Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,747 Year: 4,004/9,624 Month: 875/974 Week: 202/286 Day: 9/109 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   So let's look at why the Islamic world might be annoyed by the West?
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 166 of 174 (318043)
06-05-2006 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Damouse
06-05-2006 5:21 PM


On oil and water
You need to remember that oil was nowhere near as important during the period we are talking about as it is today. Even armies were not mechanized, most folk didn't have cars, the roads weren't there to use them and even most of the world's navies and all trains were still coal fired.
By the time of WWI more and more oil powered vehicles were being used, and the Royal Navy was in the process of converting to oil, but the norm for transportation was still mule, horse, wagon and boots.
The oil field at Basra was important because it was one of the few known Middle Eastern ones, but the port at Basra was far more important than the oil. Ports, controling those you used and denying your enemies access to them was the key.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Damouse, posted 06-05-2006 5:21 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Damouse, posted 06-05-2006 5:51 PM jar has replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4931 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 167 of 174 (318051)
06-05-2006 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by jar
06-05-2006 5:42 PM


Re: On oil and water
When i said history i meant recent history, not early history. i had been subcousciously following the ideas of the 9/11 attack folks, so i was scrounging for reasons in modern day.
Ahh. What would have happened if Europe hadn't broken up and colonized all of the fresh meat in the east/middle east?
Would they have developed redically different?
Edited by Damouse, : No reason given.

-I believe in God, I just call it Nature
-One man with an imaginary friend is insane. a Million men with an imaginary friend is a religion.
-People must often be reminded that the bible did not arrive as a fax from heaven; it was written by men.
-Religion is the opiate of the masses

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by jar, posted 06-05-2006 5:42 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by jar, posted 06-05-2006 6:00 PM Damouse has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 168 of 174 (318059)
06-05-2006 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Damouse
06-05-2006 5:51 PM


Re: On oil and water
This thread is mostly looking at the period from around WWI on, covering some of the necessary history slightly before that, so wee are looking basically from the late 18th. century on.
For earlier history a good place to look is Message 1.
The important thing to remember is that when we think of the Middle East today we think of distinct nations. Those nations simply didn't exist for the most part prior to the period we are discussing. In North Africa we see a different story. There nations that had been in existence for nearly all recorded history were dominated, more or less completely, by colonial powers or Empires from outside.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Damouse, posted 06-05-2006 5:51 PM Damouse has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 169 of 174 (318351)
06-06-2006 1:35 PM


A tale of three Agreements.
Now I would like for us to look with some detail at the content of three specific Agreements, two of which have been mentioned earlier, the third likely familar to all. The first is the Sykes-Picot Agreement between France and Great Britain, the second is the correspondence between the Mufti of Mecca and Sir Henry McMahon while the third is the Balfour Declaration.
Before moving to the documents themselves, it might be worthwile to review the status of Nationhood in the Middle East. Areas that could be considered nations exited alon the coastlines of the Arab Penninsula. These included Kuwait, Bahrain, Trucial Oman, Qatar, Aden and Oman. All of these areas were under either direct British control or ruled by a surrogate who was placed in power and supported by Great Britain. The rest of the area was nominally within the Ottoman Empire. There were governing districts, but no nations. Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, simply did not exist.
The vast majority of the Arabian Penninsula was the Hijaz, an area of a few cities such as Mecca, Riyadh, Medina and a few others. But it must be remembered that there were perhaps several dozen places that could be called cities, the rest was open country.
Local governance, where it existed at all, was mostly through the Family/Clan system. Those families were often in conflict with each other, raiding and looting were still both common and accepted, and external controls were pretty much limited to the more northern cities. There, brutality and oppression were not unknown and the Ottoman Imperialists were seen as outside conquerors.
So it was on the eve of the Great War. The Arabian Penninsula was seen by all sides, those of the Triple Entente as well as those of the Central Powers as critical. The Turks were seen as the lesser of opponents and the location itself was of strategic importance in maintaining communications and transportation between England and her colonies.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 170 of 174 (318367)
06-06-2006 2:33 PM


