Which of the following factors brought Zionism to the attention of the British Cabinet?

Jun 2019
21
California
#1
I'm debating with a few of my colleagues as to which three of the following four factors brought Zionism to the attention of Zionism during world war I:

1. The influential role of Chaim Weizmann, a committed Zionist in London with connections to the British government.

2. To improve their chances of being elected by the influential Jewish voters in Great Britain.

3. The belief that Jewish groups in the US and Russia could influence their governments to ally with the British during the war.

4. Britain sponsorship of Jewish settlement in Palestine would require a British presence in the region and keep France out an area contiguous to the Suez Canal zone.

I know that one of these had nothing to do with it, if you could please tell me which of the three really brought zionism to the attention of the British cabinet, I would really appreciate it.
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,382
#2
I'm debating with a few of my colleagues as to which three of the following four factors brought Zionism to the attention of Zionism during world war I:

1. The influential role of Chaim Weizmann, a committed Zionist in London with connections to the British government.

2. To improve their chances of being elected by the influential Jewish voters in Great Britain.

3. The belief that Jewish groups in the US and Russia could influence their governments to ally with the British during the war.

4. Britain sponsorship of Jewish settlement in Palestine would require a British presence in the region and keep France out an area contiguous to the Suez Canal zone.

I know that one of these had nothing to do with it, if you could please tell me which of the three really brought zionism to the attention of the British cabinet, I would really appreciate it.

1, then 3,

Dont' accpet 2 or 4 as being very valid at all.
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,382
#4
it has to be three of the four points, if you had to put money on it, which three of the four points would you choose?
I don;t aacpet your framing. 2 and 4 I do not find as being valid at all, I find them just wrong. I don't regard either as being more valid than the other,

2. The "Jewish Vote" was not a thing at all. British politics, 1st past the pot, just not a thing.
4. The British had presence in many parts of the middle east, no requirement for Jewish State.,
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,889
Italy, Lago Maggiore
#5
I've got a different opinion: I tend to think that geopolitics at the end rules ... so that I pick up number 4. When at London they realized that the Jewish state would haven't been that loyal and useful vassal state, they begun to show a variable behavior. We should note that UK suffered a kind of counter destiny: as soon as Israeal declared the independence US, USSR and then Turkey recognized it just to kick UK out of ME.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,197
SoCal
#6
I'm debating with a few of my colleagues as to which three of the following four factors brought Zionism to the attention of Zionism during world war I:

1. The influential role of Chaim Weizmann, a committed Zionist in London with connections to the British government.

2. To improve their chances of being elected by the influential Jewish voters in Great Britain.

3. The belief that Jewish groups in the US and Russia could influence their governments to ally with the British during the war.

4. Britain sponsorship of Jewish settlement in Palestine would require a British presence in the region and keep France out an area contiguous to the Suez Canal zone.

I know that one of these had nothing to do with it, if you could please tell me which of the three really brought zionism to the attention of the British cabinet, I would really appreciate it.
I agree with pugsville here. Jews were only several percent of the total British population at the very most and thus probably weren't a decisive force in British politics. As for Zionism strengthening the British presence in the Middle East, I'm unsure that Zionist Jews would have been any more willing to be Britain's lackeys than Palestinian Arabs were.

Also, just how powerful were Jewish groups in Russia in 1917?
 
Mar 2015
1,436
Yorkshire
#7
I was just about to recommend an excellent book that I bought recently:
A Line in the Sand: Britain, France and the struggle that shaped the Middle East by James Barr

especially as it was selling for 99pence for the Kindle version on Amazon. It describes in detail the twists and turns which resulted in the carve up of the Middle East following WW1.

However it seems to have been removed from the low price offer list and is now £7.

Point 4 is the closest according to this book. Weizman did manage to convince the key members, but certainly not all, of the British Government that Zionist settlers would work with the British to prevent French (or others) encroaching on the Canal. The Government convinced itself that Jewish settlers would develop the economy, reduce the burden and cost of running the Province and, with luck, in time the benefits would flow to the Arab population (and harmony would break out!).

Added to this David LLoyd George, both a sinner and a committed Christian, had a visceral hatred of the Turk and thought that the Jews had been promised a homeland.

However the dominant reason was saving money and keeping the Canal safe from foreign hands (French).

Of course it was not long before it was realised that Zionists were only willing to support British policy as long as it matched their own aspirations.