{"id":1403,"date":"2020-06-07T23:19:53","date_gmt":"2020-06-08T03:19:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/?p=1403"},"modified":"2020-06-07T23:19:53","modified_gmt":"2020-06-08T03:19:53","slug":"rule-britannia-or-rule-britannia-the-european-union-those-annexing-judaeans","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/2020\/06\/07\/rule-britannia-or-rule-britannia-the-european-union-those-annexing-judaeans\/","title":{"rendered":"Rule, Britannia (or, Rule Britannia!), The European Union, & Those “Annexing” Judaeans"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rule, Britannia<\/strong> (or Rule Britannia<\/em>!), The European Union, & Those \u201cAnnexing\u201d Judaeans\u2026<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

by Gerald A. Honigman<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

To begin with, please open http:\/\/q4j-middle-east.com<\/a><\/strong> and see a Roman coin of conquest for another<\/em> of its very troublesome provinces.<\/p>\n

Note please, a Iudaea<\/em> (Judaea) Capta<\/em> coin–not<\/em> a Palaestina Capta one.<\/p>\n

Vespasian would help subdue the early Brits as he had done with the Jews in Judaea as well. See accounts of contemporary Roman historians, Tacitus and Dio Cassius, regarding the latter here http:\/\/www.israelnationalnews.com\/Articles\/Article.aspx\/10171<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

While not a citizen nor subject of Great Britain (though if things turned out a bit differently about 225 years ago, that perhaps would not be the case), I can\u2019t help hearing the upbeat music of Rule Britannia<\/em>, without sensing pomp and glory.<\/p>\n

At times, the song has taken on different meaning for different people, but it has certainly epitomized the heyday of British global imperial power\u2026 https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Rule,_Britannia<\/a>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, across the Channel, other European hypocrites have been in full bloom as well, adding to the Brits’ own audacity…<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026European Union foreign-policy chief Josip Borrell put forward a surprise resolution on Israel\u2019s new government that included the following: ‘The E.U. does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank. The E.U. reiterates that any annexation would constitute a serious violation of international law’\u201d… https:\/\/www.jewishpolicycenter.org\/2020\/04\/27\/applying-israeli-sovereignty-changing-the-when-not-the-what\/<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Indeed, much if not most of the world is now having a conniption over the thought of Judeans–Jews<\/em>–once again residing and ruling in parts of Judea and Samaria.<\/p>\n

Along with those thoughts above, I recently had an opportunity to view The Iron Lady <\/em>again, a movie about Great Britain\u2019s Margaret Thatcher. Especially relevant was the episode involving her decision to go to war to \u201creclaim\u201d the Falkland Islands (aka, Las Malvinas<\/em>)–some 8,300 miles away from Great Britain off the Argentine Coast. I couldn\u2019t help but ponder Argentina staking claim over the Isle of Wight\u2026https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Isle_of_Wight<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

So, while other nations have indulged in such duplicitous policies, it\u2019s the Brits that I will again focus upon…<\/p>\n

John Campbell\u2019s biography of Great Britain\u2019s former Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher (1979 to 1990), hit the big screen in 2012. Meryl Streep took home another Best Actress<\/em> academy award for her portrayal of the Iron Lady.<\/p>\n

As hinted to above, and like her nation\u2019s overwhelming and centuries\u2019 old imperial past, there are multiple ways of viewing Prime Minister Thatcher\u2019s own actions as well.<\/p>\n

Ask people which empire, in all <\/em>of recorded history, was the largest, and see if they know\u2026<\/p>\n

The British Empire beats them all by far<\/em>–at one time comprising nearly a quarter of the land mass of Planet Earth, and about a quarter of its population up until the post-World War II era.<\/p>\n

Name the location\u2026all North America; British West Indies; Egypt and much of the rest of the Middle East and elsewhere in North and sub-Saharan Africa; Australia and New Zealand; Hong Kong; the former Burma, Ceylon, and the Indian sub-continent and its environs; islands off of South America; etc. and so forth\u2026 not to mention the earlier forced acquisition and consolidation of the Scottish, Welsh, and Irish peoples\u2019 lands.<\/p>\n

