What's new

Sykes-Picot: The map that spawned a century of resentment

pak-marine

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
11,639
Reaction score
-22
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Sykes-Picot: The map that spawned a century of resentment
_89702551_mpk_1_426_8_may_1916.jpg
Image copyrightNATIONAL ARCHIVES
Image captionThe 1916 map, with the signatures of Mark Sykes and Francois Georges-Picot



Reaching its centenary amidst a general chorus of vilification around the region, the legacy of the secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 has never looked more under assault.

As Iraq lurches deeper into turmoil and disintegration, Kurdish leaders in the already autonomous north are threatening to break away and declare outright independence.

And the militants of the self-styled Islamic State (IS), bulldozing the border between Iraq and Syria in June 2014, declared their intention to eradicate all the region's frontiers and lay Sykes-Picot to rest forever.

Whatever the fate of IS, the future as unitary states of both Syria and Iraq - central to the Sykes-Picot project - is up in the air.

_89702544_5ba719c0-de6f-4b1e-9cf1-0fcfba5dac48.jpg
Image copyrightIS
Image captionIS released a video in June 2014 of militants bulldozing berms on the Syria-Iraq border


In fact, virtually none of the Middle East's present-day frontiers were actually delineated in the document concluded on 16 May 1916 by British and French diplomats Mark Sykes and Francois Georges-Picot.

The Iraq-Syria border post histrionically erased by IS was probably several hundred kilometres from the famous "line in the sand" drawn by Sykes and Picot, which ran almost directly from the Persian border in the north-east, down between Mosul and Kirkuk and across the desert towards the Mediterranean, veering northwards to loop around the top end of Palestine.

Read more:
The region's current borders emerged from a long and complex process of treaties, conferences, deals and conflicts that followed the break-up of the Ottoman Empire and the end of World War One.

But the spirit of Sykes-Picot, dominated by the interests and ruthless ambitions of the two main competing colonial powers, prevailed during that process and through the coming decades, to the Suez crisis of 1956 and even beyond.

Kurdish hour?
Because it inaugurated that era, and epitomised the concept of clandestine colonial carve-ups, Sykes-Picot has become the label for the whole era in which outside powers imposed their will, drew borders and installed client local leaderships, playing divide-and-rule with the "natives", and beggar-my-neighbour with their colonial rivals.

_71739916_880a48c6-c735-4db3-b14e-9d45645bc575.jpg


The resulting order inherited by the Middle East of the day sees a variety of states whose borders were generally drawn with little regard for ethnic, tribal, religious or linguistic considerations.

Often a patchwork of minorities, there is a natural tendency for such countries to fall apart unless held together by the iron grip of a strongman or a powerful central government.

The irony is that the two most potent forces explicitly assailing the Sykes-Picot legacy are at each other's throats: the militants of IS, and the Kurds in the north of both Iraq and Syria.

In both countries, the Kurds have proven the Western coalition's most effective allies in combating IS, although the two sides share a determination to redraw the map.

"It's not just me that's saying it, the fact is that Sykes-Picot has failed, it's over," said the president of Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan Region, Massoud Barzani, in a BBC interview.

"There has to be a new formula for the region. I'm very optimistic that within this new formula, the Kurds will achieve their historic demand and right [to independence]".

_89702548_89702547.jpg
Image copyrightREUTERS

Image captionMassoud Barzani believes Kurds will eventually obtain a permanent nation state
"We have passed through bitter experiences since the formation of the Iraqi state after World War One. We tried to preserve the unity of Iraq, but we are not responsible for its fragmentation - it's the others who broke it up.

"We don't want to be part of the chaos and problems which surround Iraq from all sides."

Entity with borders
President Barzani said the drive for independence was very serious, and that preparations were going ahead "full steam".

He said the first step should be "serious negotiations" with the central government in Baghdad to reach an understanding and a solution, towards what Kurdish leaders are optimistically calling an "amicable separation".

If that did not produce results, he said, the Kurds should go ahead unilaterally with a referendum on independence.

