Required content:

- Allied diplomacy in the Middle East: McMahon–Hussein correspondence; Sykes–Picot;

Arab Revolt; Balfour Declaration
- Effects of the Paris peace treaties: territorial and political impact; mandate system;
British and French administration in Iraq, Transjordan, Syria and Lebanon
- Egypt after the First World War: nationalism; emergence of Wafd Party; Declaration of
Independence; British influence
- Palestine mandate: economic, social and political developments; impact of Jewish
immigration and settlement; British responses and policies;Zionism; Early stages
towards the creation of the state of Israel.
- Ataturk and the Turkish Republic: aims and policies; impact on Turkish society;
successes and failures
- Case study on Iran, Saudi Arabia or a North African state: economic, political and social
developments; western influences; attempts at modernization
Allied diplomacy - plenty of promises:

- Ottoman entry into WW1 caused many concerns such as: 1. Putting the Russian war effort at risk (

Mandate systems & influence on modern Arab

Background (Arab Revolt):

- Sharif Hussein was designated as chief spokesman of the Arabs. Through a number of meetings and correspondence
(Mcmahon & Sharif hussein), an alliance was established between the allies and the Arabs.
- Arabs agreed to revolt against the Ottomans and denounce the Ottomans as the enemy of Islam. In return, the Brits agreed to
back their demand for independence.
- Ottoman authorities tried to dissuade the Arab nationalists 1. Fear tactics - Jamal Pasha, military governor of Greater Syria
began to deport, arrest, interrogate, torture and execute many Arab nationalists leaders in 1915. Ex - 6/5/1916 in Beirut and
Damascus, 21 Arab nationalists were hanged on the grounds of disloyalty and treason. 2. Publishing the text of Sykes-Picot
agreement to show the Arabs the duplicity of the Imperial powers. Neither moves dissuaded the Arabs and the revolt started
on 10/6/1916.
- Arab tribal armies were commanded by Sharif Hussein’s son, Faisal and Abdullah (funded by the British).
- First attack was on the Ottomans in Mecca - Repulsed by the Ottomans in Mecca, so the Brits had to send reinforcements
from Egypt to assist Hussein’s men.
- September saw most towns, except Media in Hejaz under Arab control.
- Faisal’s command saw the Arabs changing their tactics. Instead of major frontal attacks (lacked skills and equipment to face a
professionally trained army), they chose guerilla warfare.
- T.E Lawrence (junior member of the Arab Bureau - branch of the British foreign office) analysed the situation (wrote it in
November 1916). He stated that the value of the tribes was defensive only and could succeed in guerilla warfare -
Historiography.
- Hit and Run tactics saw the Arabs succeed in disrupting the Hejaz railway, by cutting the supply line of Turkish forces and
immobilizing 30k Ottoman troops along the Hejaz railway (Amman - Medina).
- Prevented Otto-German forces in Syria from linking up with the Turkish garrison in Yemen. By attacking the telegraph lines,
the Ottomans were forced to send messages by wireless (Britain was capable of intercepting it).
- July 1917 - Arab-British forces attacked and captured the Red Sea port of Aqaba, followed by Sinai and Palestine. Final attack
was Faisal liberating Syria in October 1918.

Historiography:

- 3 weeks after Hussein announced his rebellion, the British war office told the Cabinet in London that the Arabworld isn't
following the lead. In a secret memorandum prepared for the War committee of the Cabinet on 1 July 1916, the General Staff
of the War Office reported that Hussein “has always represented himself as being the spokesman of the Arab nation, but so
far as is known, he isn’t supported by any organization of Arabs nearly general enough to secure automatic acceptance of the
terms agreed by him”. As a result, the British government ought not to assume that agreements reached with him would be
honoured by other Arab leaders - David, Franklin (American historian) - A peace to end all peace: Creating the Modern Middle
 East.
- Although the tribal contingents had served to divert and tie down Turkish troops and to disrupt the Hejaz railway, their real
military contributions awaited the campaigns into Palestine (1917) and Syria (1918), when the army led by Faysal played an
important role in cutting supply lines and threatening Ottoman/German eastern flanks. - Charles D Smith (American
professor), Palestine and the Arab Israeli conflict.

Mandate system: Among the representatives at the Paris peace conference, there were 2 schools of thought.

1st thought:

- The French and the British pressured a colonial agenda and were looking for territorial expansion as a compensation for
WW1.

2nd thought:

- US president, Woodrow Wilson had a different vision for the post war world. He was opposed to any annexation of territory.
He advanced self determination as a principle, according to which nations should be formed.
- Self determination assumed that the local population would be consulted as to the form of their future government.
- Wilson’s position raised the expectations of those that were seeking independence, but caused concern and discomfort
(imperial powers).

Result:

- In order to bridge the gap between the 2 schools of thought, the mandate system was invented.
- Instead of colonizing the territories that were “not yet able to stand by themselves” (according to the peacemakers), the
advanced countries would administer their affairs until the time that they were ready to manage on their own.
- In each case, one country would be assigned the role of mandatory power, the LON would supervise their work through the
permanent mandates commission (PMC). They were divided into 3 mandates (A, B, and C). The division was based on their
political development level.
- Countries agreed to guide their mandate towards independence, and encourage the development of political, economic and
social institutions in these regions aspiring to be self-governed.

Category A Mandates:

- Ex Ottoman Arab territories in the Middle East that were brink on independent statehood.

Category B Mandates:

- Former German colonies in Africa (exception of South West Africa), the MP guided the mandates away from abusive customs
such as slavery, exploitation of native labour and opened the regions up for trade with other countries.
Category C Mandates:

- South West Africa and German islands in the pacific. Regarded to be too under development, therefore not capable of self
governance. They were under the Mandatory power’s total control.
- The mandate system applied the principle of self-determination, in regards to President Wilson, but optimized French and
British control over their based territories in the ME.
- Include historiography at home
- On paper, the mandate system was a fairly interesting compromise between colonialism and independence, but this
application for the sake of the ex-Ottoman Arab territories wasn’t resolved.
- This was mainly due to the fact to the principle of tutelage or guardianship, which conflicted with the concept of Arab
nationalism (taken possession of the Arab world during and after the war).
- In other words, nation (Arab nations) that had fought alongside the allies in order to obtain an independent Arab state was
casted aside that was “not capable of standing by itself” and asked to be governed by the hands of the more “advanced
nations”
- Many Arabs found this offensive, and the numerous revolts that emerged against the 2 main Mandatory powers (France and
UK) reflected this.

Case of Syria and Lebanon:

Intro:

- Became French mandates and administered by the French until they obtained independence in 1944.
- Decision came as a surprise to some Arabs, who during the course of the war had been led to think otherwise. This
misunderstanding caused tensions between France and its mandates.

Background:

- In December 1917, when the allied forces were preparing the assault on Syria, general Allenby (commandeer of Egyptian
expeditionary forces) announced that the UK sought “complete and final liberation of all peoples formerly oppressed by the
Turks/Ottomans and the establishment of national government derive authority from the initiative and free will of those
people”. It was a confirmation of the pledges that had already been offered to Sharif Hussein by McMahon.
- The pledge was repeated in June 1918 to a delegations of Syrians in Cairo (declaration of 7).
- As a way of honouring that pledge, 3/10/1918 the British troops let Faisal enter Damascus, claim victory and liberate the city
from Ottoman control.
- Faisal established his government in Damascus, but he didn’t remain ruler for long.
- The fate of Syria & Lebanon was discussed and resolved in London and Paris without the consultation with Sharif Hussein or
his sons.
Planning:

- On 1/12/1918, British PM Lloyd George and French PM Clemenceau had met in London. The purpose of the meeting was to
review and amend the Sykes-Picot agreement.
- Both agreed to redraw the boundaries according to their interests. They each negotiated their share of the territory in total
disregard to their prior engagement or local community wishes.
- Thought at this state, the agreement was informal. Some changes to the SP agreement were discussed and later introduced
at San Remo’s conference in 1920.
- From the agreement, the UK’s territorial share was to be increased through the addition of Mosul to Iraq, Paplestine was no
longer to be placed under international administration but under British guardianship. Syria and Lebanon would be handed
over to the French.