Rule Britannia\u2019s<\/em> realm dwarfed all others, and despite many of the Brits\u2019 former possessions now having attained independence, the legacy of that imperial, neo-colonial experience is still very much with those former subjects today, with impacts on much of the rest of us as well. The late 19th century poem by Rudyard Kipling, The White Man\u2019s Burden<\/em>, sums much of this up nicely. While addressing America\u2019s new dabbling in such enterprise after its war with Spain, it was indeed originally written with Great Britain in mind.<\/p>\n

So, with this as background, let\u2019s turn now to just a few events which transpired during the Iron Lady\u2019s days as Prime Minister and which are relevant to this day as well.<\/p>\n

A few years into Thatcher\u2019s administration, in 1982 Argentina once again reached the boiling point over the audacity of British imperial and colonial policies which had resulted in its earlier snatching islands just a few hundred miles off the Argentine coast.<\/p>\n

About 8,300 miles away from Great Britain, Las Malvinas<\/em>–aka, the Falkland Islands–were perceived as a thumb in the eye of Argentine pride. As hinted to earlier, for example, think of the latter staking claim to the Isle of Wight or the Hebrides off of \u201cGreat Britain\u201d– Scotland\u2019s coast. Indeed, ask some Scots themselves how they feel about that forced union. Does the movie Braveheart <\/em>ring a bell?<\/p>\n

Anyway, after the Argentine invasion to \u201creclaim\u201d Britain\u2019s\u00a0 8,300 miles-away possession, the Iron Lady\u2019s military went to war to re-conquer the islands in the name of British sovereignty and national interests\u2026once again, almost a third of the circumference of the world away from home.<\/p>\n

For comparison, and related to the misnamed \u201cannexation\u201d issue regarding Judeans and Judea–let\u2019s turn the clock back to the June (\u201cSix Day\u201d) 1967 War in the Middle East. And, to really <\/em>understand the point, we\u2019ll have to go back even further\u2026to the break-up, after World War I, of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, which controlled much of region for some four centuries.<\/p>\n

The Brits had made a lot of conflicting promises to lots of different peoples during those days.<\/p>\n

Giving them the benefit of the doubt–and going beyond those who would claim just neo-colonial, divisive (to still remain in control<\/em>) policies–there was also a sincere feeling, in at least some circles, that long-suppressed, different peoples should finally get a taste of freedom and independence themselves.<\/p>\n

Arabia for the Arabs, Judea for the Judeans<\/em> (Jews), Armenia for Armenians, and Kurdistan for Kurds<\/em> was one way of expressing this view, and President Woodrow Wilson\u2019s famous \u201cFourteen Points\u201d emphasized this as well. The hopes and aspirations of other peoples, like Assyrians, have also periodically surfaced.<\/p>\n

Having said this, those magnanimous views, however, often clashed with the folks actually running the British Foreign Office and such.<\/p>\n

Thus, to not anger Arabs, the Brits, whose imperial navy had recently switched from coal to oil, reneged on promises to the Kurds–currently some 40 million truly<\/em> stateless people who pre-dated Arab and Turk conquerors by millennia in the Mandate of Mesopotamia and elsewhere.<\/p>\n

After receiving a favorable decision from the League of Nations regarding the heavily Kurdish-populated northern oil fields in 1925\u00a0 which awarded that territory to the British Mandate instead of to Ataturk’s new Turkish Republic, London supported only Arab nationalist interests in what would soon become a united Iraq instead. Specially designed British Hawker-Hunter (anti-guerilla) attack aircraft would help to take care of the Arabs\u2019 Kurdish headaches soon afterwards…https:\/\/www.google.com\/search?biw=1680&bih=936&sxsrf=ALeKk021kD6QAYqrcKcpEp4yYi7eX4aNWw%3A1591582152091&ei=yJ3dXuCFBYGKggfSkKToBg&q=%22british+petroleum+politics%2C+arab+nationalism%22+by+gerald+a.+honigman&oq=%22british+petroleum+politics%2C+arab+nationalism%22+by+gerald+a.+honigman&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQDDIHCCMQrgIQJ1DaOljaOmDeWGgAcAB4AIABb4gB3QGSAQMwLjKYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjgibnGkfHpAhUBheAKHVIICW0Q4dUDCAs<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

