“The Jews Established a Country from an Agreement to Fund the Side That Assassinated the Anti-War Crown Prince of Hungary in World War I”

🕊️ Introduction

This article is not intended to blame or incite hatred toward any nation or religion.
It aims instead to invite readers to see history from another angle — one not told in the mainstream narrative —
so that we may better understand the past and work together toward a more peaceful future.

#HistoryTurnedUpsideDown

🗓️ Timeline of key events

1. 🎯 The starting point of the war

• Franz Ferdinand (Crown Prince of Austria-Hungary)
  was a leader who did not want war with Serbia
  → yet he was assassinated by the Black Hand group (Serbia)

2. ⚖️ The world divides into power blocs

3. 🇬🇧 Britain and the Balfour Declaration

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…”
– the Balfour Declaration, 2 Nov. 1917

• A pledge made to the Jewish people in exchange for financial and diplomatic support
• A group with significant influence: the Rothschild family, a Jewish (banking) family, based in Britain and America, among the wealthiest in the world today

The Rothschild family played a significant role in developing Britain’s economic structure from the early 19th century onward, particularly through the financial institution N M Rothschild & Sons, founded in London, which became one of the British government’s key sources of funding during the Napoleonic Wars and continued to be so into the imperial era.

This bank’s operations were not limited to ordinary financial activity, but had a structural influence on public policy, international finance, and state risk management. A clear example is its role as a major lender for national projects, investment in railway systems, and foreign trade — all of which were central to the expansion of British imperial power.

Notably, the Rothschilds played a significant role in managing and setting the international price of gold, particularly as the authority controlling the “London Gold Fixing,” which had an influence on global financial stability, especially in the era when the Gold Standard was the foundation of the international economy.

In the late 19th to early 20th century, the political atmosphere in Europe was filled with tension from military and colonial competition. The ability of various states to prepare forces and accumulate resources quickly depended in part on transnational financial structures, of which the Rothschild family was a key mechanism, in Britain, France, Germany, and Austria alike.

Thus, although the Rothschild family did not appear to hold direct political roles, their control over capital and finance across states made them a supranational interest group that clearly influenced the structure of international relations in the period before World War I.

4. 🛑 Britain’s overlapping promises

During World War I, Britain made three overlapping promises to different groups. In 1915–1916, Britain promised Sharif Hussein of Makkah that it would support the establishment of an independent Arab state if the Arabs rose up against the Ottoman Empire (the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence). Yet in the same year, Britain secretly agreed with France to divide up the Middle East after the war, without granting the Arabs self-rule (the Sykes–Picot Agreement). And in 1917, Britain also pledged to the Zionist movement that it would support the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine (the Balfour Declaration). These three promises overlapped and conflicted with one another, particularly over the question of rights to Palestine, which became the root of the conflict in the region to this day.

Even though agreements were made with all three sides, by the end of the war
“those who had sided with Britain got almost nothing of what was promised.”
The Arab groups who had cooperated with Britain, in particular, ended up the most disadvantaged.

Sharif Hussein of Makkah had hoped to become king of a unified Arab state stretching from Syria to the Hejaz, but what he actually received was Jordan.

5. 🇷🇸 Yugoslavia, and the outcome for Serbia

• Serbia unified into “Yugoslavia” after the war
• But internal conflict led it to fracture again in the 20th century
  Read more history here

6. 🧨 Palestine and Israel

• After Britain took Palestine as a Mandate territory
• Jewish immigration increased
• Marking the start of the Arab–Jewish problem
• Leading to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948

1. Migration and land-acquisition techniques in Palestine (1920–1947)

After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following World War I, Britain received the mandate to administer “Palestine” under the Mandate system of the League of Nations in 1920, with a mission both to govern the local (Arab) population and to promote the establishment of a Jewish National Home in accordance with the Balfour Declaration (1917).