Result:

- When the Allied Supreme Council met in San Remo (representatives from UK, Italy, France and Japan), it was decided that
Greater Syria would be divided into 2 mandates (Syria & Lebanon) but under French administration.
- Fiasal’s rule over an independent greater Syria was a short lived dream.
- To ease the French take-over, The British had withdrew their troops from Syria (September 1919).
- After the Battle of Maysalun, the French defeated Faisal’s force, so Faisal fled to Haifa in July 1920. Syria and Lebanon
officially became French mandates.
- Article 22 of the Covenant stated that mandatory’s role was to “offer administrative advice & assistance” to prepare
mandates for independence. However, instead of encouraging local administrative institution formation and promoting
national unity, the French adopted a policy of “divide and rule”. It rendered the Syrias and Lebanese to be more dependent
on French presence.
- As a result, Lebanon was dominated politically by Maronite Christians (living in Mount Lebanon with close French ties -
constituted 30% of the population). It created a situation where the majority Islamic population were unhappy with Christian
rule.
- Syria was broken into 2 states, Aleppo and Damascus. They were governed separately. In addition to that, 2 smaller districts
for the Alawis (Muslim minority living in Western Syria and Northern Lebaon - part of Sh’ia Islam) and the Druze (Muslim
minority living in SS, CL and Northern Israel - unitarian Muslims).
- Political life in Syria was dominated by Sunni Muslims, isolating Druze and the Alawites.

Consequence:

- The presence of the French and the manner in which they administered the region led to the rise of nationalist movements.
- In Syria (7/1925), a revolt broke out in the Druze region. It was led by Sultan Atrash (chieftain), in which the Druze succeeded
in forcing the French out of the region. Autumn saw the movement became nationwide.
- In spite of massive air and artillery attacks on Damascus, the revolt continued and it wasn’t until the Spring (1927) that the
French managed to suppress the rebels.
 - Revolt gave rise to a Syrian political organization (National Bloc), but the French continued to undermine Syrians right to
independence and maintained control until 1944.

Case of Transjordan:

Background:

- Under Ottoman rule, Transjordan belonged to the province of Damascus (Syria) and inhabited by Bedouin tribes.
- However, San Remo’s conference saw the territory attached to Palestine (became British mandate). But, the British divided
the mandate along the river Jordan.
- It formed Palestine (west) which complied with the Balfour Declaration & supervise the establishment of a Jewish national
home. It formed Transjordan, where Abdullah (Sharif Hussein’s other son) would establish an independent Arab state.
- In this way, even though they didn’t consult any of the local inhabitants (stipulated in article 22 of the LON’s covenant), they
fulfilled both their promises to the Arabs and Jews.

Course:

- April 1921, the division was completed. 2 administrative entities were formed.
- Division was ratified by the LON on 24/7/1922.
- Abdullah was designated as the prince (Emir) of the Emirate of Transjordan (remained part of the British mandate until 1946’s
independence).
- UK fulfilled its responsibilities as Mandatory Power by supervising the political, economic and military affairs of the newly
formed Emirate.
- Transjordan didn’t constitute a major economic asset (Iraq did, but wasn’t important as a base to control the region’s
security). The British supervised Transjordan’s armed forces through the exclusive supply of instructors and arms. Maintained
a well-disciplined military loyal to Britain.

Conclusion and critical:

- Transjordan was an artificial state, created by “the stroke a pen”. It was remained Jordan after their 1946 independence.
- It continued to exist and given its geopolitical status in relation to Palestine, and later Israel, it came to play an important
strategic role as an arbiter in the region.

Case of Iraq:

Background:
- San Remo negotiations saw state boundaries drawn. Mesopotamia region became Iraq.
- The borders were drawn to suit British interests. In the north, the British showed interest in Kirkuk’s oil wells and Mosul, so
they negotiated with the French and obtained their agreement to exclude Mosul from Greater Syria.
- Iraq’s northern border was extended up to Anatolia (Turkey) and Persia (Iran).
- The mountainous province of Mosul inhabited by Sunni Kurds became part of Iraq (borders extending south to include Basra
province), inhabited by Shi’a Arabs because it was situated at the opening of the Persian Gulf.
- From this position, they kept an eye on gulf navigation (transportation of oil).
 - Central province of Baghdad became the capital, and included a mixture of Shia/Sunni Arabs.

Result:

- Iraq was born in 1920 included 3 separate provinces (Mosul, Basra, and Baghdad).
- Merger created a complex situation: Kurdish minority of Mosul brought under the hegemonic rule of the Arabs and denied
minority rights by the Arab majority. They opposed Baghdad’s authority as a result.
- Arab majority were divided by Shi’as and Sunnis. The Sunni minority ruled over the Arabs, because the British administration
backed the Sunnis. It led to Shias dissatisfaction (still existent nowadays).

Consequence:

- Iraq’s border drawn by the British didn’t give Iraq direct access to the Persian gulf. The small coastline (58km) was unsuited to
deep water port facilities (left an unfortunate legacy of major border disputes between Iraq and their neighbours – cumulated
in Iraq-Iraq war of 1980-8 and 1991 Gulf war).
- British were faced with internal revolt (May 1920, first rebellion against the British rose among the Euphrates tribes, lasted
several months and over 10k Iraqis and 450 British soldiers were killed.

Effect:

- British policymakers decided to find an alternative long-term solution.

- They decided to hand over responsibility to an Arab ruler (signed a treaty that safeguard British economic & strategic interest
in Iraq).
- In 1921, after Faisal lost Greater Syria to the French, he was brought into Iraq. After a carefully managed national referendum,
he was crowned as Iraq’s king.

Case of the Kurds:

Background:
- Kurds are ethnically distinct from the Arabs (different language and culture).
- Ancestral home has been in the regions that’s today a cross section of Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria.
- They haven’t assimilated into any of the countries they were assigned to live.
- They continue to claim political autonomy.

Result:

- In the Treaty of Sevres, promises were made for a future Kurdistan (2 state process).
- Process is Anatolian Kurds obtaining independence straight away and Iraqis Kurds being given the choices to join.
- Sevres proposals never materialized because the UK decided to include a Kurdish province, Mosul, in the newly formed Iraq
and Turkish war of independence forced the TOS revision.
- In the treaty of Lausanne, there was no mention of a distinct Kurdish region.
- The Turkish nationalist sentiments during this period saw the Kurds not regarded as ethnically distinct from the Turks.
- Kurdish 1925 rebellion resulted in the death of 25k Kurds.
 - Kurdish question is still a major dispute nowadays.

Case of the Palestine:

Background:

- Palestine proved to be the most complicated (location as the spiritual home of Judaism, Christianity and Islam).
- Jerusalem was the site of the Jewish temple, Jesus crucifixion and prophet Mohammed’s ascension to heaven.
- Future of Palestine was the concern of the world at large. It was difficult to hand over its exclusive control to one nation only,
as a result, there were a number of different expectations.

Cause:

- Palestine wasn’t specifically mentioned in the Hussein-McMahon correspondence, so the British claimed that it was
considered as one of Syrian coastal territories.
- Since it wasn’t “Purely Arab”, it was excluded from the Arab claim. However, the Palestinians claimed they were Arabs
themselves and claimed the right to independence.
- Both Arabs and Jews claimed they’ve been promised Palestine. Balfour declaration saw the British bound to help establish a
Jewish national home.
- Article 22 of LON - The British (MP) were handed “sacred trust of civilization” (Palestine obtain their independence), however
the current tensions is a result of that.

