Hybrid warfare is a form of hostile action in which the aggressor avoids direct military intervention and acts through proxy forces. Its arsenal is diverse:
political pressure through supranational organizations in the international arena;
information warfare distortion of the information space to demonize the enemy and glorify one's own proxy forces;
armed attacks by neighboring states;
subversive activities of intelligence services on enemy territory;
financing and support of opposition, separatist, and terrorist structures within the target state.
Hybrid warfare is the British ruling class's favorite tool. It resembles an octopus attack: the center remains in the shadows, while the victim perceives each tentacle as an independent force. This is exactly the picture that the media supports. But those who sees the whole picture discerns a single coordinating center.
Since the European Revolutions of 1848, the British ruling class has waged hybrid wars against its main geopolitical adversaries Germany, Russia, and the United States. Since the collapse of the British Empire, Israel has been added to this list.
This article is devoted to the hybrid war against the State of Israel. It is here that the tactics, methods, and character of the forces known as the "British ruling class" are particularly evident.
Looking at this example is also important because most modern nations, to varying degrees, find themselves the targets of aggression from this force, often without realizing it.
BRITAIN EXPLOITS ETHNIC CONFLICT TO PREVENT THE EMERGENCE OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL
The war of the British ruling class against the future state of Israel began in the first half of the 1920s, when, after World War II, Great Britain established control over Mesopotamia (today Iraq) and Palestine.
In 1922, the League of Nations granted London a mandate to administer Palestine. The basis for this was the Balfour Declaration, in which the British government pledged to "establish in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people" [1][2].
However, Britain came to the Middle East not to create a Jewish state, but to establish control over the oil fields of Mesopotamia in the Mosul region.
When the Kirkuk-Haifa pipeline was commissioned in 1934, and Mosul oil began flowing to the shores of the Mediterranean, Palestine and the port of Haifa became crucial to Britain. Royal Navy ships and tankers carrying oil to the British Isles refueled there. For London, it was the closest and most important source of "black gold".
Time magazine in April 1941, emphasizing the importance of the pipeline, called it "the carotid artery of the British Empire" [3].
Palestine also served as a buffer zone protecting the Suez Canal, a key transportation artery of the British Empire. Through the Suez, Persian oil produced by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company was delivered to Europe on Shell tankers [4-6].
Given Palestine's economic and strategic importance, the British ruling class, despite its commitments in the Balfour Declaration, had no original intention of handing over the territory to the Jews. This is explicitly stated in the article "Creation of Israel, 1948", published on the US State Department website:
"The British, who held a colonial mandate for Palestine until May 1948, opposed both the creation of a Jewish state and an Arab state in Palestine as well as unlimited immigration of Jewish refugees to the region" [7].
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book "The Anglo-American Establishment", provides even more frank testimony. He cites the position of the Milner Group, one of the most influential factions of the British ruling class, regarding the future of Palestine:
"The attitude of the Milner Group to the question of Zionism was vividly expressed by Lord Milner himself in a speech in the House of Lords on June 27, 1923 (which he concluded with the words): Palestine... must never become a Jewish state" [8].
The Balfour Declaration was, in practice, a diplomatic ploy that allowed London to retain Palestine under its control for as long as possible:
On the one hand, it provided Britain with an argument against Arab claims to Palestine, citing its commitments to the Jewish people and the decision of the League of Nations.
On the other hand, it allowed Britain to renounce its commitments to the Jewish people, citing the proviso in Part II of the Declaration. It stated: "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".
In order to put this clause into effect, the British authorities in Palestine decided to ignite an Arab-Jewish conflict. To this end, they released the leader of the Arab nationalists, Amin al-Husseini, from prison and appointed him Mufti of Jerusalem [5][9].
Husseini lived up to the expectations of his British patrons. In May 1921, he organized anti-Jewish riots in Jaffa, during which 90 Jews and 62 Arabs were killed [5].
Taking advantage of the riots, Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill issued the First White Paper a month later, which began Britain's retreat from the commitments made in the Balfour Declaration.
The First White Paper:
limited Jewish immigration to Palestine, tying it to the country's economic capabilities;
asserted that "the transformation of Palestine into a Jewish country to the same extent that England is English is impossible";
limited the territory of the "Jewish National Home" to 30% of Palestine west of the Jordan River;
secured the allocation of 70% of Palestine for the creation of the Arab Emirate of Transjordan [11][12].
