The Creation of Iraq, 1914–1921 Edited by Reeva Spector Simon and Eleanor H. Tejirian
Shortly after World War I, the state we know today as Iraq was invented. Some eighty years later, the United States and a few other countries invaded Iraq with the declared objective of reinventing at least its system of government. The editors of this volume (who also organized the conference that gave birth to it) chose to explore the history of the creation of Iraq, but they also implicitly posed the question of whether the British experience in the early twentieth century had special meaning and lessons for the invaders and liberators of the twenty first.
In fact, while there were many parallels between the two, it was also striking how many differences there were. The Iraq of 1915–1925 was a much more primitive place. Iraq in 2003 had an efficient and functioning ureaucracy. Although that bureaucratic machinery was at times used for nefarious purposes, it nevertheless provided an invaluable base of expertise and experience that was almost entirely absent when the British marched north to Baghdad. By 2003 Iraq was no longer an illiterate society; mass education had penetrated almost every corner of the populace. By the twenty-first century, oil had become the centerpiece of the Iraqi economy. In the 1920s it was not. Oil changes things. It is typically regarded as a blessing, since it generates great revenue. But oil also has a perverse effect on countries that have it, since money goes directly into the central state coffers with little or none going directly to the people. It frees the government from dependence on the popular will, and thereby tends to discourage democratic behavior and accountability. It is as hard today to predict the effect oil wealth will have on the new Iraq as it would have been to predict the prospect of oil revenues in the 1920s.
Contents
Introduction / 1 Reeva Spector Simon and Eleanor H. Tejirian 1. The View from Basra: Southern Iraq’s Reaction to War and Occupation, 1915–1925 / 19 Judith S. Yaphe
2. The View from Baghdad / 36 Reeva Spector Simon
3. Mosul Questions: Economy, Identity, and Annexation / 50 Sarah Shields
4. The Evolution of the Iran-Iraq Border / 61 Lawrence G. Potter
5. A Kemalist Gambit: A View of the Political Negotiations in the Determination of the Turkish-Iraqi Border / 80 David Cuthell
6. Kurds and the Formation of the State of Iraq, 1917–1932 / 95 M. R. Izady vi Contents
7. The Oil Resources of Iraq: Their Role in the Policies of the Great Powers / 110 George E. Gruen
8. Russia from Empire to Revolution: The Illusion of the Emerging Nation State in the South Caucasus and Beyond / 125 Peter Sinnott
9. Britain, France, and the Diplomatic Agreements / 134 David Fromkin
10. The United States, the Ottoman Empire, and the Postwar Settlement / 146 Eleanor H. Tejirian
Postscript / 162 Appendix: The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 / 165 Additional Readings / 169 List of Contributors / 171 Index / 175
List of Maps Frontispiece. Sykes-Picot Agreement (Middle East) 4.1. Iran-Iraq Boundary / 64 4.2. Iran-Iraq Boundary in the Shatt al Arab / 73 6.1. Sykes-Picot Agreement (Iraq) / 97 6.2. Provisions of the Treaty of Sevres / 101 6.3. Treaty of Lausanne / 103 6.4. Mandates in Arabia / 106
Foreword
Shortly after World War I, the state we know today as Iraq was invented. Some eighty years later, the United States and a few other countries invaded Iraq with the declared objective of reinventing at least its system of government. The editors of this volume (who also organized the conference that gave birth to it) chose to explore the history of the creation of Iraq, but they also implicitly posed the question of whether the British experience in the early twentieth century had special meaning and lessons for the invaders and liberators of the twenty first.
In fact, while there were many parallels between the two, it was also striking how many differences there were. The Iraq of 1915–1925 was a much more primitive place. Iraq in 2003 had an efficient and functioning ureaucracy. Although that bureaucratic machinery was at times used for nefarious purposes, it nevertheless provided an invaluable base of expertise and experience that was almost entirely absent when the British marched north to Baghdad. By 2003 Iraq was no longer an illiterate society; mass education had penetrated almost every corner of the populace. By the twenty-first century, oil had become the centerpiece of the Iraqi economy. In the 1920s it was not. Oil changes things. It is typically regarded as a blessing, since it generates great revenue. But oil also has a perverse effect on countries that have it, since money goes directly into the central state coffers with little or none going directly to the people. It frees the government from dependence on the popular will, and thereby tends to discourage democratic behavior and accountability. It is as hard today to predict the effect oil wealth will have on the new Iraq as it would have been to predict the prospect of oil revenues in the 1920s.
What is similar? The Americans in 2003, like the British before them, did not arrive with a game plan that was reliable. One reason for this uncertainty is that matters of local interest always trump external interests. The effect of tribes, as well as the effects of individual interests and regional interests, were no less powerful eighty years on. Inevitably, it seems, the external “liberators” came in confident of their objectives and priorities, only to be surprised, and so, in the end, find they must adjust their thinking to take account of local demands. Despite the best laid plans, the new leaders inevitably find themselves improvising.
Another fact that emerged from this historical reevaluation was that the forms of democracy are an empty vessel unless endowed with genuine authority. No people will be fooled by a show of elections to positions without any power. Running for office, however democratic the process, will be meaningless unless those elected are actually running their own affairs. At the same time, that is an inherent risk, since genuinely democratic procedures may produce new leaders who are unsympathetic to the views (and interests) or the liberating power. The contradiction is not easily resolved.