The Sykes-Picot Agreement
As mentioned earlier, the Sykes-Picot Agreement was between France and Great Britain. It was a secret agreement, to be shared with other Great Powers specifically Russia and Japan, but not meant for general publication or acknowledgement.
In the agreement the Middle East was divided up into five sections. The most eastern included all of the coastal areas of the Arabian Penninsula bordering on the Persain Gulf, the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea. Most of these coastal areas were already under direct British control so not much change was there.
But it also included parts of the Ottoman Empire in what is now Iraq. The border of the area of British direct control extended as far inland as beyond Baghdad. This was most of the transportation links including the port of Basra, Baghdad itself as well as Najaf and Karbala. This was designated on the maps and in the agreement as the Red Zone.
Inland and adjacent to this area of direct control was an area that would be under British Influence. This area, refered to in the document as area b covered all the lands adjacent to the areas under British control and all the way across the penninsula to the borders with Egypt. It extended through what is today central Iraq as far north as beyond Kirkuk to the borders with Persia and Russia.
To the west was what was called area a. This area was to be under French Influence and included what is today Syria and Northern Iraq including the Kurdish areas of Iraq and part of Turkey. It included Damascus, Aleppo and Mosul.
North and still further west was the Blue Zone. The Blue Zone would be under direct French control. It included much of what today is Turkey extending as far north as Sivas, as far south and west as the coast north of the westmost tip of Cyprus and as far north east as the borders with Persia and Russia. It also swept down the coast to include all of what is today Lebanon.
That left the smallest of the areas, one refered to as the Brown Area. The Brown area was Palestine. It extended from just above Haifa in the north to the border with Egypt south of Gaza in the south, and inland to the Jerico River. This area would be an Allied Condominium, jointly administrated.
You can read the whole agreement (it's short) and see a map of the areas here.
Next we will discuss the specifics of the treaty as they pertain to each section.
The final are

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 171 of 174 (319805)
06-09-2006 11:11 PM


The Sykes-Picot Agreement in detail.
The Sykes-Picot, like all of these documents, is really short so let's step through it in detail.
Remember, this is a secret agreement between France and Great Britain. None of the peoples in the area were party to it, or consulted.
Sykes-Picot writes:
t is accordingly understood between the French and British governments:
That France and Great Britain are prepared to recognize and protect an independent Arab states or a confederation of Arab states (a) and (b) marked on the annexed map, under the suzerainty of an Arab chief. That in area (a) France, and in area (b) Great Britain, shall have priority of right of enterprise and local loans. That in area (a) France, and in area (b) Great Britain, shall alone supply advisers or foreign functionaries at the request of the Arab state or confederation of Arab states.
So Great Britain and France agree to recognize and protect an "independent Arab states or a confederation of Arab states" in areas a & b.
If you look at the map you will see that this does not really correspond to the boundaries of any of the Nations that finally resulted. It also excludes areas that eventually became part of the Nations in the area.
There were a couple conditions added, that the Great Powers would have have "priority of right of enterprise and local loans." The second condition was "That in area (a) France, and in area (b) Great Britain, shall alone supply advisers or foreign functionaries at the request of the Arab state or confederation of Arab states."
These two conditions gave the Great Powers complete control over the economic and political reality of the area.
There were some more specifics later in the Agreement that we will add other specific limitations particularly in the area of transportation.
Sykes-Picot writes:
That in the blue area France, and in the red area Great Britain, shall be allowed to establish such direct or indirect administration or control as they desire and as they may think fit to arrange with the Arab state or confederation of Arab states.
So in the Blue and Red areas the Great Powers reserve complete control.
The fifth area was the Brown Area and was covered in one short sentence.
Sykes-Picot writes:
That in the brown area there shall be established an international administration, the form of which is to be decided upon after consultation with Russia, and subsequently in consultation with the other allies, and the representatives of the sheriff of Mecca.
The important point is that in the Sykes-Picot Agreement France and Great Britain agree that the administration will be designed based on consultaion between the Allies, Russia and in particular the representatives of the sheriff of Mecca.
Again, before we move on, take another look at the map.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 172 of 174 (320246)
06-10-2006 9:02 PM