Result:

- France and UK agreed to place Palestine under international administration (Sykes-Picot agreement).
- By the end of WW1, UK realized that its economic & strategic interests were better served if Palestine came under its direct
rule (Meditternaean coast offered UK vital ports and control Suez Canal’s access).
- Historiography - British foreign secretary and specialist of the ME (Lord CUrzon) considered Palestine as “military gate to
Egypt and the Suez Canal”.
- Presence in the region permitted the British to supervise “establishment of a Jewish home in Palestine” (promised in BD).
- San Remo’s conference recognized BD, which meant the pledge wasn’t longer between the UK and the Jews. The UK allies
agreed to honour it.
- British military administration in Palestine was replaced by civilian rule (July 1920). Herbert Samuel became Palestine’s first
High commissioner.
- Article 95 of the TOS confirmed this decision by: “The Mandatory shall be responsible for putting into effect the declaration
originally made on 2 November 1917 by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the
establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done
which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political
status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

Consequence:

- British were given the task of balancing the interests of the Jews and Palestinian. As a result, Britain came with decision of
 creating 2 separate states (Palestine and Transjordan) by dividing the land among the Jordan river as a solution.
- Palestinians still claimed their right to an independent state (specified under article 22 of LON): “Certain communities
formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of e3a development where their existence as independent
nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until
such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection
of the Mandatory.”
- Jews who were reassured by the validation of BD complained of the fact that their “designed territory” was only reduced to
the land west of the Jordan river.
- UK committed to both communities (assuring the Jewish community of creating a Jewish state, and the Arabs by not imposing
a policy that was contrary to their religious & political interests).

Impact

- Palestine’s administration was a major dilemma for the British government, as they failed to reconcile the Arab & Jewish
communities (turned into violence that targeted each other and the UK).
- When the UK ended its mandate in 1948, the Palestinians and Jews continued their hostility.

Arab-Israeli war (1948)

Causes:

1. Jewish settlers in Palestine

Background:

- Organized group that proposed a Jewish migration to the holy land (Hovevei Zion - based in Russia). The reason was due to
Jewish persecution after Alexander II assassination (1881).
- First Jewish settlers reached Palestine after 1881 (First Aliyah - Immgiration to Israel).
- Estimated that there were 21 Jewish settlements (45000 inhabitants) by late 18th century. The small Jewish presence was
unnoticed and the relationship with the locals were peaceful.

Cause:

- Idea of migration was picked by Theodor Herzl (published a book in 1896 called “The Jewish state”. The publication of the
book led to the creation of Zionism.
- Zionism proposed the establishment of a Jewish national home (no Jewish persecution or an oppressed minority). Also it was
the beginning of a Jewish national movement.

Effect:

- Birth of political zionism saw the number of immigrants to Palestine grow, which resulted in the altering of relations with the
Arabs.
 - Obtained UK’s backing through BD, which made them claim legitimacy for their cause. Also, with the project being better
financed (Jewish national fund donations), settlers could purchase land.
- Long term project of the goal was to outnumber the local Palestinians. To fulfill this objective, it was decreed that land
purchased could never be sold to non Jews, or employing local Arab labour. As a result, the local indigenous population would
be motivated to leave and look for employment elsewhere (neighbouring Arab countries).
- Movement required ideological justification to claim Palestine. As a result, they decided to revive the ancient Jewish biblical
history that provides evidence for Jews settling in the past in the land of Palestine (common national identity & religion). Also,
modernizing Hebrew (common language). All of this became the cornerstones of the Jewish nation’s future.
- To justify the return to Palestine, they claimed that the land belonged to no one (Palestinian right to statehood was rejected).
They followed the slogan “A land without a people for a people without land”.

Result:

- Settlers started to organize in 1906 themselves: First Jewish political parties were formed, Hebrew newspapers were
published and collective farms (Kibbutz) were set up. Also, the first Jewish self defence militia (Hashomer) was created in
1909. David Ben Gurion also settled there.
- The changes resulted in the presence of the Jewish community in Palestine to be rather noticed.
- July 1922, the LON ratified the Palestinian mandate and article 4 of this doc stated that “an appropriate Jewish agency would
advise and cooperate with the adminisration for the purpose of establishing the Jewish National home” resulting in tensions
between Arabs and Jews.

2. Political representation within the British mandate:

- Political power resided in the hands of the high commissioner and London’s government.
- Mandate offered neither community political rights, and encouraged the 2 communities to organize their own affairs.
- Jews were better organized, as they were represented internationally by the World Zionist Organization, which later became
the Jewish agency. It played a vital role as a liaison on behalf of the Jewish settlers in Palestine with the British.
- Jewish agency organized Jewish immigration and settlement in Palestine + managed the Jewish national fund.
- Formed the Representatives assembly, Jewish national council in Palestine (levied community’s taxes) - Recognized by the
British.
- Arab community lacked a unitary voice because the Arabs were broken due to the mandate system implementation into
various states.
- Each community had its own enemy to fight and rallied around different causes.
- Communication between the Palestinians and the British government wasn’t as strong and effective as the Jewish one.
- Mandate system offered Palestinians little scrope for change.
- Presence of the mandatory power was temporary, but the presence of Jewish communities in Palestine was to remain
permanent..
- Since there was an absence in a representative government, Arabs had no say over the Jewish question and no means of
changing the status quo democratically.
- Constitution in Palestine (1922) a council consisting of Jewish/Christians/Muslims was proposed by the British, with the Arabs
offered 10/23 seats (despite making up 89% of the population).
- Most Arab community leaders didn’t believe that their own community should participate in a political body that didn’t offer
 them rights.
- Arabs boycotted the elections, because it would legitimize the mandate and confirm the Jewish transfer of power.
- Arabs in 1935 were interested in participating, but the British (lobbied by Zionists) rejected it.

3. Rising hostilities between the Palestinian Arabs and the Jewish settlers

- Palestinians were angered at the growing immigration number entering their state and newcomers purchasing their land and
refusing to employ Arab labour.
- Resulted in violence, as the Jewish settler’s militia organization became proactive and retaliated with a similar response.
- British administration were forced to intervene, in which it took 2 forms:
1. Force of law and order, by arresting perpetrators and collectively punish all sympathizers (made them unpopular in front of
the Arabs).
2. Setting up enquiring commissions to understand the reason behind the violence (finding expressed sympathy with
Palestinians plights).
- Raised hopes and expectations among Palestinians, but left them more disappointed with no change forthcoming.
- Inter war years saw the degradation of relations between Arabs and Jewish settlers, as well as intense hostility of both
communities against the British.
- May 1921, a group of Jews were attacked in Jaffa, which spread to other towns (caused the death of 200 Jews/120 Arabs).
- Outburst gave birth to the Jewish parliamentary organization (Haganah), which claimed the Brits are incapable of protecting
Jewish farmers, so they would carry their protection themselves.
- Haycraft enquiring commission blamed the Arabs for Jaffa’s violence, but pointed out the Arabs were reacting out of fear for
their livelihood loss.
- 1922 saw British publishing the “white paper”, declaring that Britain “didn’t contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be
a Jewish national home, but there must be a home in Palestine” and reminded the Arabs that the Balfour declaration wasn’t
“susceptible to change”.
- 23 Aug 1929, a group of armed Arabs attacked Jewish worshippers at the Wailing Wall. Rioting that followed the attack
caused the death of 113 Jews/116 Arabs.
- In Hebron, another attack killed 60 more Jews, so the Shaw commission that looked into the incidents concluded the cause
was “Arabs feeling of animosity and hostility towards the Jews consequent upon the disappointment of their
political/national aspiration and economic fear.
- The recommendation of the Shaw commission resulted in the Brits sending Sir John Hope Simpson to the region. His report
expressed concerns over the economic difficulties facing the Arab farmers. The report argued that there’s an insufficient land
in Palestine to absorb immigrations, in addition to criticizing the policy of hiring only Jews (viewed it as responsible for the
current deplorable conditions).
- The report recommended control on immigration and on Jewish land purchase, which was incorporated in the Passfield
White Paper (October 1930) proposing setting land for landless Palestinians and restriction on Jewish immigration.
- Haganah grew in size, acquired more weapons and became an underground army (riots cause).

4. Social and economic developments in Palestine (1930s)

- 1930s saw a widening gap between Jewish/Arab communities.