In these presentations, I was struck repeatedly by the fact that ethnicity is different from politics. When the British after 1915 were considering the politics of what was to become Iraq, they expected someone who was a Shi‘ite to vote one way and somebody who was a Kurd to vote another. Yet they repeatedly discovered that was not the case. I suspect that this is a lesson the United States and others will have to learn and re-learn in modern Iraq. We all have this model in our heads of a three-tier country: the Kurds in the north, the Sunnis in the center, and the Shi‘ites in the south. In reality the biggest Shi‘ite population is in the center, there are Kurds everywhere, and it is generally much more complicated than it appears.
Similarly, the Law of Unintended Consequences will be no less in force now than it was then. Things have a way of going wrong, of surprising us, of turning out quite differently than anticipated.
History warns us to beware of statements that say “It’s all about oil (or religion or ethnicity).” In fact, it is not all about oil, it is not all about religion, it is not all about ethnicity. It is really about all those things, and circumstances refuse to fit themselves into such a tidy package despite our fervent wishes.
Finally, even a cursory look back should convince all of us to beware of predictions. People who are absolutely convinced that they know how things are going to work out are almost always wrong. They may be wrong for better or for worse, but they are going to be wrong. We cannot look at the world as a linear extrapolation when in fact the real world is extraordinary lumpy and endlessly surprising. Iraq has been—and will be—no exception.
These comments are simply a personal reaction to the presentations at the original conference and in this volume. It has been a valuable learning experience for me. And I recommend these accounts to anyone who is interested in understanding just how hard it is to “liberate” Iraq, and why any outside power should approach that task with a healthy dose of humility.
Gary Sick Middle East Institute Columbia University January 2004
All rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The Creation of Iraq, 1914–1921 / edited by Reeva Spector Simon and Eleanor H. Tejirian. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN 0–231–13292–1 (cl. : alk. paper) — ISBN 0–231– 13293–X (pa. : alk. paper) 1. Iraq—History—1534–1921. 2. Iraq—History—Revolt, 1920. 3. Great Britain—Relations—Iraq. 4. Iraq—Relations— Great Britain. I. Simon, Reeva S. II. Tejirian, Eleanor Harvey
DS77.C74 2004 956.7 03—dc22 2004045639 A Columbia University Press books are printed on permanent and durable acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America c 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 p 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 References to Internet Web Sites (URLs) were accurate at the time of writing. Neither the editors, the contributors, nor Columbia University Press is responsible for Web sites that may have expired or changed since the articles were prepared.
List of Contributors
David Cuthell is the Director of Turkish, Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies at Stevens Institute of Technology.
David Fromkin, University Professor and Professor of History at Boston University, is the author of A Peace To End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East 1914–1922.
George E. Gruen is a Senior Fellow and Academic Advisor at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy. He has served as an Adjunct Professor of International Affairs at the School of International and Public Affairs and currently is a member of Columbia University Seminars on the Middle East, on the History and Culture of the Turks, and on Israel and Jewish Studies.
M. R. Izady is an expert on Middle Eastern affairs with a doctorate from Columbia University. He has taught at various American and European universities, including Harvard. He is presently an Ad. Master Professor of Middle Eastern Studies and History at the Joint Special Operations University, Florida. Izady has testified before two congressional Committees and has authored many books and articles on Middle East subjects.
Lawrence G. Potter is Deputy Director of Gulf/2000, a major research and documentation project on the Persian Gulf states, which is based at Columbia University. He served as Senior Editor at the Foreign Policy Association from 1984 to 1992. He holds a Ph.D. in History from Columbia, where he is Adjunct Associate Professor of International Affairs.
Sarah Shields is associate professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is the author of Mosul before Iraq and numerous articles on northern Iraq during the late Ottoman period. She is currently working on a book on the Mosul Question and the Sanjak Question.
Gary Sick served on the National Security Council staff under Presidents Ford, Carter, and Reagan. When this book was being written, he was director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University.
Reeva Spector Simon is the author of Iraq Between the TwoWorldWars: The Militarist Origins of Tyranny (2004) and co-editor of The Origins of Arab Nationalism (1991); Altruism and Imperialism: Western Cultural and Religious Missions in the Middle East (2002) and The Jews of the Middle East and North Africa in Modern Times (2003).
Peter Sinnott has been teaching courses on the Caucasus and Central Asia at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs since 1997. He has a B.A. in Russian Area Studies from Fordham College and received a Ph.D. in Geography from Columbia University in 1996.
Eleanor H. Tejirian is an Associate Research Scholar at the Middle East Institute, Columbia University. She holds a Ph.D. degree in political science from Columbia, and is co-editor with Reeva Spector Simon of Altruism and Imperialism:Western Cultural and Religious Missions in the Middle East (2002).
Judith S. Yaphe is Distinguished Research Professor and Middle East Project Director in The Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University at Ft. McNair, Washington, D.C. She has published many articles on Iraq and U.S. Policy including The Middle East in 2015 (NDU, 2002) and Shaping the StrategicEnvironment in the Persian Gulf (NDU, 2001).