Husseini's activities, encouraged by the British administration, resulted in a wave of mass murders of Jews in Hebron, Safed and Haifa in August 1929. The Hebron massacre was the most brutal, claiming the lives of 67 of the city's 700 Jewish residents. The evacuated Hebron community, which had existed since biblical times, ceased to exist [13].
By 1936, Husseini's influence had reached such a level that he was able to organize an Arab armed revolt that now threatened the British Empire itself. The suppression of the revolt took more than two and a half years. During this time, over 5,000 Arabs, approximately 400 Jews, and 200 Britons were killed [14].
After Husseini had fulfilled his role, the British administration removed him from his post as Chairman of the Supreme Muslim Council and arrested the council's members.
The Arab Revolt resulted in Colonial Secretary MacDonald's Sixth White Paper, published in May 1939 three months before the outbreak of World War II. Under its terms, Britain:
abandoned its obligations under the Balfour Declaration and declared that the new "aim of His Majesty's Government is the establishment within ten years of an independent Palestinian State" with an Arab majority;
banned Jews from acquiring land in Palestine;
restricted the establishment of new Jewish settlements on Jewish-owned land;
limited Jewish immigration to Palestine to 15,000 per year for the next five years;
since 1944, has completely closed Palestine to Jewish immigration [15][16]
Thus, 22 years after the Balfour Declaration, the British ruling class finally cast off philanthropic mask, revealing its original intentions, for which the Declaration served as a cover. (For more details, see the article "The British Ruling Class and the Balfour Declaration".)
Conclusions
The history of the Balfour Declaration leads to the following conclusions:
1. An agreement with the British ruling class is worthless if the other side has no leverage to force it to comply with its obligations.
2. The British ruling class is trying to undermine the position of its agreement partner in order to avoid fulfilling its obligations.
BRITAIN IS USING NAZISM TO TRY TO PREVENT JEWISH REFUGEES FROM EMIGRATING TO PALESTINE
In the spring of 1944, London's policy of closing Palestine to Jews was threatened. The Nazi leadership proposed to Jewish leaders in Great Britain, the United States, and Palestine that they exchange 800,000 Hungarian Jews for goods needed by Germany.
In response, the British ruling class tasked Jewish leaders with thwarting this initiative and ensuring the accelerated deportation of Hungarian Jews to concentration camps.
In the course of carrying out this task, the London office of the Jewish Agency, through its Budapest branch, entered into an agreement with the leadership of the Third Reich. The agreement's purpose was to facilitate the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Nazi concentration camps. As a result, almost all Hungarian Jews were sent to death camps over the course of three summer months in 1944.
Despite the fact that Jews were Britain's allies in World War II as Jewish Agency President Chaim Weizmann publicly declared three days before the war [17] the British ruling class did not hesitate to send 800,000 Jews to their deaths, considering them a threat to its interests.
This leads to the conclusion: the British ruling class honors its alliance commitments only as long as they align with its interests. This position was formulated back in the 19th century by Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow" [18].
BRITAIN IS USING THE ARMIES OF ARAB STATES TO DESTROY THE STATE OF ISRAEL
After World War II, seeking to prevent the creation of a Jewish state, the British ruling class turned to Arab regimes. To this end, London initiated the creation of the Arab League, which united Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Egypt. The agreement establishing the LAS was signed on March 22, 1945, in Cairo. Saudi Arabia and North Yemen later joined the organization [19][20].
Abdul Rahman Azzam, previously Egypt's Minister of Religious Affairs, was elected the first Secretary General of the Arab League. He also headed the London office of the Muslim Brotherhood. Educated in London, Azzam subsequently settled in the British capital [21].
In 1947, on the eve of the UN vote on the partition of Palestine, British intelligence in the Middle East, under the leadership of General Iltyd Clayton, together with the governments of the Arab League countries, coordinated preparations for an attack on the future Jewish state.
On September 23, 1947, the French attach in Baghdad informed his superiors of a secret British plan to spark an Arab-Jewish war in Palestine.
After the expected victory over the Jewish state, Britain planned to divide the captured territory between the attackers. London intended to retain Haifa with its port and oil refineries, as well as the Negev region, which opened the route to Sinai and Egypt [22].
The British plan was put into action on May 15, 1948, when the armies of five states members of the Arab League invaded Israel.
