Of all the international problems of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, perhaps the most complex and intricate knot of contradictions was the Eastern question, related to the fate of the decrepit Ottoman Empire. It broke down into many private problems, each of which affected the interests of several powers. One of the most difficult issues was the Palestinian issue. Palestine never became the "sphere of interest" of any one Power. Everyone tried to gain a foothold here, and no one wanted to give up. The vast historiography devoted to the origins of the Palestinian conflict in the early twentieth century focuses almost exclusively on the relationship of the British Government with the Zionist movement and the first Arab-Jewish clashes. The role of this country in international, and in particular in Anglo-French, relations of that time is incomparably less studied. The article is devoted to the place of the Palestinian question in relations between the two leading European powers at the end of the First World War and in the first years after its end. For many centuries, Palestine's international significance has been determined by two factors: its religious and historical significance and its strategic position. But for different powers, the role of these factors was not the same. Palestine is a Holy Land for three world religions. For Christian Europe, the problem of free access to the Holy Sites of Jerusalem and Bethlehem has been relevant for many centuries and is intertwined with political and economic interests. The division of the Christian Church into several confessions gave rise to intense competition for the right to "use" certain shrines. Since the end of the 17th century, the " disputing parties "(Catholics and Orthodox) began to appeal to the largest "co - religious" powers-France and Russia [Chrysostom, 2003, p.129-133,141]. From the mid-nineteenth century, the leaders of these powers began to use the question of Holy Sites for political purp ... Read more