- 1930-5, the Jewish population doubled in size (by the end of the 30s, they constituted ⅓ of Palestine’s population).
 - Many of the new immigrations were highly skilled refugees fleeing anti-Semitic persecutions in Europe, bringing knowledge
and funds to boost Palestine’s economy.
- The world was suffering from the effects of the Great Depression, but in Palestine the economy was thriving (Haifa - oil
pipelines terminus linking Mosul with the MS became a major industrial centre, while Tel Aviv expanded from 46k in 1931 to
135k by 1935).
- Economic growth wasn’t equally distributed between the 2 communities.
- Palestinians (farm product was mainly staple crops) suffered from the absence of tariffs imposed on imported goods.
- When Palestine became the dumping ground for such food products, the Palestinian landowners (unable to compete with
cheaper world prices) were forced into bankruptcy.
- Many farm workers seeking employment in local towns/neighbouring countries, due to farm owners selling their lands
(forcing them to abandon the job).
- Palestinian-American historian, Rachid Khalidi underlined the economic gap in Palestine. Between 1922-47, the annual
growth rate of the Jewish sector of the economy was 13.2%, while the Arab was 6.5%. Per capita, it was 4.8% over 3.6%.
- Capital investment in Arab industrial establishments were 2 million, while 12.1 million pounds in Jewish industrial
establishments.
- 1936 saw Jewish individuals earned 2.6 times as much as Arabs, in addition to an official census in 1937 indicating Jewish
workers received 145% in wages more than his Arab counterparts.
- For women in the textile industry, the difference was 433%.
- By July 1937, average real wages of Palestinians decreased by 10% while the Jewish workers rose by 10%, which increased the
resentment of Palestinians towards Jewish settlers.
- Jewish community were more proactive on the social/cultural level, as in 1919 they established a centralized Hebrew school
system, in 1925 there were 2 Hebrew universities (Technion Uni in 1924 and Hebrew Uni in 1925).
- 1932 literacy rate figures showed a wide gap with Jewish at 86% and 22% for Palestinian Arabs.

5. Great Arab revolt

- Triggered off by the murder of 2 Jews (15 April 1936), inciting retaliation with the murder of 2 Arabs.
- Within a few days, thousands were mobilized. Mass demonstrations and mob attacks against each community, in addition to
guerrilla attacks directed against the British.
- 1936-9 was different, as the Palestinians were far more united on prior occasions.
- Arab higher committee, formed soon after the revolt’s beginning rallied important Palestinian families under Jerusalem’s
Mutfi chairmanship (Amin Al Husseini).
- Committee provided the revolt with the leadership and organization that had been lacking on prior occasions, meaning the
revolt could be sustained for a longer period of time and involve more Arabs than before.
- Arabs demanded were: 1. End Jewish migration 2. End land transfer to Jewish owners. 3. Representative government based
on democratic rule.
- Last demand was new, as in 1922, the Arabs refused participation in a legislative body. The change of position was due to
feeling empowered through their struggle.
- Significant change of revolt’s tactics. Previously, attacks were more spontaneous and reflected sheer anger, this time it was
better organized and aimed at more long term objectives.
- Crops were destroyed, pipelines sabotaged, roads mined and transportation disrupted.
 - Arab higher committee called for the non payment of taxes + general strike.
- Long term objective was to bring everyday life to a standstill through civil disobedience and sustained violence. General strike
lasted from April-Oct 1936.
- Revolt was met with an escalation of violence from the Jewish settlers, as a group of more militant settlers split from Haganah
to form Irgun (national military organization in the land of Israel).
- Irgun’s ideology was further proof of the irreconcilability of the 2 communities “Every Jew had the right to enter Plaestine,
only active retaliation would deter the Arabs and the British; only Jewish armed forces would ensure a Jewish state.
- British officials became direct targets of violence (September 1937 incident where the district commissioner for Galilee, Lewis
Andrews was assassinated). This led to an unprecedented degree of counter mobilization on part of British forces (calling
extra 20k men to suppress the revolt).
- Arab committee was banned and its chairman was forced to flee Palestine.
- Casualty rate was higher than the previous revolts (101 Britons, 463 Jews and 5k Palestinians dead with many more
wounded).
- British government sent Lord Robert Peel to head a royal commission for the revolt’s causes.

6. Peel Royal commission

- 1937 report admitted for the 1st time that the contradictory obligations contained in the Balfour declaration was impossible
to fulfill, so it proposed Palestine’s division into 2 states.
- Elizabeth Monroe put it as “It’s right to recommend a surgical operation, but where’s the surgeon?”. It seemed wise to divide
up the 2 communities, but leaving to such a late period meant that it was impossible to bring either side to accept such a
decision.
- Faced with both sides opposition, the recommendations were rejected which made the situation in Palestine continued to
deteriorate (both sides believed they contained legitimacy to control).
- Rejection of Peel recommendations meant the violence became more widespread, as the Arab rebel bands attacked railroads,
bridges, and police stations.
- By 1938’s summer, they controlled much of the countryside and several cities, while managing to disrupt the economy by non
payment of rent (form of boycotting).
- Arab rebel bands insisted that men should wear “Kafiya” as a result of Palestine’s national identity, which meant the British
would increase their troops and resort to violent methods.

7. British white paper - 1939

- Arab revolt had 2 contradictory effects

1. Severe retaliation on the part of the British - led to arrests, imprisonments & execution of Arab militants - caused virtual
collapse of the Arab national movement.
2. Unity shown by Palestinians over such a long period of time gave birth to an Arab Palestinian nationality identity + convinced
the British of the existence of a Palestinian national sentiment that their demands must be taken seriously.
- Course:
- White paper reflected these demands & questioned the idea that Palestine could eventually turn into a Jewish state.
- Stated that “framers of the mandate” couldn;t have intended that Palestine should be converted into a Jewish state against
the Arab’s population will.
 - Approaching war in Europe was a factor that pushed the British to show more understanding towards Arabs (Palestine & Arab
world were of strategic/political importance in the war)
- Propositions of the WP:
1. Jewish immigration to be limited to 15k a year for the next 5 years.
2. In plight of Jews in Europe, Palestine should accept 25k refugees.
3. Land transfer to Jews would be restricted to specific zones.
4. Palestine would be granted independence within ten years.

Effect of the WP:

- Zionists rejected it due to the fact that it was contrary to the promises made in the Balfour declaration.
- Zionist organization realized the need to look for support for their cause elsewhere (US - home to many Jews).
- Arabs (mainly defiant Arab higher committee) rejected it because it didn’t offer them immediate independence.
- Charles D Smith - “1939 White paper outraged the Zionists without satisfying the Arabs”.
- WP publication coincided with Hitler’s preparations for the invasion of Poland (Jewish persecution during WW2 & Herzl
claimed “Jews, living as a minority, were constantly in danger of becoming the target of racial persecution in the upcoming
years”. - Made Jews more eager to complete Herzl’s task.

Effect:

- Israel emerged from the war exhausted but well organized. T

- The new nation had lost 6000 lives, which amounted to nearly one per cent of the entire Jewish population of 650,000.
- However, the Israelis now controlled 79% of what had been the British mandate of Palestine, rather than the 55 per cent
allocated to the new state by the UN.
- On top of the 300,000 Palestinian Arabs who had fled from their homes by the time the British left Palestine in May 1948,
another 400,000 fled by the end of the war in 1949.
- They had become refugees, having fled or been driven from their homes. Most ended up in Gaza or what became known as
the West Bank.
- The events of 1947–9 as a whole, have become known in Arabic as the nakba, the catastrophe or disaster. For the Israelis, this
had been a war of national liberation.
- They had survived their first great test and were confident of their future as an independent nation.
- A US Zionist, Nahum Goldmann, wrote of the psychological effects of the Israeli victory (It seemed to show the advantages of
direct action over negotiation and diplomacy … The victory offered such a glorious contrast to the centuries of persecution
and humiliation, of adaptation and compromise, that it seemed to indicate the only direction that could possibly be taken
from then on. To tolerate no attack … and shape history by creating facts so simple, so compelling, so satisfying that it became
Israel’s policy in its conflict with the Arab world)

Armistice agreement:
 - Between January & July 1949 armistice agreements were signed, under UN supervision, between Israel and each of the
neighbouring Arab states.
I. Armistice with Egypt: The first agreement was between Israel and Egypt. It confirmed their pre-war borders while the Gaza
area of Arab Palestine came under Egyptian military rule.
II. Armistice with Jordan:
- King Abdullah of Transjordan and the Israeli government were keen to reach an agreement with each other and did so in
April.
- The King wanted his forces to keep control of the West Bank, the name given to the Palestinian Arab land on the west bank of
the river Jordan
- This area would now be governed as part of his kingdom. In this way, most of Arab Palestine, including the Old City of
Jerusalem, now became part of the new, enlarged kingdom of Jordan, The Israelis were keen to make peace with the King so
that they could keep control of the newer, western part of Jerusalem.
- They preferred a partitioned Jerusalem to the international zone that the USA/UN wanted
III. Armistice with Syria
- Reaching agreement between Israel and Syria took longer.
- When the fighting in the north had ended, Syrian forces were in control of some territory that had been allocated to the new
Jewish state.
- In July 1948, the UN negotiated that the Syrians would withdraw from the ceasefire lines if the vacated area became a
demilitarized zone. This meant that Israel could not station any troops or weapons there.
- This agreement left Israel free of Syrian troops on its territory while providing a buffer zone between the two sides.

