IllE FUTURE OF PA T , PSTINE. T HE return of the German
Emperor to Europe is a fit moment for considering what is likely to be the future of Palestine. But the question,—What will be the future of Palestine? is one of those which is as hard to answer as it is easy to ask. So full of perplexity and danger is it that the diplomatists and statesmen of Europe resolutely turn their backs upon it. They see no possible solution, and therefore they hold it better not to consider it at all. What is the good of irritating the Sphinx by talking about her riddle when you know that all the suggested answers are impossible? The European statesmen know that when the Turkish Grand Vizier said that Turkey was still powerful, because she could at any moment plunge Europe into war by with- drawing the guard at the Holy Places, and letting the Greek and Latin Christians fly at each others' throats, he spoke what was very near the truth, and put in a nutshell the Palestine problem. No one can say what is the future of Palestine, because no one can suggest any satisfactory substitute for the Turkish soldier, who at any rate keeps the peace and prevents any one Power or Church from monopolising the Hol:Land. Yet it is impossible that the Turks can for ever hod Palestine in their ghastly mort, main. Who would dare to say of Turkish rule anywhere, Esto perpetua? The time must come, and it may not be long, when the Turkish Empire will collapse, and then, whether they will or no, the statesmen of Europe must face the problem of Palestine. Needless to say, we shall not attempt here to propose a solution. That would be absurd. What we can do, however, and propose to do, is to set forth some of the conditions which create and control the present situation. The occasion for doing so is not inopportune, for the German Emperor's visit has undoubtedly added a new factor to the problem. Politically it cannot be denied that the German Emperor's visit has proved a great success. German influence in Palestine was nothing ten years ago. Now it is of great and growing import- ance. Then it might have been possible to settle things without reference to Germany. Now, if and when the question of the future of Paleatine has to be dealt with, Germany will take as large a share as any Power in determining what must be done. Whether Germany has really gained or lost strength by her new departure is another matter. We are only concerned with the fact that a new and vitally important factor has been imported Into the question. Hitherto Russia, France, and England were alone politically interested in Syria. Now Germany has as great an interest as any European Power. On paper no scheme looks better for the future of Palestine than that which is connected with the Zionist movement. Roughly, it is that the Jews should be placed in the Holy Land as the trustees for Europe. They would hold Jerusalem and the rest of the Holy Land under guarantees from the Powers, and maintain the status quo. They would, in fact, step into the shoes of the Turks, and hold the balance fairly between the different Christian sects,—Greeks, Latins, Armenians, and Protestants. As the Jew is, or at any rate is. supposed to be—most un- fairly we believe—never really an Englishman, or a German, or a Frenchman, but only a Jew, he would, it is urged, be uninfluenced by any national predilections, and therefore no one Power would be able to say that it had been unfairly treated. Again, there would be a certain fitness in allowing the Jews to return to their own land after their bitterness against the Christians had died out, and after Christian animosity towards them, or at any rate towards their creed, had ceased to be professed by the civilised nations of Europe. Lastly, how convenient it would be to provide a place where the Jewish usurers and petty traders who are not wanted in Europe could be" shot" by the Governments who do not desire to persecute any one for his religion, but who do desire to expel "undesirable citizens,"—and especially those who have hooked noses and a natural capacity for doing better in commerce than the average of their neighbours. In fact, on paper the foundation of an internationally guaranteed Zionist State in Palestine would do beauti- fully, and would settle the vexed question of who is to have the Holy Land when the Turks go. Unfortunately, the scheme is only good on paper and only acceptable by those who believe that the world is governed by reason and not by human passion. The Jews may be the ideal caretakers of Palestine, but they will never act as such, because though the various Christian sects and the Mahommedans hate each other cordially, they all hate the Jews a degree worse. The one bond of sympathy between everybody in Jerusalem who is not a Jew is hatred of the Jews, that hatred being a concentrated essence of religious fanaticism and race-prejudice. The Jews would require a far greater military force than they would ever be likely to obtain to keep the Christians and Mahommedans under proper control.