In January 1949, when it became clear that Arab armies would be unable to destroy Israel, Britain decided to attack the Jewish state directly. Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin issued an ultimatum: unless Israeli troops immediately withdrew from Egyptian territory, Britain would enter the war.
The threat of an Anglo-Israeli conflict was removed thanks to the intervention of President Truman and pressure from the British public, which did not want to participate in another war [23].
Conclusions
While the British ruling class needed Jews to secure a mandate to govern Palestine and deflect Arab claims, it promoted the creation of a Jewish national homeland in Palestine. Having achieved its goal, London began to backtrack on its commitments, then repudiated them, and finally tried to exterminate the Jews.
The British pulled a similar trick during the First World War against their ally, Russia. Seeking to keep Russia in the war, they entered into a secret agreement with the Tsar, promising to hand over Constantinople and the Dardanelles Strait to Russia in the event of victory. However, London had no intention of fulfilling this promise, since blocking Russia's access to the Mediterranean was traditional British policy.
In February 1917, the British ambassador to Russia, George Buchanan, relying on local anti-monarchist circles, facilitated a coup that led to the tsar's abdication. Upon learning of the fall of tsarism, British Prime Minister Lloyd George, rubbing his hands, declared: "One of England's war aims has been achieved!" [23a].
The conclusion is that treaties and alliances with the British ruling class are dangerous, as promises can be followed not only by reneging on them but also by attempts to destroy the partner. This attitude of the British towards their allies was aptly described by the Russian general Alexei Edrikhin-Vandam: "It is bad to have an Englishman as an enemy, but God forbid to have him as a friend!"
BRITAIN USES THE SOCIALIST INTERNATIONAL TO EXERT INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE ON ISRAEL
After World War II, the British ruling class (BRC) took steps to reassert its influence over the global left. To this end, the Fabian Society (the BRC's think tank) and the Labour Party under its control re-established the Socialist International, an international coalition of left-wing parties headquartered in London, in 1951 [24].
The Socialist International, which unites 132 parties from over 100 countries, is an important instrument of political influence, allowing Britain to promote its interests on the world stage.
In 1995, the Socialist International (SI) was granted consultative status at the UN [35a], allowing it to influence the agenda of the UN Economic and Social Council [35b]. This gave the British ruling class additional leverage over the UN system.
In 2017, SI President Antonio Guterres was elected UN Secretary-General. Upon assuming the helm, he outlined the priorities of British globalism, including:
expanding the powers of the UN at the expense of weakening the sovereignty of nation states;
using the climate agenda to curb economic growth;
stimulating migration from Asia and Africa with the aim of destroying European civilization;
supporting radical Islamic organizations and states;
a hardline anti-Israel stance;
a policy of global population reduction.
The climax of Guterres' tenure as Secretary-General was the COVID-19 pandemic, which he, together with Prince Charles, described as the "Great Reset of the Global Economy" [25].
The British ruling class is actively using the Socialist International in its hybrid war against the state of Israel.
A striking example is the campaign initiated by London in April 2025 to recognize the non-existent state of Palestine [26][27]. Its goal is to prevent the Israeli leadership from destroying the terrorist organization Hamas, which, as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, acts as a proxy for Britain [28].
The initiative of British Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party, Keir Starmer, to recognize the State of Palestine has been supported by heads of state leading parties that are members of the Socialist International or are within the British sphere of influence. Among them are:
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, leader of the Liberal Party and former governor of the Bank of England;
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, leader of the Labour Party;
Malta Prime Minister Robert Abela, leader of the Labour Party;
Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Stre, leader of the Labour Party;
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Snchez, leader of the Socialist Workers' Party;
Portuguese Prime Minister Lus Montenegro, leader of the Social Democratic Party;
French President Emmanuel Macron [29-33].
In the above list, the members of the Socialist International are:
The British Labour Party;
The Australian Labour Party;
The Norwegian Labour Party;
The Maltese Labour Party;
The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party.
Other parties and political leaders are, to varying degrees, within London's orbit of influence:
The Liberal Party of Canada is a member of Liberal International, headquartered in London.
French President Emmanuel Macron is a former employee of Rothschild & Cie, a bank owned by the Rothschild family, which has remained a symbol of British influence for centuries [34].
Portugal, since the overthrow of the monarchy in 1910, has been within the British sphere of influence, regardless of the political orientation of the party in power [35].
Conclusions
If a group of countries is taking concerted hostile steps against your country, it makes sense to take a closer look at the political affiliations of their leaders.
If these countries are led by leaders of left-wing parties, then, in all likelihood, the actions against your country are being coordinated from London from the headquarters of the Socialist International or the Fabian Society.
BRITAIN USES THE ISRAELI LEFT AS A "FIFTH COLUMN" WITHIN THE JEWISH STATE
After the Fabian Society established control over the global left in 1951, left-wing parties in various countries essentially became London's "fifth columns".
In Israel, these "fifth columns" are two left-wing parties, leading the so-called "left camp":
The Social Democratic Party Meretz (formerly Mapam).
Both parties consistently adhere to London's policy aimed at weakening and eliminating the state of Israel. The reason for such blatant betrayal lies not only in their membership in the Socialist International. The Israeli left and the British ruling class are linked by the blood of Jewish victims of the Holocaust, whose extermination they took part in [50].
Following the defeats of the Arab armies that attacked Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, the British ruling class concluded that it was impossible to destroy the Jewish state militarily. Subsequently, a different tactic was chosen: strangling Israel under the guise of the so-called "peace process."
A key role in the implementation of this tactic was assigned to the Israeli left and its leader Shimon Peres, elected vice-president of the Socialist International in 1978 [36].
It took the left two decades to cultivate a generation of Israelis raised in the spirit of pacifism and willing to make unilateral concessions. Their rise to power in 1992 marked the beginning of a forced "peace process," the catastrophic consequences of which Israeli society has yet to overcome.
Israeli leftists are creating a terrorist Palestinian Authority
On September 13, 1993, the Israeli left and Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords, a document that marked a tragic turning point in the history of the Jewish state [37]. The Norwegian Labor Party, one of the most anti-Israeli forces within the Socialist International, played a significant role in their preparation.
As part of the agreements, the left brought Yasser Arafat and his 50,000-strong army of terrorists from Tunisia to Israel and created for him the Palestinian Authority as a prototype of a future Palestinian state.
Once inside Israel, Arafat turned to what he knew best: terrorism [38]. During the terrorist war, known as the "Oslo War" [39], in the first five years after the signing of the Accords, the number of Israelis killed by Arafat's terrorists exceeded the figures for the previous fifteen years. In total, in the fifteen years since the signing of the Oslo Accords, approximately 1,470 Israelis have been killedwhich, in terms of population, is equivalent to approximately 33,000 deaths in Russia or 67,000 in the United States [40-43].
For his services in undermining security, Shimon Peres was generously rewarded by forces hostile to the State of Israel:
In 1994, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with Yasser Arafat;
In 1999, he was elected Honorary President of the Socialist International [44];
In 2008, Queen Elizabeth II awarded Peres the title of Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St Michael and St George;
In 2010, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs awarded Peres an Honorary Doctorate from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations;
In 2012, he was awarded the title of Honorary Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences;
Also in 2012, US President Barack Obama awarded Peres the Medal of Freedom.[45][46]
Israeli leftists are creating a Hezbollah terrorist enclave on the northern border
Not content with unleashing a terrorist war, Israel's left-wing government initiated a unilateral withdrawal of IDF troops from southern Lebanon in 2000 [47].
This move led to the formation of a Hezbollah terrorist enclave on the northern border. Its consequences included rocket attacks on northern Israel and two full-scale wars.
Israeli leftists are creating a Hamas terrorist enclave on the southern border
Having eliminated security on the northern border, the left turned its attention to the south. In 2005, the Israeli left-wing government withdrew troops and evacuated Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip [48]. As a result, the terrorist quasi-state of Hamas emerged there, which began systematically shelling southern Israel.
The result of this policy was the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, in which 1,200 Israeli citizens were killed [49].
The result of the "peacekeeping" activities of the Israeli left
The result of the Israeli left's "peacekeeping" activities has been a semi-ring of terror encircling the Jewish state on three sides: Hezbollah in the north, Hamas in the south, and Fatah, Hamas underground cells, and Islamic Jihad in the east. The country's security situation has regressed to a level reminiscent of 1949.
Thus, the Israeli left's crimes against the Jewish people did not end with their collaboration with the Nazis in the Holocaust [50].