Ataturk and the Turkish republic -

Background information:

- Most of Anatolia (Turkey) was under occupation

- Istanbul (capital) was taken over by allied forces and placed under their administration, in addition to the Dardanelles Straits
(occupied by the British) and major cities on the southern Mediterranean coast (Cilicia, Adana and Antalya) were in
French/Italian hands.
- Fate of Turkey was simply in the hands of the allies.
- Allies wished for the Ottoman Sultan, Mehmed VI to maintain the throne, but under a nominal role.
- His sultanate became an empty shell and he was rendered powerless and dependent on the West.
- Turkey wasn the only one that succeeded in forcing the allies to revise the original peace treaty (Sevres) out of all central
powers, due to the strength and perseverance of Turkish nationalism (personified in Mustafa Kemal’s leadership known as
Atatur, the father of the Turks).

Ataturk’s ideology:

- Rid Turkey of foreign troops presence, reverse the terms of TOS, and restore Turkish sovierginity in Anatolia.
- Strengthen Turkey and put an end to its reputation as “the sick man of Europe”.
Turkish war of independence (Ataturk’s role):

- Decided to travel to Anatolia to combat the invading Greek army, as he wanted to rid the country of foriegn troops.
- Greek presence was a major blow to Turkish national pride, as Greece was an Ottoman colony for centuries.
- Greeks took Turkey’s the opportunity to further advance into Anatolia, triggering a sense of nationalist and starting TWOI.
- Reminded his compatriots that the homeland was in danger and “only the nation’s wall - population” could save it.
- Defying warnings of an enemy attack on his ship, he set sail on "Bandirma" on 16th May 1919.
- On 19th May 1919 he landed in Samsun in Anatolia and this day marks the commencement of the Turkish Liberation War.
- Presence evoked a landslide of patriotism amongst the people.
- A liberation movement of sorts, albeit on a small scale and still in the nascent stage, was taking place in Erzurum and Mustafa
Kemal quickly took charge of it.
- Realized the importance of having a central seat of power that would be akin to impart common national identity for the
people and presenting a united front against the enemy.
- Thus, when the foreign forces occupied Istanbul, on April 23, 1920, Mustafa Kemal convened the Grand National Assembly,
thereby founding a new provisional government and elected as president.
- Greek army marched towards Bursa and Eskisehir, but suffered heavy losses in Jan 1921 in the hands of Colonel Ismet
(appointed by Ataturk).
- Under his role, the Turkish Army won over the majority of the enemy forces at Dumlupinar on 30th August 1922.
- In the east, there was an Armenian threat (promised an autonomous republic by the allies in TOS).
- Autumn 1920, the support of the Soviet troops helped the Turkish army of resistance attack and defeat the newly formed
Armenian republic (first step in revising TOS, as the Mudanya armistice was signed between Turkey, Greece and the UK
followed by the TO Lausanne in Switzerland).

Effects:

- Turkey emerged from the war with pride and ready to build a new and modern state.
- Country suffered enormously after the war, with the population of Anatolia declining by 20%.
- Disrupted much of the country’s infrastructure and famine was widespread.
- Caused massive waves of migration and 10% of the population had left the country.

Establishment of Modern Turkey:

- Wanted to strengthen Turkey’s rule, so he dismantled the sultanate, Ottoman system of government (considering it
outdated/continuous source of weakness for Turkey).
- Aim to replace the Sultanate with a Republic, but aware that he needed to remain cautious since the majority of the Turks
continued to be loyal to their sultan and the sultanate system.
- His tactics were extremely subtle, as he established his authority in Ankara (a city in the heart of Anatolia), as he didn’t want
to continue the Ottoman legacy by establishing it in istanbul.
- 1920-1922, dual power existed: 1. Legal seat of power remained in Istanbul, where the Sultan/Ottoman parliament resided 2.
Alternative seat of power backed by the GNA composed of delegates chosen by local resistance groups was in Ankara.
- Kemal wanted to show that the sultanate was weak and dependent on the west and lacked legal legitimacy.
 - Stressed the sultan’s association with the signing of the humiliating TOS (undermined Turkish sovierginity) and dismembered
TUrkey.
- Pointed out that any decision taken by the government of Istanbul had to be approved by occupying forces (incident
validated it in Jan 1920, as the Ottoman parliament met and adopted the national pact, which defined Ottoman frontier’s as
“All Ottoman land inhabited by Turks when Mudros treaty was signed in October 1918”.
- Stated that Turkey’s national boundaries were areas inhabited by an Ottoman Muslim majority, which was a nationalist
mesage addressed to foreign powers preset on Turkish soil, but didn’t question the loss of Arab speaking Ottoman territory.
- As soon as the parliament’s decision was published, Allies occupied Istanbul (showed the disregard that Western powers had
towards Ottoman parliamentary decision).
- Government in Istanbul was under foreign troops mercy, but the GNA in Anakara represented Turkish people and its strength
depended on Turks themselves.
- Making the National Pact the credo of Nationalists and GNA, Ataturk had made this alternative seat of power legitimate in
Turkish people’s eyes.
- Following steps that assured Ataturk’s success were:
A. GNA repudiated the sultanate and offered Kemal presidency. Mufti of Ankara declared Istanbul’s government to be a traitor
(23/4/1920)
B. GNA passed a law abolishing the sultanate (1/11/1922)
C. Turkey was proclaimed a Republic with Ataturk as president after TO Lausanne (29/10/1923).

Reforms under the Republic:

- Turkey underwent significant change in the next 2 decades (modernized and became a secular parliamentary republic capable
of dealing with European powers on equal terms).
- Many of these changes were due to Mustafa Kemal. Kemalism (Ideology and policies of Ataturk was based on 6 principles,
such as: Reformism/revolutionism 2. Republicanism. 3. Secularism 4. Populism 5. Nationalism 6. Statism.

Reformism/revolutionism:

- Reformism was the need to revolutionize Turkey and the Turkish lifestyle according to the model by Kemal.
- Symbolized Kemalism, because its aim was to bring state controlled, orderly change and demanded the willing and active
participation of the people.
- Kemalism was a paternalistic ideology.
- Ataturk prescribed remedies, which he thought would better Turkish lives.
- Similar to a father, he was disappointed at homes which his flock showed little appreciation.
- Reforms had 2 aspects (cultural/political).
- Cultural: 1. Aimed to bring Turkey close to Western European nations. 2/ The model of the Western nations for Ataturk was
the model for progress, so the closer the Turks came to resemble their European neighbours, the better their lives would be.
- Political: 2. Aimed to strengthen the state through establishing a state ideology that united Turkish citizens under a uniform
and centralized model.
- Changes included strict laws restricting people’s clothing. Men were no longer allowed to wear the traditional headgear
(Turban) and women were discouraged from wearing the veil.
- People were encouraged to dress in the Western European style, like the leader.
 - Culturally, it reduced the outward differences between Turks and Western Europeans.
- Kemal wanted the word “Turk” to represent a society that’s opposed to being outdated/exotic.
- Politically, served the purpose of eliminating regional/ethical differences (Kurds were strongly discouraged to dress in
traditional clothes). Introduced a new mono-ethnic, Turkish identity.
- 1926, European calendar replaced the Islamic lunar calendar, with Sunday replacing Friday as the day of rest. The reforms saw
Turkish national identity shifting Westward.
- 1928, new Turkish alphabet using Latin letters replaced Ottoman alphabets (written from right to left and used Arabic letters).
- Schools became free and compulsory, with schools doubling between 1923-1940 and the number of teachers increased by
133% whereas the students by 300%.
- Culturally, ability to write in a similar style as Western European helped bridge the gap.
- Politically, inability to read the Ottoman script ended the new generation’s relationship with the past, which meant a clear
start for Modern Turkey.
- Furthermore, the Quran's language is in Arabic, and even if it can be translated into Turkish, many devout Muslims thought it
was a must to read it in the original language.
- New generation, brought up on new alphabets had difficulty reading the Quran in Arabic (main purpose of Ataturk’s move as
he wanted to securalize the youths).
- Turkish women's union (1924) was formed to promote women’s rights.
- 1930, women were given the right to vote in municipal elections and even qualify as candidates.
- Unions disbanded in 1935, as parity had been achieved with the right to vote.
- Women were encouraged to pursue education and enter public life (Mustafa Kemal with his adopted daughter, Sabiha
Gokcen who became Turkey’s first female combat pilot).

Republicanism:

- 29/10/1923 after TOL, Turkey was proclaimed a republic with Mustafa Kemal as the first president.
- Symbolically, to break with the peast, Ataturk changed the seat of the government + capital of the country moved from
Istanbul to Ankara.
- 1924, the new constitution was passed which confirmed the move from a constitutional monarchy to a republic.
- According to the 1924 constitution sovereignty lay with the people (elected a parliament, GNA) which then elected the
president, who chose the PM.
- Through a republic, civil liberties were severely restricted under Kemalism.
- 1925, 1 party system (Republican’s people party) was established and all opposition came under severe attack.
- Law of the maintenance of order was introduced in March 1925 to crush Kurdish rebellion, but used to rid the Kemalists of all
forms of dissent.
- Law remained in force until 1929.
- Kemal was conscious of opposition danger, which is why he introduced strong discipline within his own party.
- Discussions were only allowed in closed meetings. Once a decision was taken, all members were bound by that decision.
- State and the party were often indistinguishable.
- Decisions in the National assembly were rate + votes were dictated by the party decision.
- Elections were held every 4 years, but the candidates were represented by the party.
- In 1930, for a few months, a new party (Free Republican party) was given permission to be formed, with Kemal’s total
 approval.
- October 1930 local elections saw the new party obtain 30/502 local councils.
- Success managed bring closure to the party, since they were forced to close down (11/1930).
- Press liberty was severely restricted.
- 1931, new Press law was adopted which gave the government the right to close down any newspaper that published anything
contradicting the “country’s general policies”.
- Kemalism intended to use the press as a means to spread its message + not allow any adverse information to be spread to the
public/opposition.

Secularism:

- Separate the caliphate (religious authority) from the sultanate (political authority).
- After Mehmed VI’s departure, Abdul Majid (sultan’s cousin) was designated as caliph. He didn’t have any political
responsibility but rather influence over Muslims.
- GNA passed a law abolishing the caliphate (3/3/1924), ending religious authority (Ottomans held for 400 years). Risky move,
but fulfilled the new credo.
- Politically, it broke the Ottoman influence and culturally it was a step towards a modern Turkey.
- The measures taken was aimed to reduce Islamic influence in Turkish people’s daily lives (closure of religious schools,
abolishment of Turkish ministry - religious endowments - property handed to the state) & replacing Islamic courts by Civil
courts based on European civic codes (1926).
- Islamic jurists lost their authority and fewer people chose to become one.
- Worships at tombs/shrines was prohibited.
- Call to prayer was in read Turkish (following Quran’s translation to Turkish).
- Family code was changed, banning religious marriages/polygamy.
- Islam was no longer the country’s official religious, transforming Turkey into secularism.

Nationalism:

- Promotion of Turkish history and culture.

- Turkish historical society foundation (1925) with the aim to emphasize Turkey’s pre Islamic history and show Turkish people’s
importance before their association with Islam.
- Kemalist ideology aimed to develop Mustafa Kemal’s cult (done through reinterpreting history & emphasizing his role in the
nationalist movement).
- Mustafa Kemal’s memoirs were published (1926). He depicted himself as the one who led the nationalist movement from the
start and present former colleagues as incompetent.
- 1927 speech - outlined Turkish national movement’s history and criticized his former colleagues. It was translated into
German, French and German, becoming the official modern Turkish history
- Kemalism aimed to make Turkish people proud of Turkey (making people have faith in and be loyal to the new national
identity).
- Turkish revolution history (1934) became a compulsory subject at school.
- He was inventing the nation of Turkishness through rewriting the past and placing himself as the founder.
- 1982’s constitution, nationalism principle still stands as “material and spiritual well being of the Republic” & Ataturk is
 described as “immortal leader and incomparable national hero”.

Populism:

- Emphasized the nation’s common interests over a group/class interests.

- Kemalist reforms were beneficial to all, and didn’t limit themselves to a privileged group.
- Kemalism reached out to the people/spread its ideology beyond the elite (EX: Ministry of education organized
lectures/exhibitions throughout the country to spread nationalist/secularist ideas - called Turkish Hearth Movement &
replaced in 1932 with People’s homes and Rooms”.
- 500 PH&R throughout Turkey by the end of WW2 & served as recreational centres/sports clubs (fulfilled cultural/political
purpose, spreading Kemalist thinking during people’s leisure time).

Etatism/Statism:

- Aims of Kemalist ideology was to strengthen the state.

- Under Statism’s principle, centralized economic planning was introduced (wasn’t so unusual in the interwar years) & the state
came to supervise much of the economic sector.
- Gave the state the predominant role in the economic field.
- Turkey’s state after the war & the massive shortages led to the state being the only force that had the ability to redress the
situation.
- Kemal’s model was a mixture of Roosevelt’s new deal and Hitler’s planned economy.

Turkey’s relations with the outside world:

Mosul:

- Turkey’s prime objective was to restore its sovereignty over its own territory.
- Kemal showed a great deal of pragmatism in his relations with the outside world & at the cost of losing popularity at home
(EX: Support for dropping Turkey’s territorial claims to Mosul, which stood on Turkey/Iraq’s border and divided up the Kurdish
community.
- Mosul’s artificial border was devised by Lloyd George & Clemenceau based on existing oil reserves, which gave UK access to
Mosul’s oil fields.
- National pact, which defined Turkey’s territory as “All Ottoman land inhabited by Turkeys when the treaty of Mudros was
signed in Oct 1918” which stated Mosul should had been Turkish.
- Under pressure by the GNA to push for Turkey’s rights, but decided to call for LON’s arbitration.
- LON sent a commission of enquiry in 1925.
- When LON arbitrated against Turkey, Ataturk signed a treaty (7/1926) with Iraq/US and accepted the league’s decision -
Mosul belonging to Iraq.
- In return, Turks received 10% of the region’s oil revenue.
- Negative reaction in Turkey, as many felt humiliated by a biased arbitration.
- To control dissent among Ataturk’s own nationalists, civil liberties were greatly restricted.
 - Maintenance Order Law (introduced in 1925) was used to curb open discussions.
- Some theories rose that a fight with the UK over Mosul would simply weaken Turkey (explaining his decision to hand Mosul to
the UK).
- Kemal was aware of Kurdish separatist tendencies & realized Mosul’s addition might increase Kurdish ethnic minority
strengths & prove dangerous to the Republic.

“Peace at home & Peace in the world”:

- Foreign policy remained cautious and realistic.

