Laurent Guyénot • The Unz Review • February 02, 2025

In 1853, when the Crimean War broke out between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, the latter was saved by the United Kingdom and France. Twenty years later, Tsar Alexander II, as protector of the oppressed Serbian and Bulgarian Christians, went to war once more against the Ottomans. With the Russians at the gates of Constantinople/Istanbul, the Ottomans were forced to accept the creation of the autonomous principalities of Bulgaria, Serbia, and Romania, by the Treaty of San Stefano. The British were unhappy with this treaty, and together with Austria-Hungary, convened the Congress of Berlin (1878) which canceled it. Russian conquests were taken back, Armenia and Bulgaria were mostly returned to the Ottoman Empire, and the Balkans were fragmented into heterogeneous and conflicting states. This “balkanization” elicited the nationalist resentments that would spark the First World War.

The main objective of the Treaty of Berlin was to save what could be saved from a weakening Ottoman Empire in order to counter Russian pan-Slavic expansion. England, ever jealous of her naval supremacy, wanted to prevent Russia from getting closer to the Bosporus. The British obtained the right to use Cyprus as a naval base, while monitoring the Suez Canal. This was the beginning of Britain’s “Great Game” for colonial rule in Asia, and the containment of Russia, leading in particular to the creation of Afghanistan as a buffer state.

There are several ways to interpret this segment of history that carries the seed of all the tragedies of the twentieth century (“the Jewish century” according to Yuri Slezkine). There are distinct viewpoints about the forces shaping history at this crucial time. But in the end, history is made by men, and it can be understood only if one identifies the main actors and their motives: you just cannot understand the Vietnam War without digging into Johnson’s or Kissinger’s mindset. One name stands out among the instigators of the Treaty of Berlin: Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881), prime minister under Queen Victoria from 1868 to 1869, and again from 1874 to 1880. Disraeli was also the man who made the takeover of the Suez Canal by England possible in 1875, through funding from his friend Lionel de Rothschild, son of Nathan Mayer — an operation that consolidated the Rothschilds’ control over the Bank of England.

Disraeli is a very interesting case, because he was both a major British statesman during Britain’s global hegemony, and a novelist who used his fictional characters to voice his honest thoughts while maintaining a sort of “plausible deniability” (Sidonia speaks, not me!). We have therefore the unique opportunity of being able to read between the lines the man’s true motives in politics. Imagine if Kissinger had written novels with, as central character, a Jew who was driving the empire’s foreign and military policy, while being a close friend of the richest Jewish banker.

Disraeli has been called the true inventor of the British Empire, since it was he who had Queen Victoria proclaimed Empress of India by Parliament, with the Royal Titles Act of 1876 (the top picture is a cartoon depicting Disraeli as a peddler presenting the Queen with the imperial crown). Disraeli was, as said already, the main inspiration for the Congress of Berlin. On top of that, Disraeli was a forerunner of Zionism, who tried to insert the “restoration of Israel” into the agenda of the Berlin Congress, hoping to convince the sultan Abdul Hamid to concede Palestine as an autonomous province. The Sultan rejected the offer, which probably included the promise of financial support for his collapsing economy — as would Herzl’s offer in 1902, also rejected.

…   …   …   …   …   …   …

To read the entire article, click here.

Para ler o artigo todo em português (tradução automática) clicar aqui.

END | FIM