Minorities Treaties and Mandatory Regimes

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-339
Author(s):  
Laura Robson
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Fragile States ◽  
World War ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
Peace Agreements ◽  
Racial Lines

Abstract The post–World War I treaties of Versailles, Sèvres, and Lausanne collectively created two related frames for ongoing Allied control over unreliable territory: a system of “minority protection” in the new and fragile states of eastern Europe, and a neocolonial regime of externally monitored “mandates” in the Mashriq and elsewhere, with both systems falling under the jurisdiction of the newly constructed League of Nations based in Geneva. This article explores how the architects of the peace agreements developed the concepts of minority rights and mandatory responsibilities in conjunction, as a way of codifying, formalizing, and legitimizing restrictions on sovereignty along immovable racial lines.

scholarly journals Embedded Turkification: Nation Building and Violence within the Framework of the League of Nations 1919–1937

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-244
Author(s):  
Carolin Liebisch-Gümüş
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Nation Building ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Population Transfer ◽  
World War ◽  
Core Element ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
International Humanitarianism ◽  
Homogenous Population

AbstractThis article traces intersections between Turkey's relations with the League of Nations and violent homogenization in Anatolia in the two decades following World War I. It advances the argument that the strife for creating a homogenous population—a core element of Turkish nation building—was embedded in the international order. This is explained on two levels. First, the article stresses the role of international asymmetries on the mental horizon of the Turkish nation builders. The League's involvement in the allied plans to partition Turkey had the organization wrapped up in a mélange of humanitarian concerns, civilizing doctrine, and imperialist interests. Turkish nationalists wanted to avoid those imperialist pitfalls and overcome international minority protection by means of Turkification. They saw international humanitarianism as an obstacle to their nationalist line. Second, the article highlights the ways in which the League itself supported the Kemalists’ drive for Turkification, either directly, especially in the case of the “population transfer” between Greece and Turkey, or indirectly through prioritizing Turkey's sovereignty over minority concerns.

Islands for an Anxious Empire: Japan’s Pacific Island Mandate

2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 1699-1703
Author(s):  
Tze M. Loo
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
World War ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Imperial Power

Abstract A century after the victorious Allied powers distributed their spoils of victory in 1919, the world still lives with the geopolitical consequences of the mandates system established by the League of Nations. The Covenant article authorizing the new imperial dispensation came cloaked in the old civilizationist discourse, entrusting sovereignty over “peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world” to the “advanced nations” of Belgium, England, France, Japan, and South Africa. In this series of AHR “reflections” on the mandates, ten scholars of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the international order consider the consequences of the new geopolitical order birthed by World War I. How did the reshuffling of imperial power in the immediate postwar period configure long-term struggles over minority rights, decolonization, and the shape of nation-states when the colonial era finally came to a close? How did the alleged beneficiaries—more often the victims—of this “sacred trust” grasp their own fates in a world that simultaneously promised and denied them the possibility of self-determination? From Palestine, to Namibia, to Kurdistan, and beyond, the legacies of the mandatory moment remain pressing questions today.

Navigating Nationality in the Emigration of Minorities between Bulgaria and Greece, 1919—1941

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodora Dragostinova
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
World War I ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
World War ◽  
Population Exchange ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Voluntary Exchange ◽  
Actual Exchange

The 1919 Convention for Emigration of Minorities between Bulgaria and Greece was an important prototype for minority handling and population exchange in Eastern Europe after World War I. Based on research in Bulgarian and Greek archives, this article offers a comparative analysis of the conflicting pursuits of the two countries and the multiple opinions of various groups affected by displacement. Despite the optimism of the League of Nations that the Convention would solve ethnic conflict by bolstering individual rights, people's unwillingness to prioritize nationality undermined the execution of voluntary exchange. Instead, emigration occurred as an “actual exchange,” and refugees fled their birthplaces under harsh circumstances. Yet individuals inventively navigated their nationality and often defied the priorities of the nation-states to further their personal strategies. Because of the failure of this first international experiment of voluntary exchange in Eastern Europe, future proponents of population management adopted the principle of compulsory exchange.