_89702550_40349fb5-89f6-4c09-bcb8-e24dae0ef2a9.jpg
Image copyrightREUTERS

Image captionKurds have declared the establishment of a federal system in areas they control in Syria
"It's a necessary step, because all the previous attempts and experiments failed. If current conditions aren't helpful for independence, there are no circumstances which favour not demanding this right."

Iraq's Kurds are landlocked and surrounded by neighbours - Syria, Turkey, Iran and Iraq itself - which have traditionally quashed Kurdish aspirations.

Under threat from IS, they are more dependent than ever on Western powers which are also strongly counselling them to stick with Iraq.

But whether or not the Iraqi Kurds achieve full formal independence in the near future, they have already established an entity with borders, a flag, international airports, a parliament and government, and its own security forces - everything except a passport and their own currency.

To that extent, they have already redrawn the map. And next door in northern Syria, their fellow Kurds are essentially doing the same, controlling and running large swathes of land along the Turkish border under the title of "self-administration".

Redrawing the future
As for IS, its territorial gains have already peaked. But the chaos in both Iraq and Syria that allowed it to take root have yet to run their course - the alienation of Iraq's Sunni Arab minority (and the Kurds), and Syria's fragmentation in a vicious sectarian civil war.

_71651783_mpk_1_426_8_may_1916.jpg
Image copyrightNATIONAL ARCHIVES

Image captionThe map was drawn with a line from Persia to the River Jordan
The unspoken struggle is over whether formulas can be found for different communities to live together within the borders bequeathed by 20th Century history, or whether new frontiers will have to be drawn to accommodate those peoples - however that concept is defined.

"Sykes-Picot is finished, that's for sure, but everything is now up in the air, and it will be a long time before it becomes clear what the result will be," said the veteran Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt.

The Sykes-Picot agreement conflicted directly with pledges of freedom given by the British to the Arabs in exchange for their support against the collapsing Ottomans.

It also collided with the vision of the US President Woodrow Wilson, who preached self-determination for the peoples subjugated by the Ottoman Empire.

His foreign policy adviser Edward House was later informed of the agreement by UK Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, who 18 months on was to put his name to a declaration which was to have an even more fateful impact on the region.

House wrote: "It is all bad and I told Balfour so. They are making it a breeding place for future war."


@2800 @Bilad al-Haramayn @500 @Malik Alashter @Serpentine
@Kuwaiti Girl @Falcon29 @f1000n
@Dr.Thrax
@Solomon2 @beast89 @United
 
Last edited:
.
I sure hope that when finally the dust settles on the war being waged by ISIS, Kurds, Syria, Turkey Russia and Iraq with american support, a new order emerges which is good for the region and Muslims.
 
. . .
logo.png

Moving forward from Sykes-Picot
Abdulateef Al-Mulhim | Published — Thursday 19 May 2016


abdulatif-al-mulhim-100x100.jpg

Abdulateef Al-Mulhim

Contrary to general perception, the century-old Sykes-Picot Agreement should not be held responsible for the failure of many Arab states. Those failures are caused mainly by poor governance, poor utilization of natural resources, social inequality, weak education system and unnecessarily protracted conflicts.

Was the Sykes-Picot Agreement a conspiracy? If we assume for a moment that it really was a conspiracy then why is this issue being raised after a century.

The agreement was named after Mark Sykes of the British War Office and French Consul in Beirut Francois Picot. It was formulated and supervised by two superpowers of that time i.e. Great Britain and France. Ironically, not many people know much about a third party that was involved in this agreement. Not even historians mention that party in books, which are famous for conspiracy theories in the region.

Tsarist Russia was the third signatory to the agreement. Russia was promised control of Istanbul, all Turkish Straits and parts of eastern Anatolia.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement wasn’t the only agreement that was secretly signed during that period. In 1916 World War I was underway. During major wars, many such deals are signed in public or behind closed doors. Many of them are temporary strategic deals that are meant to change the course of a war. During wars, you try to win as many friends to your side as possible.

More ironic is the fact that when the French and British were planning for an agreement that would increase their influence and expand their control in the Middle East, there was another agreement taking place and not much different from the Sykes-Picot Agreement. That agreement was signed between Turkey and Germany. According to that deal, in case the central powers won the war, Turkey would regain control of three provinces relinquished to Russia in 1878. The central powers were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire.

