William the Pilgrim Prince

Israel had several diplomatic ‘pluses’ during the spring of 2018: the move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, persuading America to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement, and a successful initial military confrontation with Iran in Syria … and even more. To these, another plus was chalked up in June 2018: the first ever official visit of a British royal to Israel in 70 years. Prince William, known also as the Duke of Cambridge and second in line to the throne, made the historic visit.

He met with the Israeli President Reuven Rivlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He had a moving experience at the Yad va Shem holocaust memorial and pledged that his generation would not forget the holocaust. He had ‘sporty’ interaction in Tel Aviv. William also managed to pray at the Western Wall, though this may have been a ‘private visit.’ Time was made for him to visit Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah.

On a personal note, William was able to visit the grave of his great-grandmother, Princess Alice of Battenberg, on the Mount of Olives. She helped save a Jewish family in Greece during World War II and has been honoured as a ‘righteous Gentile’ at the Yad VaShem Memorial.

Why was this visit significant? And why has it taken the British royals seventy years to make it - officially speaking (Charles and Philip attended the funeral of slain Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, and Edward came on another occasion, but always in an ‘unofficial capacity.’ Until now).

What has changed?

First, it is important to understand the role of royalty. The concept of monarchy has evolved over the centuries from being an absolutist leader - Rex is Lex - to one subservient to the people and rule of law. This evolution has brought the concept of a constitutional monarchy, which is the form of government in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and some of the northern European countries. The monarch is the symbol of the nation and its constitutional arrangements. He or she is subject to and guardian of the constitution, thus making Lex as Rex. While some may see these functions as superfluous, they are not. The crown unites the nation, reflects its governance, and, denies absolute power to all other branches of government, be they the executive, judicial, or legislative. This perfectly enforces the ‘checks and balances’ and ‘separation of powers’ so necessary for smooth governance. That’s why Australia, for example, has experienced one of the most stable domestic scenes in all of history.

Another aspect of a constitutional monarchy is that the royals must be politically neutral. They cannot be involved in partisan politics. This is so they can represents all of their people, not just the faction that voted for them.

In regard to royal visits, it needs to be understood that the monarch and his or her family have to be invited to a country first - they can’t just merely show up. Following the invitation from the host country, comes a second level of permission: the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The monarch must heed the advise of his or her government and that comes through the FCO.

Regarding a visit to Israel, the FCO has prevented the British royals from making an official visit since 1948. One reason is that it has many Arab-leaning bureaucrats and they did not want to offend the Arab countries. Another reason is that Israel and the territories are among the most political charged areas on earth. Every movement, every gesture, every word, is heavily scrutinised to detect political opinion or bias. It is easy to interpret and misinterpret and the possibility of a simple statement or action flaring up into an international incident is ever present. Leaked emails in 2007 from the courtiers revealed that they were concerned Israel could improve its image by a royal visit. While Queen Elizabeth II is very adept at walking the apolitical, impartial tight-rope, would her 36 year old grandson William be able to do the same, in the highly politicised holy land? By all accounts, he kept his balance through it all.

The Duke’s 2018 official visit was made possible by a couple of circumstances. One, President Rivlin invited the UK to authorise an official visit to commemorate the centenary of the famous Balfour Declaration of November, 1917. Britain’s early role of supporting the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine cannot be overestimated. The government of UK PM Theresa May has made it clear that they are proud of the role Britain played in the birth of Israel. Second, there is detectable impatience by the Arab world towards the Palestinians handling of the peace process. In tandem, with a simultaneous warming of unofficial relations between Israel and some of the Sunni Arab regimes. The Jewish state is seen as a bulwark against the ever-present Iranian threat. Iran’s ‘Shia crescent from Iran-Iraq-Syria-and Lebanon is viewed as a serious menace the Arab world and Israel. So the FCO came to the conclusion that there could be no harm to Britain’s relations with the Arabs by allowing a royal visit to Israel. Thus, the symbolism of Prince William’s visit demonstrates the changing scene in the Middle East and the world. It could be the dawning of a new day, as well as a dry run to a even greater royal visit, when the house of Israel says ‘Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord’ (Matthew 23:39; Luke 13:35).