“Sons of the Soil”: Cause Lawyers, the Togo-Cameroun Mandates, and the Origins of Decolonization

2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 1709-1714
Author(s):  
Meredith Terretta ◽  
Benjamin N. Lawrance
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
World War ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Imperial Power

Abstract A century after the victorious Allied powers distributed their spoils of victory in 1919, the world still lives with the geopolitical consequences of the mandates system established by the League of Nations. The Covenant article authorizing the new imperial dispensation came cloaked in the old civilizationist discourse, entrusting sovereignty over “peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world” to the “advanced nations” of Belgium, England, France, Japan, and South Africa. In this series of “reflections” on the mandates, ten scholars of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the international order consider the consequences of the new geopolitical order birthed by World War I. How did the reshuffling of imperial power in the immediate postwar period configure long-term struggles over minority rights, decolonization, and the shape of nation-states when the colonial era finally came to a close? How did the alleged beneficiaries—more often the victims—of this “sacred trust” grasp their own fates in a world that simultaneously promised and denied them the possibility of self-determination? From Palestine, to Namibia, to Kurdistan, and beyond, the legacies of the mandatory moment remain pressing questions today.

The Ottoman Empire: The Mandate That Never Was

2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 1694-1698
Author(s):  
Yiğit Akın
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
World War ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Imperial Power

Abstract A century after the victorious Allied powers distributed their spoils of victory in 1919, the world still lives with the geopolitical consequences of the mandates system established by the League of Nations. The Covenant article authorizing the new imperial dispensation came cloaked in the old civilizationist discourse, entrusting sovereignty over “peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world” to the “advanced nations” of Belgium, England, France, Japan, and South Africa. In this series of “reflections” on the mandates, ten scholars of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the international order consider the consequences of the new geopolitical order birthed by World War I. How did the reshuffling of imperial power in the immediate postwar period configure long-term struggles over minority rights, decolonization, and the shape of nation-states when the colonial era finally came to a close? How did the alleged beneficiaries—more often the victims—of this “sacred trust” grasp their own fates in a world that simultaneously promised and denied them the possibility of self-determination? From Palestine, to Namibia, to Kurdistan, and beyond, the legacies of the mandatory moment remain pressing questions today.

An International Regime in an Age of Empire

2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 1676-1680
Author(s):  
Susan Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
World War ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Imperial Power

Abstract A century after the victorious Allied powers distributed their spoils of victory in 1919, the world still lives with the geopolitical consequences of the mandates system established by the League of Nations. The Covenant article authorizing the new imperial dispensation came cloaked in the old civilizationist discourse, entrusting sovereignty over “peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world” to the “advanced nations” of Belgium, England, France, Japan, and South Africa. In this series of “reflections” on the mandates, ten scholars of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the international order consider the consequences of the new geopolitical order birthed by World War I. How did the reshuffling of imperial power in the immediate postwar period configure long-term struggles over minority rights, decolonization, and the shape of nation-states when the colonial era finally came to a close? How did the alleged beneficiaries—more often the victims—of this “sacred trust” grasp their own fates in a world that simultaneously promised and denied them the possibility of self-determination? From Palestine, to Namibia, to Kurdistan, and beyond, the legacies of the mandatory moment remain pressing questions today.

REPUBLIC OF PARADOX: THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS MINORITY PROTECTION REGIME AND THE NEW TURKEY'S STEP-CITIZENS

2014 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 657-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lerna Ekmekcioglu
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
World War ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
The Republic ◽  
International Power ◽  
New Nation ◽  
Republic Of Turkey