Looking at the rest of Sykes-Picot.
Earlier we went over the first three paragraphs of Sykes-Picot and looked at the map. Now let's look at the balance, the final thirteen paragraphs.
You can see the whole Sykes-Picot Agreement here and the map here.
So to move on. The next paragraph covers port access and water supply for Great Britain, and control of Cypress by the French.
Sykes-Picot writes:
That Great Britain be accorded (1) the ports of Haifa and Acre, (2) guarantee of a given supply of water from the tigres and Euphrates in area (a) for area (b). His majesty's government, on their part, undertake that they will at no time enter into negotiations for the cession of Cyprus to any third power without the previous consent of the French government.
Then on to access and shipping by Great Britain through the port of Alexandretta:
That Alexandretta shall be a free port as regards the trade of the British empire, and that there shall be no discrimination in port charges or facilities as regards British shipping and British goods; that there shall be freedom of transit for British goods through Alexandretta and by railway through the blue area, or (b) area, or area (a); and there shall be no discrimination, direct or indirect, against British goods on any railway or against British goods or ships at any port serving the areas mentioned.
then French access to transportaion through Haifa:
That Haifa shall be a free port as regards the trade of France, her dominions and protectorates, and there shall be no discrimination in port charges or facilities as regards French shipping and French goods. There shall be freedom of transit for French goods through Haifa and by the British railway through the brown area, whether those goods are intended for or originate in the blue area, area (a), or area (b), and there shall be no discrimination, direct or indirect, against French goods on any railway, or against French goods or ships at any port serving the areas mentioned.
then details of building the railroad:
That in area (a) the Baghdad railway shall not be extended southwards beyond Mosul, and in area (b) northwards beyond Samarra, until a railway connecting Baghdad and Aleppo via the Euphrates valley has been completed, and then only with the concurrence of the two governments.
and that Great Britain have soely right to build and operate a railroad from Haifa to baghdad as well as troop transport along the line:
That Great Britain has the right to build, administer, and be sole owner of a railway connecting Haifa with area (b), and shall have a perpetual right to transport troops along such a line at all times. It is to be understood by both governments that this railway is to facilitate the connection of Baghdad with Haifa by rail, and it is further understood that, if the engineering difficulties and expense entailed by keeping this connecting line in the brown area only make the project unfeasible, that the French government shall be prepared to consider that the line in question may also traverse the Polgon Banias Keis Marib Salkhad tell Otsda Mesmie before reaching area (b).
and on and on. The whole rest of the Agreement concerns France and Great Britains financial, commercial and strategic interests in the area.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2328 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 173 of 174 (330945)
07-11-2006 8:03 PM


Bump
Information that might be interesting considering some recent threads.

  
jar
Member (Idle past 419 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 174 of 174 (330949)
07-11-2006 8:41 PM


The McMahon-Hussein Correspondence.
As discussed above, Great Britain and France implemented a secret agreement, the Sykes-Picot Agreement that divided up the Middle East into spheres of influence that would be under the control of those two Nations and where they would have an exclusive economic advantage.
But at the same time, Great Britain was also holding secret negotiations with the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein (familar name? should be. it is the father of man that the Arabs selected to head Syria, that France then deposed and later Britain made head of Iraq). The correspondence was a series of ten letters between the two, when the Sharif outlined the hope of an Arab Nation and McMahon dealt with what would be acceptable to Great Britain.
You can read all ten of the letters here.
The most significant part comes in the second letter from McMahon to the Sharif (letter number 4). In particular, McMahon outlines the borders of some future Arab State that they would support.
I have realised, however, from your last letter that you regard this question as one of vital and urgent importance. I have, therefore, lost no time in informing the Government of Great Britain of the contents of your letter, and it is with great pleasure that I communicate to you on their behalf the following statement, which I am confident you will receive with satisfaction:-
The two districts of Mersina and Alexandretta and portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo cannot be said to be purely Arab, and should be excluded from the limits demanded.
With the above modification, and without prejudice of our existing treaties with Arab chiefs, we accept those limits.
As for those regions lying within those frontiers wherein Great Britain is free to act without detriment to the interest of her ally, France, I am empowered in the name of the Government of Great Britain to give the following assurances and make the following reply to your letter:-
1. Subject to the above modifications, Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sherif of Mecca.
2. Great Britain will guarantee the Holy Places against all external aggression and will recognise their inviolability.
3. When the situation admits, Great Britain will give to the Arabs her advice and will assist them to establish what may appear to be the most suitable forms of government in those various territories.
4. On the other hand, it is understood that the Arabs have decided to seek the advice and guidance of Great Britain only, and that such European advisers and officials as may be required for the formation of a sound form of administration will be British.
5. With regard to the vilayets of Bagdad and Basra, the Arabs will recognise that the established position and interests of Great Britain necessitate special administrative arrangements in order to secure these territories from foreign aggression, to promote the welfare of the local populations and to safeguard our mutual economic interests.
So as can be seen from the above, except for certain areas in Syria (designated for the French anyway in Sykes-Picot) that today would be considered Lebanon, and specific ports (again the ones outlined in Sykes-Picot) the McMahon Correspondence declares that Great Britain will support the establishment of an Arab State.
The important thing is that in all this correspondence there is no mention of some special status for Palestine or State of Israel.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024