Imposed Boundaries

Imposed Boundaries • 1900-1949

Introduction: Pushing for Independent Control

Many Middle Eastern nations were under French and British colonial control at the beginning of the twentieth Century. British forces maintained various levels of control in Persia (Iran), Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, and Egypt in order to secure British political and economic interests. As indicated on the Timeline, Middle Eastern nations began taking strides towards their independence at varying degrees beginning with the conclusion of World War I.

The Mandate system, established at the end of World War I and approved by the League of Nations, claimed that trusteeship of former Ottoman and German territories would help bring these regions to independent nation status. Class A mandates consisted of Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and Palestine. Under French and British leadership, these mandates were expected to adopt systems of self-government that would insure their success as independent nations. Despite such intentions, Imperialist forces often came in conflict with nationalist desires among the emerging mandate countries. The Timeline provides a broad overview of the events of this era, including the dates on which nations such as Egypt and Iraq declared their independence from Britain. As the Timeline illustrates, many of these transitions were marred by violence and conflict. Despite such uprisings, however, many of these states gained their independence by the end of 1949.

These readings examine the interactions between France, Britain, Arabs, Jews, and the new mandate powers regarding each nation's desires for control of the four Mandate regions. The Framing Questions provide a broad analysis of the issues at play during this era of imposed boundaries, while the Reading Guide Questions aid in analyzing the specific primary source documents' roles in this era, and secondary sources' applications.

Framing Questions:
• How did the Ottoman Empire rule over the region prior to Britain's involvement in the area during World War I? What effect did this early system of governance have on French and British attempts to control the region?
• In what ways did the Mandate System fulfill its goal of shepherding these nations to their own independence? To what extent did French and British policy have the opposite effect in shaping the destiny of these new nations? Compare the forces of Nationalism and Imperialism in the region.
• How many of the conflicts in this period stemmed from French and British failures to divide the nations of the former Ottoman Empire along existing ethnic, religious, and political cleavages?
• How did the Mandates' struggles for independence differ from the struggles of other European colonies? How were they similar?
• As you move on to examine the period between 1950 and the present, consider what was the effect of this tumultuous period was on political conflicts post-1950? How many later-day conflicts were born in this era?

Imposed Boundaries • 1900-1949

Readings

Ottoman Rule - A brief glimpse

This article discusses the Ottoman Empire's political institutions and highlights the role each institution played in establishing the empire's system of governance. By examining how the Sultan ruled the empire, it is possible to see the manner by which Ottoman lands fell into the hands of regional leadership. In many ways, the Ottoman Empire granted its citizens considerable liberties. At the same time, however, the ancient empire's reliance on theocratic governance played a significant role in shaping the future systems of government in the Middle Eastern region. This article can be accessed online or printed as a handout.

Reading Guide Questions
• How does this brief synopsis of the Ottoman Empire Empire help illustrate the importance of Ottoman political institutions?
• As you read over the remaining articles, consider which of the Mandates' institutional structures evolved out of Ottoman rule? Did any of the new governments make a direct departure from this style of governance?

"Why the Middle East is so Volatile"

This lengthy article examines the tensions between the forces of political nationalism and imperialism in the Middle East and traces the history of present day tensions to the imperialist and nationalist ambitions in the early twentieth century. Two additional authors respond at the end of the article, highlighting the controversy surrounding whether to emphasize religious, nationalist, or imperialist forces in discussing Middle Eastern history. This article demonstrates how forces such as nationalism and imperialism can span across nations' cultural and political boundaries. This article may be best accessed online due to its format, though it can be printed if desired.

Reading Guide Questions
• What do you feel are some of the greatest conflicts between the forces of nationalism, imperialism, and Zionism, as explained in this article? Do you perceive any of these forces to be stronger than any other?
• How do you think the conflict between these forces may have hindered the development of stable nation-states in the Middle East? Could these obstacles have been avoided?

McMahon Letter- British Promises to Arabs

The Ottoman Empire entered World War I in alliance with Germany in 1914. Arabs in the Ottoman Empire soon began negotiations with British officials in hopes of gaining their independence in return for supporting British forces in the region. This letter confirmed the British promise to the Arab population and helped incite the 1917 Arab revolution in the Ottoman Empire against pro-German forces. This letter can be accessed online or printed as a handout.

Reading Guide Questions
• Given your interpretation of the agreement, how supportive was the British government of the Arab nationalist movement? Was Britain's aim to secure Arab interests, or their own interests?
• How does this early agreement illustrate the nationalist desires of the Arab population?

Sykes-Picot Agreement

The Sykes-Picot agreement was a secret pact executed between Great Britain and France in May 1916, during World War I. With the assent of Russia, the two countries agreed upon the eventual dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and aimed to divide the former Ottoman territories between the two nations. This document can be accessed online or printed as a handout.

Reading Guide Questions
• Both France and Britain proclaim it to be in their best interest to maintain control of specific former Ottoman and Middle Eastern regions. How do they balance their own interests against those of the Arab state?
• Which specific regions do Britain and France claim as their own under this agreement?

