DOCSLIB.ORG

Overview: Making of Empire

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Overview: Making of Empire Studying the Ottomans: Section 2: Ottomans in the Modern World (19th -early 20th C.) WWI and Aftermath. End of Empire, Birth of Modern Turkey (1:) Egypt and the Arab Revolt Nov. 26-30 WWI: how and why Ottomans Involved ‘Revolutionary’ Young Turk Goverment: - took Ottomans into WWI on side of Germans (Axis powers) - controversial decision (Mustapha Kemal, among others, opposed) - had initially declared neutrality WWI: how and why Ottomans Involved Also, October 29: - Allies announced to Grand Vizier Said Halim Pasha that they had ‘an agreement with Egypt’ - any hostility towards Egypt would be treated as a declaration of war [more on Egypt, below] WWI: how and why Ottomans Involved Key stumbling block to allying with Britain (Allies) was Russia: - Russia long-time enemy, clearly had eyes on Straits of Dardanelles - Ottomans lost territories to Russia steadily since 18th C, reason for refugee crisis in 19th C - could never find support for fighting with Russia WWI: how and why Ottomans Involved Final ‘push’: - came from alliance treaty signed with Germany, August 1914 - followed by ‘incident’ when German ships, navy under protection Ottomans, attacked Russian sea- port October 28 - considered by many to be de facto Ottoman entry to war Official declaration of War against Allied Entente, 1 Nov. 1914 World War I All empire implicated: - Egypt-Sudan, Arabian peninsula, Fertile Crescent - Ottomans on side Central Powers threatened British communications to India (overland and through Suez Canal) - from bases in Egypt, Persian Gulf, British secured lifeline Ottoman Territories becoming Middle-Eastern Theatre of WWI Area Referred to as ‘Fertile Crescent’ In WWI World War I Germans asked for Turks: - to curtail shipping Suez Canal -proclaim jihad against the Entente - November 23, 1914: Sultan called upon all Muslim States to take up arms against British, French and Russia in name of Islam - goal: to unite Muslims across Islamic world: Africa (north, east), Asia, India – and ‘Middle East’ World War I In India: - British colony; sought to exploit Muslim animosity - largely ineffective, except for Pan-Islamists In Africa: - Sudan – competing with British for neo-mahdist loyalty: failed, memory Ottoman/Turkish oppression too recent - Zanzibar/East Africa – mixed results; sultan ultimately capitulated to British but many mainland Arabs assisted Germans in Tanganikya World War I Middle East: - a few tribal shaykhs in south Arabia Yemen, Fertile Crescent responded positively Egypt: under British - ‘occupied’ in 1882 - declared formal ‘protectorate’ December 1914 - Muslims loyal at first, experience of WWI would change that - ‘Nationalists’ sought escape from ‘Turkish Yoke’: not part of Pan-Arabism, Pan-islamism World War I: Egypt Egypt: -importance lay in Suez canal - critical to Britain’s communications, supply lines with Asian, African colonies - rightfully anticipated attack by joint Ottoman-German forces - moved 30,000 Indian forces and Anglo-French naval squadron into place World War I: Egypt Suez Expeditionary Force: - 25,000 troops under direction German officer - attempted ‘surprise’ attack but necessitated long march across desert - posed logistical problems; surprise impossible - lost 2000 men; attack a failure – led to retreat - no further attempt made to take Canal but British could not afford to leave it undefended: took needed forces World War I: Egypt Egypt remained critical: - British imposed martial law - pledged to defend, protect people and… - NOT call on Egyptians to aid in war effort - soon realized need of assistance – logistical, physical labour – to carry out that effort - country became one large army base World War I: Egypt Labour Corps: - built roads, railroads; constructed wharfs, loaded/unloaded ships; laid pipelines (most important being water); laid hundreds of miles wire netting over sand (for transportation); constructed huge resevoirs; assisted Lawrence with ‘Arab Revolt’ (below) - December 1916, Egyptian Expeditionary Force comprised of: - 150,000 British troops - 6,000 Indian troops - 13,000 Egyptian labourers Egyptian Labour Corps Moving along a Wire-Netting Road (above) Building Railway in Sinai Desert (right) World War I: Egypt Recruitment: - mostly in extremely poor villages, used ‘native’ recruiters - six-months’ enlistment (at first) - advance 3 English pounds (for family support); minimum daily payment - given clothes, blankets, necessary equipment, and ‘disinfected’ - offered choice of camel or horse transport, labour corps, veterinary corps (working in animal hospitals) World War I: Egypt With Time: - needs increased; longer terms of enlistment demanded - difficulty finding new recruits - armed ‘guards’ needed to keep (now forced) labour at work - martial law used to extract food to feed labour corps - 1918: riots broke out over methods used to recruit labourers World War I: Egypt - although Egyptians had believed outcome of war would guarantee independence and therefore they should support British… - harsh treatment during war – largely related to Labour Corps -- led to resistance (e.g. riots) - also key to rise of nationalist movement Wafd, led by Sa‘ad Zaghlul World War I: Egypt Sa’ad Zaghlul: -son of small landowner, mayor of a village in Egyptian Delta - studied in medressa, al-Azhar (university) - disciple of traditional scholars al-Afghani, al-Abduh - also studied at French School of Law - collaborated with British; Minister of Education 1906 World War I: Egypt - as Britain's rule became more blatant, exploitative during WWI: Zaghlul emerged as nationalist leader - now arguing for ‘independence’: liberal, secular government - purely ‘Egyptian’ (not Arab or Islamic) nationalism - post-war, became ‘Muslim Brotherhood’: remained central to Egyptian politics (‘Arab Spring’, democratic elections etc) [See “Egyptian nationalism” in ‘Resources’] World War I: Arab Revolt Arab Nationalism: (1) Wahabism [see lecture/readings Oct. 29-31] - Muhamed Pasha engaged by Istanbul to destroy ‘anti-Ottoman’ religious movement; succeeded but movement remained strong (2) Arab discontent: - failure to listen to movements in exile (from 19th C.) - centralization in Istanbul (concern of Emir Husayn) World War I: Arab Revolt Early Arab nationalists generally moderate: Demands of reformist (not radical, revolutionary) nature - more autonomy - more Arabic in education - changes in conscription (during peacetime) World War I: Arab Revolt Arab nationalism: - not yet mass movement (even in Syria where strongest) - most Arabs gave primary loyalty to: - their religion/sect - their tribe - their local governments. Ideologies of Ottomanism and Pan-Islamism strong competition for Arab nationalism World War I: Arab Revolt Most existing Arab “nationalists” : in exile -al-Fatat(Youth) Paris, 1911 - al-Ahd (the Covenant), led by an Egyptian Both called for Arab-Turkish monarchy like Austrian- Hungarian empire - Arabs remaining in parliament had supported 1909 ‘counter-coup’ World War I: Arab Revolt 1913: Arab congress met in Paris: - again requested more autonomy - assurance that conscription outside their ‘home regions’ would only apply during war (not ‘peacetime’) CUP did not respond to requests - fuelled more general discontent ‘at home’, as well as abroad World War I: Arab Revolt Tribes of Arabian Peninsula: - Mecca (under Sherif Husayn) resented increased centralized control under CUP - had support of regional Hijaz tribes - son sought support of Lord Kitchener (Cairo) against Ottoman regime (1911) - British chose not to intervene -- at this time So: in 1914, most Arabs still loyal to Ottoman Empire World War I: Arab Revolt The Hijaz Revolt, 1916: - arguably turning point of Turkish - Arab relations in 20th C. - Hijaz Revolt does not represent expression of Arab or Islamic sentiment against Ottoman Empire - local reaction taking advantage of WWI and imperialist British goals in the Middle East - used religion to legitimize itself in eyes of Islamic world [“Turning Point of Turkish-Arab Relations”, ‘Resources’ for argument] World War I: Arab Revolt With outbreak of War and Ottoman involvement in Arabian Peninsula (e.g. attempt at taking Suez Canal): - strategy of encouraging Arab discontent became ‘official - Britain encouraged Sherif Husayn of Mecca to organize Arab revolt: - made promises of ‘reward’ [next lecture] - saw opportunity to undermine Ottoman attempts at Arab unity [ Sherif Husayn of Hijaz World War I: Arab Revolt Video Excerpt: “Lawrence of Arabia and the Arab Revolt” [Additional Readings] World War I: Arab Revolt June 10, 1916: Arab revolt declared World War I: Arab Revolt Given impetus by Colonel T. E. Lawrence: “Lawrence of Arabia” [ref. video excerpt] - aided by Amir Abd al-Aziz [Ibn Sa'ud] -- leader of nationalist, traditionalist Wahabi movement - was to engage regional pro-Ottoman princes in battle - offered separate, secret agreement by British [next lecture] Ibn Saud with British (Sir Percy Cox and Gertrude Bell ) Arab Revolt 1916-18 Carrying ‘Flag’ of revolt (above) Camel Corps (right) T.E. Lawrence “Lawrence of Arabia” (left) ‘Lawrence of Arabia’: engaged in guerilla warfare in the Desert World War I: Arab Revolt Not Known exactly how many ‘Arabs’ actually fought: - 5,000 official number; did not cover ‘irregulars’ fighting with Lawrence and Faisal - most important: many joined in revolt only when it arrived in their local region - totally unlike ‘regular’ warfare World War I: Arab Revolt Significance of Arab Revolt: - tied up tens-of- thousands of Ottoman troops (who otherwise might otherwise have attacked Suez Canal) - real British justification for starting the revolt Not at all what was understood as ‘purpose’ by those engaged (including Lawrence): believed fighting for new Arab Nation State [next lecture….] World War I: Arab Revolt To Be Continued …. [Wed. Nov. 28].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Re-Visiting the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 in Palestine