- Ataturk maintained very amicable relations with the Western World (signed many bilateral treaties with various Western
European countries by 1925).
- Maintained cordial relations with the USSR (2 countries signed a nonaggression pact in 1923, lasting until 1945).
- Turkey maintained independence from the west through this approach.
- Turkey signed friendship treaties (1928 & 1930) with Italy & Greece, in which both countries renounced their claims over
Turkish territory.
- 1932 - Turkey was admitted into LON.
- 1934 - Ataturk concluded the Balkan pact with Greece, Yugoslavia & Romania (assuming non-aggression and cooperation
between them).
- 1936 - Turkey asked for/obtained the rights to supervise the Dardanelle straits.
- Treaty of Saadabad (signed between Iran, Turkey, Iraq & Afghanistan in 1937) brought closer cooperation between them,
reaffirming existing frontiers & agreeing to consult 1 another on common interest matters.
- 1939 - Turkey took back Alexandrette district (had a large Turkish minority and became part of Syria after WW1 and
administered by the French).
- 1938 - Turkish republic pleaded successfully its case in front of LON and the district was detached from Syria and became the
independent republic of Hatay (joined Turkey in 1939).

Kemalism - An assessment

- Important objective - Show the world & Turkish people that times changed.
- New era was defined by nationalism, republicanism and secularism.
- Loyalty to a Turkish national identity replaced loyalty to Ottoman rulers.
- Kemalism succeeded because Turkey continues to be a secular Republic & bridged the gap with Europe (might join the EU).
- Turkey’s international relationship remained peaceful and succeeded in affirming sovereignty over its own territory.
- Final assessment is to evaluate his success in the long run.
- Ataturk had Turkish elite backing, but Kemalism transformation that aimed to bring wasn’t smooth as the state ideology
claims with signs of resistance to Kemalism reforms nowadays.
- Change was imposed and at different periods of modern Turkish history saw dissatisfaction erupting to the surface that
reflects certain shortcomings in the system such as:

Turkification policy:

- Policy of forcefully replacing multi ethnicity with mono ethnicity aimed to bring a standard Turkish identity.
 - Ethnic minorities (Kurds) were discouraged from speaking Kurdish/dressing in traditional Kurdish clothing (not recognized as
ethnically/culturally distinct from Turks + “Mountain Turks” referred.
- Kurds couldn’t form a political party based on their ethnicity (erupted with 1925 revolts).
- 1925 revolts were severely crushed & rebels leaders/large number of followers were executed.
- Kurds claimed cultural autonomy and demanded separation from Turkey despite repression.
- Mustafa Kemal’s ideal of “inventing” the mono ethnic Turk hasn’t been successful.
- 1982 constitution reiterated the mono-ethnic nature of Turkey as stated “Turkish state is an indivisible entity. The language is
Turkish”
- Article 66 states that “everyone is bound to the Turkish state through Turkish citizenship.

Secularization policy:

- Turkish constitution aimed to keep religion out of political sphere & Mustafa Kemal term saw a strict maintenance of the
measure.
- 1950s saw political parties emerge that openly expressed their religious beliefs & their popularity in elections proved that
Kemalist secular ideas hadn’t transformed Turkish beliefs.
- 1982 constitution retained the Turkish secular identity and 1990s law banned headscarf.
- Recent years saw major debates within Turkish communities over the degree to which islam could be tolerated politically
(AKP since 2002 won Turkish elections + saw the AKP lifting the ban on wearing in colleges/universities + a poll saw 45% of
Turkish women wore headscarfs.

Equal rights for men & women :

- Attempted to impose parity between men & women in society (required a change in thinking).
- 1933 had 13 Turkish female judges + 17 women elected in 1935 elections. However, the numbers weren’t sustained as there
were 6 women deputies in 1990.
- 2007 elections had 24 women, but only 4.4% of total deputies in Turkey’s parliamentary.
- 2003-4 statistic compared female/male school attendance at secondary level, with the gap being less than 10% + literacy rate
in 2003 were 79% for women & 94% for men.

Reza Khan:
Background:

- Iran witnessed physical damage from WW1, but the war had an effect on the ruler’s central authority.
- Iran was ruled by Ahmad Shah (Qajar’s dynasty, with his authority undermined by foreign troops presence + country breaking
up into local separatist revolts to take advantage of power vacuum

Iran after WW1:

TOV:

- Persian delegation went to Paris to present its country’s grievance to the peacemakers by claiming the war had damaged
their economy + left many regions devastated (the conference should compensate them).
- Some representatives were sympathetic, the British delegation refused to let the Persians present their demands, so the
delegation returned home empty handed.
- Britain’s refusal is due to the fact they’ve already prepared the bilateral agreement - Anglo-Persian agreement that aimed to
put Persia under British protection).
- The plan meant that the weak Persian government would sign the treaty and hand over to the UK total control of its finances,
army, economy, administration and affairs.

Society:

- Chaotic years for Persia following WW1.

- Country managed to rally sufficient nationalist support to obstruct British plans and prevent Anglo-Persian ratification
(despite a weak government in power).
- Succeeded in defeating the rebel forces & restored Tehran’s authority.
- Persia remained an autonomous sovereign state due to Reza Khan (Cossack Brigade commander)

Reza Khan background:

- Reza Savad Koohi joined the Persian Cossack brigade (elite military unit run by Russia officers) at the age of 16.
- Military career gave him access to minimum education (he wouldn’t have obtained otherwise).
- Sowed the seeds of patriotism & a particular dislike for foreign powers dominating his country.
- Stated that “After I chose the soldier’s profession, I became more sunk in grief as I saw Iran's Forces destinies determined by
Russian officers”.
- Soldier's profession gave him the opportunity to rise to Brigadier rank .
- Coincided with Russian revolution & Russian officers dismissal which opened the possibility for an Iranian to fill the
commander;s post.
- Reza Khan was the man to fulfill the post due to his capabilities.
- Civil disorder & disintegrated central authority (1921) = Reza Khan leading his troops into the capital in a bloodless coup
d’etat and forced Ahmed Shah to appoint him as minister of defence.
- 1923, he gave PM and parliamentary vote saw him taking over from Ahmad Shah (1925) being forced to abdicate (ended the
Qajar dynasty).
 - Reza was made King & became Shah, he chose the name “Pahlavi” for the dynasty.

Consolidation of power:

Tribal chiefs -

- Needed to obtain legitimacy & popularity to consolidate his position.

- 1st task was to restore order & ensure rebel’s military defeat.
- Needed to establish himself as the sole, legitimate ruler, which he did by merging all different armed units into 1 central
national that was sent out to crush and disarm rebels.
- Personally led the fight against the last tribal chiefs, Sheikh Khazal (led a separatist movement in Khuzistan’s southern
regions).
- Chiefs elimination and ethnic rebellion suppression saw Reza Khan as a hero and saviour in Iran, as he restored discipline and
prevented Iran’s disintegration, making him popular & legitimate.

Power base -

- Needed to obtain a power base (Persian rulers traditionally had a tribal affiliation which offered them the necessary platform
from which to rule + ascended the hierarchy within their tribe and were tribal chiefs before they vied for leadership position
in Iran).
- EX - Qajars originated from north-Western Azerbaijan and brought with them Turco-Persian ethnic group support.
- WIthout necessary tribal affiliation that guaranteed a support system, Reza Khan needed to create his power based.
- As a nationalist & modernizer, he chose the army & middle class intelligentsia as his tribe.
- He offered the soldiers nationalist pride + obtain/maintain their loyalty through increasing army size and offering privileges to
the armed force (helped him maintain his main power base).
- Middle class intelligentsia - Promised national rebirth & national unity + pledged a break with the past (received middle
classes backing who suffered from the country being dominated by foreign powers under the weak Qajar dynasty).
- Was the man for the middle class who could realize their wish for an independent & stable Persia that was free from foreign
powers clutches & ready to meet 20th century challenges.
- Didn’t remain Reza’s loyal supporters till the end, despite aiding his rise to power and supported his projects at first.