It is clear that the Sykes-Picot Agreement and/ or any other agreement were not only aimed at dividing the Arab world but was the eventual outcome of a world war. So, why, this 100-year-old agreement is still talked about and blamed for all the events in the Middle East? The answer is easy. We just love and enjoy conspiracy theory because it is the easiest way to pass the buck to others without taking the responsibility of our own actions. What if it were true that the Sykes-Picot Agreement was a well-crafted conspiracy to divide the Arab world and keep it divided?

If Sykes-Picot was really a conspiracy, why it took the Arab world to realize this after more than 100 years and why is the Arab world unable to the change the course of events?

The agreement didn’t materialize two years after the end of the WWI, which ended in 1918. At that time air supremacy was distant dream and countries relied on their maritime or naval power. So, all superpowers at the time had their eyes on coastal territories. And both France and Britain were after the Mediterranean coastal areas. Britain wanted to be close to its territories in the area and France wanted proximity to its colonial territories in Northern Africa, mainly Algiers. At the end of the day, Arab countries were divided. But, again, this was 100 years ago. They could have reunited again if they had a genuine will to do so. As a matter of fact, it is the opposite. The Arab countries were not only divided, but there are internal divisions among people of the same country.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement was signed at a time when there was no Soviet Union. Europe’s map was different and even the world’s new industrial superpower the United States of America comprised only 48 states.

After a century, many in the Arab world are still stuck in the past. One should look at the past only to learn from it but unnecessary obsession of the past is unhealthy and obstructs growth. After WWI and WWII, many countries rose from the ashes. Many countries were divided and many others were united. In 100 years, the world saw new powers rise and dominate the globe and the world also saw old world powers disintegrate. The world changes at a faster pace than in the past and countries continue to switch alliances according to their interests. Until the mid 1970s a war was raging between the US and Vietnam, which was backed by China. Today, it is the Vietnamese seeking US military intervention to stop the Chinese from its military expansion in the South China Sea. Is this an American- Vietnamese conspiracy against the Chinese or is it just a geopolitical fact?
 
.
Lets pray that Kurds turn out to be better muslims than us. After all Salah Ud-din Ayubi was also a Kurd and he liberated Jerusalam.

He did not do it single-handedly. Most of his army, generals etc. consisted of local Arabs. It were the Arabs who eventually defeated the Crusaders and later Mongol hordes, liberating their lands. Mamluks also took part. Kurds played a very small role overall. Lastly while there are many religious Kurds most of the politically active Kurds nowadays are of a secular and nationalistic nature, especially in Turkey. Moreover there are only about 7-8 million Kurds in the Arab world, almost all entirely located in small pockets of northern Syria and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Borders have been changing since forever and this will likely continue however I do believe that the region will likely end up as Europe after WW2 and the end of the Cold War eventually in the sense that greater integration will occur. When this will occur we can only guess about. It's the need of the hour though. That should be obvious for everyone.
 
Last edited:
. .
He did not do it single-handedly. Most of his army, generals etc. consisted of local Arabs. It were the Arabs who eventually defeated the Crusaders and later Mongol hordes, liberating their lands. Mamluks also took part. Kurds played a very small role overall. Lastly while there are many religious Kurds most of the politically active Kurds nowadays are of a secular and nationalistic nature, especially in Turkey. Moreover there are only about 7-8 million Kurds in the Arab world, almost all entirely located in small pockets of northern Syria and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Borders have been changing since forever and this will likely continue however I do believe that the region will likely end up as Europe after WW2 and the end of the Cold War eventually in the sense that greater integration will occur. When this will occur we can only guess about. It's the need of the hour though. That should be obvious for everyone.
Our ultimate target should be liberation of Jeruselam from the Jews. Again this will not be done single-handedly. The first step is for muslims to unite and increase their military strength. Today it looks like a far off thing but one day it might happen.
 