A few years earlier, London was involved in similar Rule Britannia<\/em>, imperial shenanigans\u2026<\/p>\n

While Jews had earlier been promised that they would be able to live throughout the Brits\u2019 other, smaller Mandate of Palestine, in 1922 almost 80% of the land was handed over to Arab nationalism, in one of its many permitted subspecies, instead. How is it that Arabs get to have dozens of states, yet other peoples are still deprived of one?<\/p>\n

The Emirate of \u201cTransjordan\u201d was thus virtually severed from the remaining 20% of the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine\u2019s territory, while still technically being part of the Mandate until gaining independence in 1946.<\/p>\n

Led by the Brits\u2019 Sir John Bagot Glubb (\u201cGlubb Pasha\u201d), Transjordan\u2019s Arab Legion seized lands west of the Jordan River in its attack on a minuscule reborn Israel in 1948; subsequently holding territory on both banks, it soon renamed itself Jordan.<\/p>\n

Note<\/u>: The conquest of historical Judea and Samaria (only recently thus being dubbed the \u201cWest Bank\u201d as well), was an illegal <\/em>occupation of non-apportioned <\/em>(not \u201cpurely Arab\u201d) territory in the Mandate, and no nations other than Pakistan and the Brits themselves recognized this.<\/p>\n

Having been blockaded at the Straits of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba by Egypt and shelled by the Jordanians a bit later (casus belli), when Judeans took the land in their war for survival in 1967, they were thus re<\/em>-taking it from an illegal occupier.<\/p>\n

In his book upon which the movie, Iron Lady, is based, John Campbell refers to\/insinuates that Israel\u2019s defensive actions on the West Bank amounted, instead, to the illegal acquisition of \u201cPalestinian\u201d lands. It\u2019s confusing as to whether those words are his thoughts or are actually those of the Iron Lady\u2026Either way, they\u2019re disturbing and simply wrong.<\/p>\n

Contrary to Arab assertions, the disputed lands were indeed non-apportioned<\/em>, and all<\/em> the Mandate\u2019s residents were allowed to live there. Consider, however, that Arabs also claim virtually the entire region to be just \u201cpurely Arab patrimony\u201d as well. Much, if not most, of the area were state lands, and Jews had lived and owned property there until they were slaughtered by Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s; and Transjordan officially made its East Bank<\/em> territories Judenrein (as it had made itself) after 1948.<\/p>\n

Again, the Brits have been a mixed blessing on all of these matters, wavering back and forth between issues of real politik<\/em> and fair justice, and in some ways have been better than some other folks across the English Channel. And the Iron Lady was no exception, despite her relative<\/em> friendliness to Israel compared to what it has faced coming out of her nation since she left office.<\/p>\n

Thatcher\u2019s Britain–which could fight Argentina 8,300 miles from home in the name of Her Majesty\u2019s national (if not also still imperial<\/em>) interests–would, with other European Union folks,\u00a0 constantly press Israel to return the territories used to launch attacks against it and on which Judeans\/Jews (unlike Brits on the Falklands, French Polynesia, American Samoa, Russian Chechnya, etc.) have thousands of years of history and land ownership connecting them to.<\/p>\n