But if the Jews are incapable of acting as substitutes for the Turks, who can be found to act as guardians of the Holy Places ? An ingenious, but of course impossible, sugges- tion is that America should be put in to keep the peace. America is a. Christian Power, but not officially either Protestant or Catholic or Greek, there being, of course, no State religion. Again, America is not a European Power, and therefore there would be less jealousy of her. Lastly, owing to the American missions and the American College at Beyrout, the Americans have a very large interest already in the Holy Land. Needless to say, however, the idea is absurd. No Power but England would agree to ask America to occupy Palestine, and even if the Powers were unanimous in their request, it is as certain as anything can be that America would refuse. In that case, if, and when, the Turks go, either Russia, France, Germany, or England will become the possessor of the Holy Land. England may, however, be ruled out. We do not want Syria, and would not take it as a gift. We might not, theoretically, like to see a strong Power there; but as long as we command the sea an invasion of Egypt from Syria is quite impossible, and if we do not command the sea we have ceased to count as a, nation, and certainly shall not hold Egypt. Therefore, though we might grumble, it may be assumed that we shall never take Syria. There remain Russia, France, and Germany. Ten, or even five, years ago one would have said that France, as the protector of the Latin Christians and with her so- called historic claims, would probably carry the day. No one would say that now. French influence in Syria and Palestine has greatly declined. In the first place, France has been too busy worrying us about Egypt and other places to be able to pay proper attention to her Syrian interests. What, however, has had a worse effect upon the position of France in Syria, has been the alliance with Russia. You cannot be courting a Power in Paris and growling at the same Power in Damascus and Jerusalem. France had to make her- self agreeable to Russia in the Holy Land, and the result has been an immense increase of Russian activity, and a corresponding decline in French influence. At one time France seemed to the native Syrian the greatest of all European Powers. That is not the case now. Russia, supported by energetic and well-paid Russian Consuls, Russian schools, and Russian monasteries, has taken the place once held by France. Russia has, of course, been quite polite and friendly, and there has been a great deal of talk about mutual co-operation and respect for each other's rights ; but it is quite possible to edge past a man in a crowd and take his place while you are making him the best compliments in the world. To complete the injury to French interests came the rise of German power in Syria and the Emperor's visit. Theoretically, no doubt, Germany has also robbed Russia of a portion of her power, but in reality the loss has all been French. The Russian agents on the spot were, in fact, unaffectedly delighted to see the power of the Latins, as represented by France, so successfully challenged by Germany. While France is fighting to maintain her somewhat vague claim to be protector of the Latin Christians, Russia is in a very businesslike way pressing the claims of the Orthodox Church, of which she is the unquestioned and unquestion- able protector. The days of French preponderance in Syria are, therefore, over, and could only be revived if— which is practically impossible—France should shake her- self free from the Russian alliance and cease her foolish and debilitating attempts to injure British influence in Egypt.
There remain Russia and Germany. In all probability, or rather if things remain as they are, and if there is no great change in Russia's internal condition, Russia will obtain control of the Holy Land, in spite of Germany's opposi- tion. After all, Germany may want Syria, but not at the expense of an invasion of Pomerania. That is one reason.
Another reason is the fact that the Russian people would value the possession of the Holy Places in a way quite different from any other people. Palestine is filled with the monasteries of the Greek Church, and what is more, Palestine is filled with Russian pilgrims,—men who are as real pilgrims as those of the Middle Ages, and not merely Cook's tourists with a religious bias. Watch a Latin pilgrimage, say, from the Tyrol or France, going about Jerusalem, and then compare them with a set of Russian pilgrims bathing at the Fords of Jordan. The Roman Catholic pilgrims are very likely excellent men, full of fervour, and very likely in the best sense more religious than the Russians ; but it is clear that they do not know the ecstasy of devotion, the true pilgrim-fanaticism that belongs to the peasants who have done most of their pilgrimage on their feet and staff in hand. Those men want the Holy Land far more intensely than do the Germans, Protestant or Catholic, and those who want most ardently, when other conditions are fairly equal, are generally those who win. But this is all in the nature of a prophecy, and we have no desire to prophesy. We must add, however, that we do not believe that if Russia ever gets to Syria she will menace us in Egypt. Ten days of practically waterless desert is the very best form of buffer-State, and Russia will find, as did Napoleon and Mehemet Ali, that you can only hold Syria provided you are at peace with the mistress of the seas.
We have only one word more to say. People often ask bow it is that the future of Palestine presents such .difficulties. The reason is simply that Jerusalem—you cannot separate Jerusalem from Palestine—is the sacred city of so many creeds and warring faiths. Not only is it the Holy Place of all the Christian Churches, and two of them quarrel bitterly over it—the Greeks and the Latins—but it is also one of the most sacred places in the Mahommedan world. Mecca and Medina are hardly more sacred than the Mosque of Omar. That is a fact which is often ignored by Europeans, who forget that to turn the Mahommedans out of the Temple Enclosure would disturb the whole Moslem world, from the Straits Settlements to Albania. We must never forget that Mahommedan pilgrims from India visit Jerusalem, just as Christian pilgrims visit it from Europe. Lastly, Jerusalem is profoundly sacred to the Jews, and the Jews are beginning to be locally numerous and important. Most certainly there are no elements of difficulty wanting in the problem of the future of Palestine. Yet perhaps after all the difficulties that seem so great will somehow disappear. The mountains from the plains appear an in- .passable wall. Yet when you get up to them you always find a pass. We can only hope that Palestine will not ,prove an exception.
Previous page