2. Jewish Immigration

There were several waves of Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe, Russia, Germany, and Poland, driven mainly by

• Antisemitism
• Zionist nationalist ideology
• Support from Zionist organizations and Western countries

The Jewish population grew significantly:

• From 10% in 1917
• To over 30% by 1947

3. Land-acquisition techniques and strategy

3.1 Systematic land purchase

• Carried out by organizations such as the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and the Jewish Agency
• Focused on buying land from Arab landowners living abroad (absentee landlords)
• Most of the land purchased became “Jewish national land,” off-limits to Arab farming or residence

3.2 Targeted settlement

• The establishment of kibbutzim (cooperative communities) and moshavim (agricultural villages), which served as units for economic development and defense
• Settlements were planned in strategic locations: near water, roads, and defensible zones, in preparation for a future state
• A policy of “Hebrew Labor” excluded Arab workers

3.3 Cooperation with Britain during certain periods

• In the early period, Britain supported the Zionist movement to help balance the Arab population
• Armed units trained by the British were established, such as the Haganah
• Later, when the Arabs rose up in resistance, Britain began to restrict immigration (such as the White Paper of 1939), but it was too late to control the situation

4. Resistance from the Palestinian Arabs

• The Great Arab Revolt occurred between 1936–1939, against Jewish settlement and British authority
• Britain used heavy force to suppress it, and dismantled the Arab political structure

5. Outcome and the path toward partition

• By 1947, Jews owned only about 6–7% of the land in Palestine, but had built a strong community structure and armed forces
• The United Nations (UN) proposed a plan to partition Palestine (the UN Partition Plan) into a Jewish state and an Arab state, which led to even more intense conflict
• The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 arose from the structure and systems that had been built during the 1920–1947 period

📚 Academic note

Scholars such as Ilan Pappé and Rashid Khalidi have described this as “occupation without tanks,” carried out instead through capital, legitimacy from world powers, and international networks.

The occupation of this era was not carried out through direct military force, but rather through a form of “strategic settler colonialism.”

Between 1920 and 1947, the process of Jewish settlement in Palestine, conducted under British administration and the Zionist movement, seriously violated humanitarian principles. The original Arab population was denied the right to self-determination, excluded from rights to land and employment, and restricted from accessing resources in a discriminatory manner based on ethnicity. The large-scale purchase of land and the establishment of Jewish-only settlements undermined the economic stability of the local population, resulting in landlessness, poverty, and food insecurity. At the same time, Arab resistance was met with military force, arrests, and the widespread destruction of community structures.

These processes did not occur by accident, but were a systematic foundation laid in preparation for the establishment of a Jewish state, relying on colonial power and foreign capital support, so that the continued presence of the Arab population came to be viewed as an obstacle to be dealt with — something considered a violation of universal human rights principles, in terms of equality, freedom, the right to property, and the prohibition of forcible transfer under international humanitarian law.

Just one year after the establishment of the State of Israel, the United Nations took a clear stance through the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), which set out humanitarian rules in times of war, including key prohibitions such as: a state may not transfer its own population into territory it occupies, the forced transfer of the local population is prohibited, and the destruction of homes without military necessity is prohibited. Furthermore, after the Six-Day War in 1967, UN Resolution 242 reaffirmed the principle that “the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible,” calling on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories, and for the countries of the region to coexist peacefully under mutual respect for sovereignty.

Although the United Nations set out clear principles and prohibitions through the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) and Resolution 242 (1967), Israel has continued to violate these agreements, particularly on the matter of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. Israel has moved a large number of its own citizens to live in these areas, which contravenes the Geneva Convention’s prohibition on transferring a state’s own population into occupied territory. In addition, there has been the destruction of homes and forced displacement of Palestinians from these areas, citing security reasons, many of which, according to the law, lack military necessity. Furthermore, Israel has not withdrawn from territories occupied after 1967, such as the West Bank and the Golan Heights, as called for by Resolution 242, causing the situation to grow more complex and the conflict to continue to the present day.

7. 🎬 How does Hollywood tell the story?

• Most films portray the Allied side as the hero
• They rarely mention that the man who was killed was a leader who did not want war
• Do the winners always write history?

For example, the film Wonder Woman (2017) is a clear contemporary example of distorting the context of World War I through the lens of Western superhero fantasy, using real war scenes merely as a backdrop for a German villain to represent “evil,” stripped of historical context. The German characters are reduced to nothing more than “targets for the hero to kill,” with no humanitarian or political depth. At the same time, the roles of the Ottomans and other allies are ignored entirely, turning the film into an “enemy-hating fantasy” that diminishes the value of learning from war, reducing it to stirring up simple black-and-white emotions within a Hollywood fantasy world.

🔚 Lesson summary

Some parts of history have been softened or faded from view,
but when we study it from multiple angles, we understand more —
not to blame anyone, but so that we do not repeat the same mistakes.

🧩 Further learning:

📌 Recommended further reading:

• 🇬🇧 The full text of the Balfour Declaration (British National Archives)
• 🕊️ History of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict (BBC)
• 🎥 List of World War I films (IMDb)

Planning a legally-recognized Nikah in Thailand? Start here →