Israel is a creation of Britain. This is an indisputable fact. Zionism, which brought Israel into existence, was also a colonialist ideology. While it shares many fundamental ideas with German racism, Zionism is ultimately a product of Britain. When examining Britain’s colonization efforts in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, and their outcomes, the similarities between Zionism and Anglo-Saxon expansionism become apparent. Both have remarkably similar goals. The relationship between
Israel is a creation of Britain. This is an indisputable fact. Zionism, which brought Israel into existence, was also a colonialist ideology. While it shares many fundamental ideas with German racism, Zionism is ultimately a product of Britain. When examining Britain’s colonization efforts in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, and their outcomes, the similarities between Zionism and Anglo-Saxon expansionism become apparent. Both have remarkably similar goals.
The relationship between the United States and the Ottoman-Islamic world did not begin with either World War I or II. To understand the activities of this country properly, we must look back to the 19th century. It is impossible to comprehend the ideology of American schools and missionary activities without considering them within the context of colonial expansionism. Other important elements also fall within this context. For instance, by examining the ideological lines of large and small companies operating in the Levant, we can better understand both the past and the present. However, we first need to define these ideological lines. When we lump all of Europe together, we stray from reality. Thus, we should focus on the fundamental aspects of the Britain-US axis and distinguish them from the others. Over a long period, we have seen that both Britain and the US operate with a highly rigid ideological stance that needs to be analyzed.
Like Britain, the US actively participated in the establishment of Israel during World War I, but its activities in the Eastern Mediterranean date back to the 19th century. The nature of the British-US relationship is beyond the scope of this writing, but when it comes to Israel, we must remember their sequential and intertwined roles. The eager steps of the Germans are also noteworthy in this context. They were involved in the process that led to the creation of Israel during World War I. We know that some German representatives in Istanbul, despite being our allies, were worried about the success of the Canal Operation. However, this does not mean that Britain and the US had the whole of Europe behind them in their Israel project. Today, we see countries like Spain, Ireland, and Norway distinguishing themselves by recognizing Palestine as a state with full territorial integrity. They clearly do not want to be part of the same group.
So, which countries, particularly after World War II, followed the US-UK line, and why? Does this mean they are under a yoke, or did they collectively build Israel as part of a colonial project? Analyzing the steps taken by Spain, Ireland, and Norway will help answer these questions correctly. Rather than a coherent whole, there was a periodical agreement, which we now see dissolving. This brings new questions that need to be answered.
The actions of Israeli terror groups against European, American, and British parties, as mentioned in a previous article, were undoubtedly part of a plan. Today, the Israeli state continues these terrorist actions. These acts of terrorism, carried out according to a plan, reflect an underlying ideology. Without the support of Britain and the US, Israeli terror groups and the Israeli state would not dare to commit these acts. There was a consensus between Anglo-Saxon and Zionist "deep structures," shaping the entire 20th century. Both Europe and the Islamic world were directly affected by this. These deep structures cannot be reduced solely to "Jewish" capital or the Anglo-Saxon bourgeoisie. They were fundamental components of what we call "state logic." French intellectuals and the German middle class could not stand against these deep structures. German and French nationalists and opposition movements were merely tools used by the US, Britain, and Israel.
We can also critique ourselves. Renowned Turkish academics and intellectuals should not absolve themselves by saying "they sold their lands." In the end, the lands that were supposedly sold were once part of the Ottoman-Islamic territory.
At this point, we must give special attention to Hamas, which President Erdoğan refers to as a part of the national resistance.