    Oberlin Digital Commons at Oberlin Honors Papers Student Work 2016 Contested Land, Contested Representations: Re-visiting the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 in Palestine Gabriel Healey Brown Oberlin College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.oberlin.edu/honors Part of the History Commons Repository Citation Brown, Gabriel Healey, "Contested Land, Contested Representations: Re-visiting the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 in Palestine" (2016). Honors Papers. 226. https://digitalcommons.oberlin.edu/honors/226 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Work at Digital Commons at Oberlin. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons at Oberlin. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Contested Land, Contested Representations: Re-visiting the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 in Palestine Gabriel Brown Candidate for Senior Honors in History Oberlin College Thesis Advisor: Zeinab Abul-Magd Spring/2016 Table of Contents Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………………...1 Map of Palestine, 1936……………………………………………………………………………2 Glossary…………………………………………………………………………………………...3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….4 Chapter One……………………………………………………………………………………...15 Chapter Two……………………………………………………………………………………...25 Chapter Three…………………………………………………………………………………….37 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….50 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………. 59 Brown 1 Acknowledgements Large research endeavors like this one are never undertaken alone, and I would be remiss if I didn’t thank the many people who have helped me along the way. I owe a huge debt to Shelley Lee, Jesse Gamoran, Gavin Ratcliffe, Meghan Mette, and Daniel Hautzinger, whose kind feedback throughout the year sharpened my ideas and improved the coherence of my work more times than I can count. A special thank you to Sam Coates-Finke and Leo Harrington, who were always ready to listen as I worked through the writing process.
    [Show full text]
  • The Purpose of the First World War War Aims and Military Strategies Schriften Des Historischen Kollegs
    The Purpose of the First World War War Aims and Military Strategies Schriften des Historischen Kollegs Herausgegeben von Andreas Wirsching Kolloquien 91 The Purpose of the First World War War Aims and Military Strategies Herausgegeben von Holger Afflerbach An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libra- ries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high quality books Open Access. More information about the initiative can be found at www.knowledgeunlatched.org Schriften des Historischen Kollegs herausgegeben von Andreas Wirsching in Verbindung mit Georg Brun, Peter Funke, Karl-Heinz Hoffmann, Martin Jehne, Susanne Lepsius, Helmut Neuhaus, Frank Rexroth, Martin Schulze Wessel, Willibald Steinmetz und Gerrit Walther Das Historische Kolleg fördert im Bereich der historisch orientierten Wissenschaften Gelehrte, die sich durch herausragende Leistungen in Forschung und Lehre ausgewiesen haben. Es vergibt zu diesem Zweck jährlich bis zu drei Forschungsstipendien und zwei Förderstipendien sowie alle drei Jahre den „Preis des Historischen Kollegs“. Die Forschungsstipendien, deren Verleihung zugleich eine Auszeichnung für die bisherigen Leis- tungen darstellt, sollen den berufenen Wissenschaftlern während eines Kollegjahres die Möglich- keit bieten, frei von anderen Verpflichtungen eine größere Arbeit abzuschließen. Professor Dr. Hol- ger Afflerbach (Leeds/UK) war – zusammen mit Professor Dr. Paul Nolte (Berlin), Dr. Martina Steber (London/UK) und Juniorprofessor Simon Wendt (Frankfurt am Main) – Stipendiat des Historischen Kollegs im Kollegjahr 2012/2013. Den Obliegenheiten der Stipendiaten gemäß hat Holger Afflerbach aus seinem Arbeitsbereich ein Kolloquium zum Thema „Der Sinn des Krieges. Politische Ziele und militärische Instrumente der kriegführenden Parteien von 1914–1918“ vom 21.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain's Broken Promises: the Roots of the Israeli and Palestinian
    Britain’s Broken Promises: The Roots of the Israeli and Palestinian Conflict Overview Students will learn about British control over Palestine after World War I and how it influenced the Israel‐Palestine situation in the modern Middle East. The material will be introduced through a timeline activity and followed by a PowerPoint that covers many of the post‐WWI British policies. The lesson culminates in a letter‐writing project where students have to support a position based upon information learned. Grade 9 NC Essential Standards for World History • WH.1.1: Interpret data presented in time lines and create time lines • WH.1.3: Consider multiple perspectives of various peoples in the past • WH.5.3: Analyze colonization in terms of the desire for access to resources and markets as well as the consequences on indigenous cultures, population, and environment • WH.7.3: Analyze economic and political rivalries, ethnic and regional conflicts, and nationalism and imperialism as underlying causes of war Materials • “Steps Toward Peace in Israel and Palestine” Timeline (excerpt attached) • History of Israel/Palestine Timeline Questions and Answer Key, attached • Drawing paper or chart paper • Colored pencils or crayons (optional) • “Britain’s Broken Promises” PowerPoint, available in the Database of K‐12 Resources (in PDF format) o To view this PDF as a projectable presentation, save the file, click “View” in the top menu bar of the file, and select “Full Screen Mode” o To request an editable PPT version of this presentation, send a request to