AbstractThis article focuses on the years after World War I, especially the first decade following the 1923 establishment of the Republic of Turkey, in order to analyze the position of minorities in the developing “we” of the new nation as projected by its political elite. Situating the discussion in the context of the League of Nations interwar minority protection regime, I demonstrate that the Treaty of Lausanne, which the Ankara government and the Allies signed in July 1923, played an important role in the conflicting treatment that minorities have since received in Turkey. The treaty's minority protection clauses entrenched divisions that had already been formed in the Ottoman Empire during the violence of the preceding decade, including the Armenian genocide. Moreover, reminding Turkish leaders of how 19th-century European imperial powers had used the cause of Ottoman Christians’ suffering as an excuse to infringe on Ottoman sovereignty, these clauses alarmed the Turkish political elite, especially as the “Great Powers” themselves were not bound by such minority protection guarantees. The goal of preventing a repetition of this unbalanced international power dynamic, which, according to the new Turkey's leaders, had led to the demise of the Ottoman Empire, engendered paradoxical policies toward non-Muslim Turkish citizens; they have been largely excluded from a Turkness (Türklük) to which they were sometimes included, even forcibly included.

The Matter of Time

2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 1681-1688
Author(s):  
Sherene Seikaly
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
World War ◽  
Colonial Era ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Imperial Power

Abstract A century after the victorious Allied powers distributed their spoils of victory in 1919, the world still lives with the geopolitical consequences of the mandates system established by the League of Nations. The Covenant article authorizing the new imperial dispensation came cloaked in the old civilizationist discourse, entrusting sovereignty over “peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world” to the “advanced nations” of Belgium, England, France, Japan, and South Africa. In this series of “reflections” on the mandates, ten scholars of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the international order consider the consequences of the new geopolitical order birthed by World War I. How did the reshuffling of imperial power in the immediate postwar period configure long-term struggles over minority rights, decolonization, and the shape of nation-states when the colonial era finally came to a close? How did the alleged beneficiaries—more often the victims—of this “sacred trust” grasp their own fates in a world that simultaneously promised and denied them the possibility of self-determination? From Palestine, to Namibia, to Kurdistan, and beyond, the legacies of the mandatory moment remain pressing questions today.

scholarly journals The hierarchical society: the politics of self-determination and the constitution of new states after 1919

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 372-396
Author(s):  
Maja Spanu
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Society ◽  
International System ◽  
World Politics ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
World War ◽  
New States ◽  
History Of

International Relations scholarship disconnects the history of the so-called expansion of international society from the presence of hierarchies within it. In contrast, this article argues that these developments may in fact be premised on hierarchical arrangements whereby new states are subject to international tutelage as the price of acceptance to international society. It shows that hierarchies within international society are deeply entrenched with the politics of self-determination as international society expands. I substantiate this argument with primary and secondary material on the Minority Treaty provisions imposed on the new states in Central, Eastern and Southern Europe admitted to the League of Nations after World War I. The implications of this claim for International Relations scholarship are twofold. First, my argument contributes to debates on the making of the international system of states by showing that the process of expansion of international society is premised on hierarchy, among and within states. Second, it speaks to the growing body of scholarship on hierarchy in world politics by historicising where hierarchies come from, examining how diverse hierarchies are nested and intersect, and revealing how different actors navigate these hierarchies.

Eastern Europe in the Global History of Decolonization

2018 ◽  
pp. 350-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Mark ◽  
Quinn Slobodian
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
World War I ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
New States ◽  
History Of ◽  
European Colonialism ◽  
The Cold War

This chapter places Eastern Europe into a broader history of decolonization. It shows how the region’s own experience of the end of Empire after the World War I led its new states to consider their relationships with both European colonialism and those were struggling for their future liberation outside their continent. Following World War II, as Communist regimes took power in Eastern Europe, and overseas European Empires dissolved in Africa and Asia, newly powerful relationships developed. Analogies between the end of empire in Eastern Europe and the Global South, though sometimes tortured and riddled with their own blind spots, were nonetheless potent rhetorical idioms, enabling imagined solidarities and facilitating material connections in the era of the Cold War and non-alignment. After the demise of the so-called “evil empire” of the Soviet Union, analogies between the postcolonial and the postcommunist condition allowed for further novel equivalencies between these regions to develop.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document