Great Britain, France, Belgium, Germany, and other EU nations (not to mention Russia and the Arabs\u2019 own internal conquests and colonization of scores of millions of native non-<\/em>Arab peoples themselves)–which acquired territories and conquered peoples all around the globe, while grabbing their natural resources as well–see no discrepancy threatening Jews and complaining about an allegedly \u201cexpansionist\u201d Israel because, having been repeatedly attacked by Arabs who want their sole, minuscule nation destroyed, state that they need something beyond the 9-15 mile wide sardine can that Israel was left as after the UN-imposed Auschwitz\/armistice lines were imposed in1949…In other words, the very territorial compromise that, ironically, the British Foreign Secretary, as will be discussed below, had promised Israel earlier himself.<\/p>\n

As still goes on today, \u201cland for peace\u201d became the constant lecture–even from the friendly Iron Lady–though it was quite clear to all with eyes open and neurons intact that the only \u201cpeace\u201d the vast majority of Arabs had in mind for Israel was the peace of the grave<\/em>–regardless of its size. That Israel IS is the problem…<\/p>\n

What makes this all the more confusing is that it was indeed an earlier British Foreign Secretary himself, Lord Caradon, serving as chief architect of the final draft of UNSC Resolution 242 in the aftermath of the June \u201967 War, who deliberately<\/em> built in a territorial compromise over the disputed territories so that Israel would, at long last, get more secure, defensible, and real political borders instead of the armistice lines imposed upon it in 1949 after the combined Arab attack the year before. 242 also calls for “recognition,” but since most Arabs wouldn’t accept a 9-15 mile wide Israel, forget about them agreeing to anything bigger. Israel cannot be held hostage to such rejectionist thinking.\u00a0Find Israel on a world globe without a magnifying glass\u2026I dare you.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Here were the Iron Lady\u2019s colleague, Lord Caradon\u2019s, very words on this subject\u2026<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u201c\u2026It would have been wrong to demand Israel return to positions of June 4, 1967 \u2026 those positions were \u2026 artificial \u2026 just places where soldiers of each side happened to be on the day fighting stopped in 1948 \u2026 just armistice lines. That\u2019s why we didn\u2019t demand Israelis return to them\u2026\u201d http:\/\/www.israel.org\/MFA\/ForeignPolicy\/Peace\/Guide\/Pages\/Statements%20Clarifying%20the%20Meaning%20of%20UN%20Security%20C.aspx<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

With this in mind, Jews would obviously have to repopulate areas in Judea and Samaria in which they indeed had lived earlier\u2026for millennia. Until the Jordanians destroyed numerous synagogues and such, this included East Jerusalem as well, the location of Judaism\u2019s holiest of sites, the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.<\/p>\n

To get what 242\u2019s final accepted draft promised–territorial compromise–it\u2019s thus a no brainer<\/em> that Jews would have to actually live on the land. Hence the confusion over this next alleged statement from the Iron Lady in 1980, recorded in a secret diplomatic cable written by Ambassador John Robinson on May 4, 1980:<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026Efforts to convince (Prime Minister) Mr. Begin that his West Bank policy was absurd, and that there should not be Israeli settlements on the West Bank, had failed to move him\u2026 His response was that Judea and Samaria had been Jewish in biblical times and that they should therefore be so today\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

To her credit, however, she also made the following statement on page 246 in her book, Statecraft: Strategies For A Changing World:<\/u><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026Israel must never be expected to jeopardize her security: if she was ever foolish enough to do so, and then suffered for it, the backlash against both honest brokers and Palestinians would be immense \u2013 \u2018land for peace\u2019 must also bring peace\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

As a relevant footnote to this overall topic and discussion, please also consider that the Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations and other solid documentation show that the vast majority of Arabs were newcomers into the Mandate themselves\u2026i.e., Arabs settlers setting up Arab settlements<\/em> in Palestine.<\/p>\n

Indeed, after the combined Arab invasion in 1948 backfired on the Arabs themselves, so many Arabs in the Mandate were indeed newcomers that the United Nations Relief Agency set up to assist Arab refugees had to adjust the very definition of that word to assist those people.<\/p>\n

