BRITISH MIDDLE EAST POLICY-MAKING AFTER THE FIRST WORLD WAR: THE LAWRENTIAN AND WILSONIAN SCHOOLS

1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 773-793
Author(s):  
TIMOTHY J. PARIS

In the aftermath of the First World War, two schools of divergent thought emerged among Whitehall's Middle East policy-makers. One, propounded by T. E. Lawrence, found support in the Foreign Office, where many favoured Arab national ideals and backed the Hashemite family for rulership positions in the region. The other, epitomized by Arnold Wilson, the civil commissioner for Iraq, was thought to reflect the India Office view that direct British rule in Iraq was essential and that Hashemite pretensions should be opposed. In this article, the author shows that the lines separating the India and Foreign Offices were not so clearly drawn. Many senior officials in the India Office were disturbed by Wilson's imperial programme for Iraq and some were prepared to support Hashemite aspirations. But Lawrence's 1920 campaign for Hashemite rule and his hyperbolic press attacks on Wilson's policies had the paradoxical effect of moving the India Office to defend Wilson and to revert to their anti-Hashemite stance. The article concludes with an analysis of the reasons behind the triumph of the Lawrentian over the Wilsonian schools at the end of 1920, when Wilson was removed from Iraq and Middle East policy-making was consolidated in the Colonial Office.

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Patricia Ellis

Glanders, although known to be endemic in certain regions/countries of the Old and New Worlds for centuries, had been largely overlooked as a threat to equine and human health until the disease re-emerged in the Middle East in 2004. The exponential growth in international horse movements, both legal and illegal, mainly for performance purposes, has enhanced the risk of global spread of glanders in the Middle East and elsewhere. Ever since the First World War, the glanders bacillus has been recognised as a potential biological warfare agent.


Author(s):  
S. S. Shchevelev

The article examines the initial period of the mandate administration of Iraq by Great Britain, the anti-British uprising of 1920. The chronological framework covers the period from May 1916 to October 1921 and includes an analysis of events in the Middle East from May 1916, when the secret agreement on the division of the territories of the Ottoman Empire after the end of World War I (the Sykes-Picot agreement) was concluded before the proclamation of Faisal as king of Iraq and from the formation of the country՚s government. This period is a key one in the Iraqi-British relations at the turn of the 10-20s of the ХХ century. The author focuses on the Anglo-French negotiations during the First World War, on the eve and during the Paris Peace Conference on the division of the territory of the Ottoman Empire and the ownership of the territories in the Arab zone. During these negotiations, it was decided to transfer the mandates for Syria (with Lebanon) to the France, and Palestine and Mesopotamia (Iraq) to Great Britain. The British in Iraq immediately faced strong opposition from both Sunnis and Shiites, resulting in an anti-English uprising in 1920. The author describes the causes, course and consequences of this uprising.


1984 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Ewing

The British controlled their empire in India through the twin instruments of the army and the civil services. But the army was never used much to administer British territories and the day-to-day business of law and order was left to the civil services, headed by the élite corps of covenanted officers, the Indian Civil Service. This corps was the vital link that carried the dictates of the centre to the two hundred and fifty districts that made up British India. Obviously a Service only a thousand or so strong had a presence too thin to achieve what some hagiographers have claimed but it was, nonetheless, a vital part of the structure of British rule. In the years immediately following the first world war, this vital part seemed unable to cope with the galaxy of problems with which it was beset: its own members increasingly questioned the value of their role; Indian politicians attacked what they saw as the remnant of imperial control whilst, on the widest scale, the complex task of governing India seemed to be beyond the creaking, anachronistic and overworked I.C.S.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graydon A. Tunstall

This is a definitive account of the Austro-Hungarian Royal and Imperial Army during the First World War. Graydon A. Tunstall shows how Austria-Hungary entered the war woefully unprepared for the ordeal it would endure. When the war commenced, the Habsburg Army proved grossly under strengthen relative to trained officers and manpower, possessing obsolete weapons and equipment, and with the vast majority of its troops proved inadequately trained for modern warfare. Well over one million Habsburg troops mobilized creating an enormous logistical challenge of forging an army from the diverse cultures, languages, economic and educational backgrounds of the Empire's peoples. Graydon A. Tunstall shows how the army suffered from poor strategic direction and outdated tactics and facing a two-front offensive against both Russia and Serbia. He charts the army's performance on the battlefields of Galicia, Serbia, Romania, the Middle East and Italy through to its ultimate collapse in 1918.


2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Fantauzzo

In March and December 1917 the British Empire won two much-needed victories in Mesopotamia and Palestine: Baghdad and Jerusalem. Both cities were steeped in biblical and oriental lore and both victories happened in a year that had been otherwise disastrous. Throughout the British Empire the press, public, and politicians debated the importance of the two successes, focusing on the effect they would have on the empire’s prestige, the Allies’ war strategy, and the post-war Middle East. Far from being overwhelmed by the ‘romance’ of the fighting in the Middle East, the press’s and public’s response reveals a remarkably well-informed, sophisticated, and occasionally combative debate about the empire’s Middle Eastern war effort.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document