Conflicting Commitments
Balfour Declaration
British Mandate for Palestine

In a pivotal letter by Arthur James Lord Balfour to Lord Rothschild, the British Cabinet made its first recognition of the Zionist aims of a Jewish State. Written after discussions in the British Cabinet, and consultation with Zionist leaders, the Balfour Declaration represents the first political recognition of Zionist aims by a Great Power.

At approximately the same time, representatives from Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Greece, and Belgium met in April 1920 to discuss problems arising from World War I and allot mandates in the Middle East for the regions of the former Ottoman Empire. Britain received mandates for Iraq, Trans-jordan, and Palestine; and France received mandates for Syria and Lebanon. The Palestinian mandate highlights exactly how the mandates were to be governed and controlled.

The British Mandate is rather lengthy, and may be easier to access online. The Balfour Declaration can be printed or viewed online.

Reading Guide Questions
• Examine the explanation of Mandatory powers under this document. What do the first five articles establish about local control and legislation in these regions?
• How do you think these stipulations of control differ from European control of other colonies? Do you think these nations were treated the same as other colonies? Compare British and French control in this region to European control in another set of colonies (e.g., American, South African).
• Given your own interpretation of the short statement made in the Balfour Declaration, how well do you feel the British government met their promise to recognize the Zionist movement?
• How well do you feel the Mandate balances Arab and Jewish interests? Pay particular attention to Articles 15, 16, 18, 22, and 23 and the ways in which all interests are taken into account.
• Challenge question- If you had been present at the granting of the San Remo mandates, would you have included any additional peace-keeping stipulations in the document? Why or why not?

Royal Commission Reports on Palestine and Jerusalem
Peel Commission Report
Woodhead Commission - Map of Proposed Partition Plan

Woodhead Commission - Map of Proposed Jerusalem Borders

British White Paper of 1939

The Peel Commission, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry, came to the British Mandate of Palestine in 1936 to investigate the roots of the Arab-Jewish conflict and propose a proper solution. In its recommendation to the British Parliament, the commission, headed by Lord Robert Peel, recommended the abolishment of the British Mandate and the partition of the region between the two peoples.

Upon the Arab rejection of the Peel Commission's partitioning recommendation, the British government assembled the Woodhead Commission to devise a new plan that would satisfy Arab and Jewish populations in the region. This new report included a statement of policy rejecting partition as impracticable, and suggesting that Arab-Jewish agreement might still be possible. When the Woodhead Commission's proposals failed to produce an agreement, the McDonald White Paper of 1939, named in honor of the British Colonial Secretary, effectively ended the British commitment to a Jewish State as stated in the Balfour Declaration.

These resources may be best accessed online due to length. Teachers may want to print the map graphics for comparison purposes.

Reading Guide Questions
• Pay particular attention to Part III of the Peel Commission Report. How does Britain propose to reach a compromise through partition? Does Britain believe they will be able to meet the expectations of either party involved?
• How does the Peel Commission Plan propose to divide the existing Palestinian lands between Jewish and Arab populations? What reasons does Britain give to support this proposition?
• Examine the Woodhead Partition plan map. From a strictly visual analysis of the divisions, how effective do you think the plan would have been? Do you see any distinct advantages to the plan? Disadvantages?
• Review the 1939 White Paper's analysis of Britain's success in fulfilling its obligations under the Palestinian Mandate. How do the proposal's immigration stipulations and other rulings diminish the Balfour Declaration's lasting commitment to a Jewish State?

Comparing Britain in the earliest twentieth century with the current U.S. role in Iraq

Note: Because of its applicability, this story is included in both the Imposed Borders 1900-1949 and Political Borders 1950-2003 sections.

This NPR audio story discusses the similarities between the U.S. role in Iraq today and Britain's role in Iraq during and after World War One. In pursuing its creation of an Iraqi government in the former Ottoman regions of Mesopotamia, Britain adopted portions of the rhetoric of peace and liberation that the U.S. is currently pursuing. This story is not intended as criticism of current foreign policy, but, rather, as a means of comparison between the two tumultuous periods in Iraqi history. The platitude "history repeats itself" seems to have tremendous applicability in this instance, and it is important that students be able to connect the parallels between Britain's problems with occupation and the reality of the obstacles the United States may face in attempting to install a democratic government in Iraq. Because it is an audio file, this resource requires that it be used online. Teachers are encouraged to let students listen to the parallels between these events.

Listening Guide Questions
• What was your reaction to the introductory segment of this news story? Despite your awareness of Britain's role as a Mandatory power, did you realize the striking comparisons between the two time periods?
• Do you think the U.S. has different intentions than the British? Can you explain what differences you see?
Challenge Question- What lessons can you draw from this story? If you were asked to give Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush three recommendations for U.S. action in Iraq based on this story, what would you tell them or warn them about?