So many Arabs were recent arrivals\u2014settlers–themselves that UNRWA had to change the very definition of \u201crefugee\u201d from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident<\/em> to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948\u2026Please understand what this is saying.<\/p>\n

And there was no special agency set up to help numerically more Jewish refugees, fleeing so-called \u201cArab\u201d\/Muslim lands, than Arabs who were fleeing in the opposite direction due to a war which Arabs started over Israel\u2019s rebirth on less than one fourth of one per cent of the region. Sephardi<\/em> and Mizrahi<\/em> Jews make up more than half of Israel\u2019s Jewish population–with numerous others having fled elsewhere as well.<\/p>\n

While the Iron Lady is missed for her relative <\/em>fairness towards Israel in the midst of a Europe which spews much animus and duplicitous hostility towards the Jew of the Nations<\/em>, besides the troubling example mentioned above, there were other disturbing episodes as well\u2026like when she joined American political leaders, such as George H.W. Bush, James Baker, and others, in condemning Israel\u2019s surgical destruction of Saddam Hussein\u2019s Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq.<\/p>\n

Just imagine if Saddam had the bomb<\/em> when he invaded Kuwait, went to war with Iran, and so forth\u2026<\/p>\n

Working non-stop on behalf of freedom for the Soviet Union\u2019s Jewish refuseniks, Mrs. Thatcher then made the painful, incorrect leap, however, comparing them to allegedly \u201cstateless\u201d Arab refugees. The plight of the latter was indeed largely a self-inflicted wound\u2026that of the former folks was not. http:\/\/www.icjs-online.org\/index.php?article=263<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Furthermore, to date, Arabs have almost two dozen states–including one that Great Britain itself awarded to them on almost 80 % of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine–today\u2019s Jordan. Arabs refused another proposed partition in 1947 which would have given them about half of the 20% that was left.<\/p>\n

Question<\/u>: What compromises have Arabs ever<\/em> been willing to make with any of their own national competitors?<\/p>\n

90% of the total territory was not enough\u2026<\/p>\n

Jews were entitled to nothing<\/em> in this self-centered vision of justice\u2026the same subjugating Arab mindset which victimizes scores of millions of other non-<\/em>Arab peoples in the region to this very day as well. Ask Kurds, the Amazigh\/\u201dBerbers,\u201d Copts, Assyrians, black Africans in the Sudan and elsewhere, Semitic–but pre-Arab conquest–Lebanese, native \u201ckilab yahud\u201d Jew dogs, <\/em>and others as well what they think about this matter\u2026 https:\/\/ekurd.net\/arabism-zionism-journeys-2019-01-12<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

No doubt, it\u2019s very disappointing when folks like the Iron Lady fail to see such differences.<\/p>\n

In the broader perspective, however, and despite all of the above and other \u201cflaws\u201d (just ask the Irish), when judging world leaders, the world would be a better place if Margaret Thatcher was still in her office at 10 Downing Street today\u2026<\/p>\n

And the good news is that with Prime Minister Boris Johnson now at that residence, the Iron Lady\u2019s legacy may not only live on, but perhaps may improve as well.<\/p>\n

www.geraldahonigman.com<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rule, Britannia (or Rule Britannia!), The European Union, & Those \u201cAnnexing\u201d Judaeans\u2026 by Gerald A. Honigman   To begin with, please open http:\/\/q4j-middle-east.com and see a Roman coin of conquest for another of its very troublesome provinces. Note please, a … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[22,62,73,158,160,232,267,285,293,301,302,450,454,469],"class_list":["post-1403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-1967-mideast-war","tag-arab-nationalism","tag-argentina","tag-european-union","tag-falkland-islands","tag-israel","tag-judea-and-samaria","tag-kurds","tag-lord-caradon","tag-mandate-of-mesopotamia","tag-mandate-of-palestine","tag-the-iron-lady","tag-transjordan","tag-unsc-res-242"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1403","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1403"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1403\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geraldahonigman.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}