.
Kurds classify themselves as kurds .. they have learnt hard way to keep mosque and state separate therefore good chance that they will emerge as a great nation,

So. you're suggesting that most of the Muslim states are or have been theocracies, right? For crying out loud what do you think the despotic sukular regimes have been doing in the Muslim World? Count them, see how many of them are theocracies and how many of them are suckular regimes. If political Islam had any role in the governance we wouldn't have despots with hundreds of herems oppressing the subjects or billions stashed in the secret Swiss accounts and do you know how that effects the region? You know all too well but of course sukular blood suckers like you are masters in the art of acting.
 
.
Our ultimate target should be liberation of Jeruselam from the Jews. Again this will not be done single-handedly. The first step is for muslims to unite and increase their military strength. Today it looks like a far off thing but one day it might happen.

Another deluded kid..
 
.
So. you're suggesting that most of the Muslim states are or have been theocracies, right? For crying out loud what do you think the despotic sukular regimes have been doing in the Muslim World? Count them, see how many of them are theocracies and how many of them are suckular regimes. If political Islam had any role in the governance we wouldn't have despots with hundreds of herems oppressing the subjects or billions stashed in the secret Swiss accounts and do you know how that effects the region? You know all too well but of course sukular blood suckers like you are masters in the art of acting.

LOL no need to loose it kid , before using the old usual routine ghissa pitta politicians this and that , count how many of the muslim majority countries call them a muslim or islamic name answer a very few (3-4 tops i guess)

Point is most are formed on the basis of region , nation , race and every thing else except religion and so will be the kurds and that was my whole point ! reason why i brought it up since you wish to count so much why not count this so instead of mixing apples and oranges try doing some real numbers .. dont waste your energy on swiss bank acccounts and politicians its beyond
 
.
Tommy's (Brits) promised three different people a land that were controlled by a fourth people. This was DIRTY dealing at it's best.
1. Large part of modern Mid East was Turkish Ottoman Land
2. To keep alliance with the French against the German led axis Tommy's signed Sykes-Picot with the French and gave them land owned by Turks but populated by Arabs !
3. Arabs were promised bby the Tommy's an independent continuous state from Yemen to Syria (same piece of land to be divided between the French and themselves) provided they rebel against Turkish overlords. This was Hussein-Macmohan agreement.
4. European Jews were promised a piece of the same land provided they support British war effort with money, supply of Acetone and use their influence to bring the Yankees to join the war against the axis. This was Balfour declaration.

Land belonging to one promised to three diff people just to win the war. One must give credit to British foreign office for having diplomats who knew the art of playing many cards and do whatever it takes to win a war

Arabs fought the French and British. Tommy's supported Arabs to kick the French out of Syria. Once the French were out, to keep Arab nationalism under check they allowed mass immigration of European Jews, who started fighting the Arabs. Arabs and European Jews in addition to fighting among themselves also started fighting the Tommy's. Fed up, these dirty fork tongued Tommy's packed up and left leaving only two belligerents i.e European Jews and local Arabs. These two have been fighting even since !

Illiterate, ill informed people of the third world always allowed themselves to be dictated and be pawn of world powers. Mess continues to this day (Americans & Russians are still playing the same game!
 
. .
LOL no need to loose it kid , before using the old usual routine ghissa pitta politicians this and that , count how many of the muslim majority countries call them a muslim or islamic name answer a very few (3-4 tops i guess)

Point is most are formed on the basis of region , nation , race and every thing else except religion and so will be the kurds and that was my whole point ! reason why i brought it up since you wish to count so much why not count this so instead of mixing apples and oranges try doing some real numbers .. dont waste your energy on swiss bank acccounts and politicians its beyond

Religion must be separate from the state that was your point and I pointed out that it has been the case in almost the entire Muslim World for the last half a century and that is the reason why we're in such poor state. People like you are looking for excuses for the poor state of the Muslim world brought upon by the suckular devils like you. Yahia Khan and his secular bunch committed crimes against humanity in 1971 and gave india the opportunity to break Pakistan but suckular villains like you in BD blame it on the Islamists. This is just one example of what has been going on in the Muslim World.
 
.
I may be a deluded kid in your eyes but you are a deluded nation in my eyes. How long has your country been trying to join EEC and when do you expect to achieve full membership.

Read the last paragraph of brutas post. He's describing people exactly like you.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom