The pro Arab sentiment in the Foreign Office has existed for decades and I really don't understand it. Jewish terrorist were a problem during Israel's move to independence but historically their has been far more bad blood between Arabs and the British Commonwealth than with Israel.
Ironically the experience of allied forces in the middle east in WWI was that the Jewish settlers were friendly and helpful while the Arabs, who were meant to be our allies, were a real problem. They were dangerously unreliable and brutal to the point Turkish prisoners often had to be defended by Commonwealth forces, on occasion the Turks were allowed to retain their personal weapons until they could reach secured allied positions to become POWs. There were many cases of Arabs robbing and murdering Commonwealth troops and some brutal reprisals that saw the troops concerned punished as certain Arabs, no matter their behaviour, were Pandas. Australia has a close, mutually respectful relationship with our former enemy, Turkey and a pretty good relationship with Israel, but Arab nations have always been hard work. The fiction that the Arabs took Damascus and that the Arab revolt broke the back of the Ottoman Empire is a joke, as are the artificial borders through the middle east. I understand the reasons for it but still it doesn't explain the Foreign office attitudes.
Actually I understand there was a between wars proposal to establish a semi-independent Jewish state in the north of Western Australia. Now if this had occurred we could have had Israeli RAAF squadrons flying P-40s with the desert air force in WWII. Such an arrangement would have made our recent resources boom very interesting with some very wealthy, powerful Australians developing some very, Foreign Office like, anti Jewish Sentiment. I imagine a modern Jewish state would be much harder to disenfranchise and relocate than indigenous communities.
