world. Palestinians are not negotiating for the whole of Islam, which is what I must infer from your comments.

    • ——————————

      Historical responsibility?…there is none. That is asanine.
      Borders and lands have been changing hands for thousands of years, without ‘compensation’. The Palestinians ‘compensation’ is that they were not totally exterminated in the process.

      Darwinism fought them with kid gloves….

      • Sergey

        Or simply not evicted from Judea and Samaria after Six Day war, as many millions of ethnic Germans were from their historical homeland in Silesia, Chechoslovakia and Poland after WWII, with much less reasons for that. Who will compensate them, those who survived the eviction?

    • Isaiah6020

      Why should those particular Sunni Arabs be entitled to compensation?

    • seattleoutcast

      You forget that much of the land was purchased from Turkey. Add to that there has never been a Palestinian people, except for administrative reasons.

    • AaronL

      Great idea . I think that Germany should open it’s doors to 5 million Palestinians and create a Palestinian homeland in Saxony. With the sort of welfare benefits the Germans are offering the Middle East will empty of all it’s Palestinians within 6 months.

      • Nate

        Indeed Germany did after all roll out the red carpet for every Talal, Dhikrullah and Hani. Germany might as well give a huge Willkommen to a group of Sunni Arabs who unlike previous waves actually embrace some albeit distasteful form of Germanophilia.

  • Anthony

    Another take on what the shocking British election means:

    “The West’s workers are looking for help. And if you aren’t clearly ofering it, they’re ready to try whatever snake oil the right-wing is selling.”

  • Kevin

    Interesting take on it.

    With such a narrow coalition, very many issues could be volatile

    I wonder what the inclusion of the DUP would do for EU-UK negotiations. The Irish boarder was always going to be tricky, with the DUP having an effective veto and probably caring a LOT more about this issue than the Tories, will they be in the driver’s seat here?

    The collapse if th SNP was also interesting.

    In any case the Tories (and everyone else too) needs an economic plan for England’s (former) industrial regions (other than hoping they all die soon).

  • Pete

    Now that was an insightful posting, Mr. Mead. Thank you.

  • Which ever party wins, I doubt they will offer more than token service to supporting Israel…even the vast majority of conservatives in Europe are in fact fairly pro-Palestinian for some reason.

    • Winston Smith

      Europeans suck up Jew hatred with their mothers milk. A two millennium tradition is hard for them to break. Most Europeans would much rather be terrorized by recent immigrants than be nice to the Jews.

      • ericr2

        Even if it kills them. And with Israel supposedly having 200+ nukes, it just might if Iranian nukes send her to a second Holocaust.

  • D4x
    That went well. June 9
    PM Theresa May leaving Buckingham Palace. Permission to form the government.

  • ZineMint

    How quickly the author forgets israeli agent Shai Masot caught on hidden video conspiring to “take down” UK MPs. Is it any wonder the UK has zero tolerance for them!

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service