Break with the past:

- Needed to unify the country & offer his supporters an ideology replacing tribal affiliation, based on loyalty to the nation &
founder.
- Nationalism (unified Perisan identity based) was the means through which Reza Shah could justify his action.
- Needed to eliminate future separatist movements risk & suppress ethic differences (Iran is ethnically diverse, with each
minority having its specific language, culture and literature).
- Reza Shah outlawed ethnic languages & clothing + central state loyalty became his rule’s credo.
- National rebirth symbol achieved through Reza Shah’s revival of pre Islamic Persian myth + took steps to revive pre Islamic
Iran.
- Changed Persia’s name into Iran in 1935, emphasizing the country’s pre Islamic roots.
 - Iran was inclusive of all ethnic groups, whereas Persia was exclusive.
- Pursued a military discipline (disobedience = munity).
- Criticism of his rule = curbed + rivals suppressed through civil liberties restrictions.
- At first, many accepted the restrictions (price to pay to obtain independence + national unity + made him popular among
people fearing Iran’s disintegration)., but force made him unpopular.

Nature of the regime:

- Based on 2 principles - 1. Tradition and continuity 2. Nationalism and change.

- 1. Nationalism - introduced modernity and bring about change 2. Tradition - maintained continuity and prevented the birth of
a truly modern state.
- Tradition forces were represented by supporters of monarchy systems & Islamic authority vested in the elergy (Ulema).
- Never managed (as Ataturk) to break away totally from traditional forces because he feared alienating their authority and
couldn’t face social upheaval and tensions that such a break would emerge.
- Ali Ansari (historian - Modern Iran) “Reza Khan’s reformist zeal was tempered by respect for tradition” - maintained monarchy
& some of the reforms to appease the Ulema.

Continuity of Iran under his leadership;

- Reza Khan’s supporters were led to believe that he would end monarchical rule in Persia and establish a republican regime,
since a Republic had been established in Turkey (appealed to Reza Khan’s middle class supporters - saw it as a way to break
with the past and modernize Iran).
- Republic upset some of the more traditionalist groups such as clergy, who equated it with Ataturk’s secularist ideas.
- Ulema (Islamic authority) declared that a republic was contrary to Islam, which led to RK changing his views and justfied his
change of mind by claiming no dynasty = no survival.
- Potential opposition from the Ulema saw RK choosing to continue along the traditional path by giving it a natonalistic
justification for maintaining monarchical rule.

Difference with Qajar dynasty:

- Had the clergy’s full backing and totally dependent on their approval.
- Reza Khan’s will to modernize Iran required a break from Clergy’s rigid control.
- Later parts of his reign had him taking steps in that direction, but not eliminating the clergy from the political scene.
- 1925, he acquiesced to the clergy’s will and maintained the monarchy.
- “Compulsory military service law” introduction was opposed by the clergy on ideological grounds (feared secular principles
indoctrination).
- Reza Khan reacted by amending the law in a way that theological students would be exempt from military (similar to Israel
and Orthodox Jews).
- Reza Shah feeling more secure meant that exemption was withdrawn (clergy held designated seats in the parliament).

Persia:

- Predominantly a rural economy.

 - Under Qajars, social/economic/political power resided in landowning classes hands.
- Reza Khan’s struggle against local chieftains challenged this authority, as he attacked the traditional & confiscated much of
their property.
- Iran didn’t undergo enormous economic changes so the prestigious/wealthy sector remained the land.
- New landowners replaced the old ones, but power structure nature and social relations in rural areas remained the same.
- Qajars restricted civil liberties.
- At first (RK takeover), middle class intelligentsia spoke of a “wind of change” and believed the new leader would be the
vehicle in which their agenda could be implemented (realized their mistake soon after).
- RK reign had press freedom severely restriction & opposition suppressed.
- M.Reza Ghods stated that “1st Pahlavi monarch reduced parliament & cabinet to rubber stamps”
- Institute for Public opinions orientation was formed to control & repress dissent.
- Articles written about Iran in foreign press were systematically reported & censored.

Changes:

- Traditional leaders were undermined & Patriotism and love of unity were introduced (new and in line with modernity).
- Dynastic nationalism (around the ruler and not nation).
- Reza was more calculating and shrewd that predecessors (needed to secure his position since there wasn’t any legitimacy -
chose allis carefully according to circumstances).
- Reza used western educated intellectuals but dispensed with them (felt a sense of threat).
- Creation of a Persian identity to break with the past (to legitimize Rwza’s rule).
- 1928 - secondary school history textbooks emphasized Iran pre Islam (rewritten history).
- Persian language academy formed for persian language purification & take out Arabic words.
- Greater autonomy from the west (Qajar dynasty was a weak government depending financially/politically on foreign powers).
- Reza’s aim was to pursue a “3rd power policy” (obtaining power from others besides Russia/UK such as Germany, France &
US to obtain technical expertise/equipment by sending students to these countries for training).
- 1932 - Iran & UK negotiated the existing oil concessions. 1933 - new agreement rose Iran’s royalties to 20% from 16% but
over 60 years (not favourable to Iran).
- Established good relations with neighbouring countries to strengthen regional links (Saadabad pact in 1937 signed with
Turkey, Iraq & Afghanistan to end disputes among them).
- Difference with Qajar monarchs - state apparatus role (administration of the state compared to monarch’s ruling under
Qajar).
- Reorganized the army to modernize Persia + reflect his strengths as a strong leader.
- Compulsory military service for 2 years to increase armed forces size and Reza Shah’s power base (1925 - 40k men serving in
the army compared to 1941 - 400k men). ⅓ of the country’s budget was allocated to the army
- Armed services permitted more social mobility in society & allowed young men of humble origin to receive basic education &
move up the social ladder.
- Unit commanders in the army were ordered to teach soldiers elementary reading, writing and arithmetic.
- Young officers were sent abroad for training (Mainly France, as French instructors came to Iran).
- Army managed to limit regional opposition (pre conscription, the tribes secured the country’s safety by providing resources in
men & weapons - less reliance on local private corrupt armies).
 - Central government = non existent (most who ran it lacked experience or were too conservative)
- Reza planned to reorganize many existing institutions to strengthen the state through creating a modern bureaucracy
(reduced country’s dependency on foreign powers providing administrative services traditionally).
- Reorganized the country’s finance & economy through taxing sugar & tea and establishing a national bank (Bank Melli iran) to
print its own money (took over the British imperial bank) since the country was on the verge of bankruptcy + aimed to
introduce changes (national army creation) + reduce country’s dependence on outside loans.
- 1927 - New Ministry of justice was formed to draw a set of civic codes (prior only religious courts and legal issues were under
clergy). Clergy didn’t lose all its control however.
- 1928 - Capitulation laws - Laws that didn’t permit a foreign national to be tried in an Iran court were invalid (annulled).
- Reza Shah introduced important reforms in education (aware of high illiteracy rates in Iran) since it served the purpose of
disseminating loyalty towards the new monarch.
- 1927 - Established new secondary schools for both genders.
- 1928 - Started sending students abroad on government scholarships (1934 - 200 foreign educated students had became
secondary/university teachers).
- 1934 - Tehran university inaugurated in 1934.
- Iranians had no birth certificates or surnames (known as son/daughter of their father) pre Reza, so he introduced a law where
Iranians were obliged to choose a name and forced to register officially under that name (major step towards standardizing
Iran with the rest of the world).
- Iran lacked any infrastructure under Qajars, so Reza was keen on giving Iran railway system & roads (referred to railways as a
powerful factor in Iran’s progress & prosperity in his inauguration speech for trans Iranian railway project linking Caspian to
Persian gulf). Project was funded by the new taxation system (1929) & 12 km of roads were constructed (1925-1941).
- Cyrus Ghani (autobiography RK author) - “railways were an assertion of independence & means of restoring Iran’s lost
confidence”.
- Implemented dress codes after his visit to Turkey in 1934 (government employees were forced to wear western clothes & all
men besides clergy were obliged to wear international headgear).
- Amin Banani - specialist on Iran’s modernization - “indiscriminate imitation of western societies”.
- Aimed for women to have equal rights to men by opening up the right to education for women & permitting them to attend
the new Tehran university + 1936 law banned the wearing of the veil (considered abrupt & rigid by society). Women wearing
veils were arrested (contradicting).

Fall of Reza Shah: 1941 - Allied forces asked for the right of passage through Iran, which was refused so they’ve occupied Iran since
the Iranian army showed little resistance (strategically important for sending supplies to USSR to prevent Hitler advance into
Caucasus).