    [Show full text]
  • Pan-Arabism and Identity Politics: a Between Case Study
    Pan-Arabism and Identity Politics: A between case study design of Iraq 1952-1977 Alex Iliopoulos Master Thesis: International Relations, specialization Global Order in Historical Perspective Faculty of Humanities Based Sciences – Leiden University Date: January 2021 Student number: S1655485 First examiner of the university: Dr. Diana Natermann Second examiner of the university:1 Dr. Anne-Isabelle Richard TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page Abstract -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 Introduction of research question -------------------------------------------------------------4 CH 1: Pan-Arabism before 1940 (The ‘Awakening’ of Pan-Arabism)-------------------6 CH 2: The (Ethnic) Identity of Pan-Arabism-------------------------------------------------9 CH 3: The between case study research design ---------------------------------------------12 CH 4: Pan-Arabism in Iraq 1940-1952 -------------------------------------------------------15 4.1: Group Identification is fluid -----------------------------------------------------15 4.2: The driving forces behind Pan-Arabism ---------------------------------------17 4.3: ‘Othering’, the ‘out-group’ and ‘scapegoats’ ---------------------------------19 CH 5: Pan-Arabism from 1952-1970 (the in-between period of the two case studies)-21 CH 6: Pan-Arabism 1970-1977, What changed?--------------------------------------------24 Conclusion / Discussion-------------------------------------------------------------------------27 Bibliography--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Arabism in Syria Author(S): C
    The Rise of Arabism in Syria Author(s): C. Ernest Dawn Source: Middle East Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Spring, 1962), pp. 145-168 Published by: Middle East Institute Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4323468 Accessed: 27/08/2009 15:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mei. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Middle East Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Middle East Journal. http://www.jstor.org THE RISE OF ARABISMIN SYRIA C. Ernest Dawn JN the earlyyears of the twentiethcentury, two ideologiescompeted for the loyalties of the Arab inhabitantsof the Ottomanterritories which lay to the east of Suez.
    [Show full text]
  • Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: 1948– 1970
    PALESTINE AND THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT: 1948– 1970 by Dr Charles D. Smith, University of Arizona With the declaration of Israeli independence on May 14, 1948, the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict and Britain’s role in it entered a new phase. Before Israel’s creation, the conflict was one between Zionism and the Palestinian Arabs that originated prior to World War I as a result of Jewish immigration into Palestine with the goal of ultimately creating a Jewish state. This objective had gained official recognition with the issuance of the Balfour Declaration by Great Britain on November 2, 1917. It promised British support to create “in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people,” understood by British and Zionist officials to mean a Jewish state in all of Palestine. Once the Balfour Declaration was incorporated into the 1922 British mandate for Palestine, Britain was obligated to prepare an incoming Jewish population for self-government, not the existing Arab population; mandates had been instituted with the idea of preparing local inhabitants for future independence. As the mandatory power responsible for Palestine, Britain had faced an Arab revolt in the 1930s which it had crushed, and then a Jewish revolt from 1945 onward demanding a Jewish state. Faced with world knowledge of the Holocaust and American pressure favouring Zionism, Britain decided to abdicate its responsibility and in February 1947 handed the Palestine question over to the newly formed United Nations, though British forces remained in Palestine to May 1948. The U.N. General Assembly approved recommendations for partition of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state in November 1947, leading to intense civil strife between Jews and mostly Palestinian Arabs that resulted in the creation of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • Occupation and Resistance in Southern Iraq: a Study of Great Britain's Civil Administration in the Middle Euphrates and the Gr
    DePaul University Via Sapientiae College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences 3-2018 Occupation and resistance in southern Iraq: a study of Great Britain’s civil administration in the Middle Euphrates and the Great Rebellion, 1917-1920 Scott Jones DePaul University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd Recommended Citation Jones, Scott, "Occupation and resistance in southern Iraq: a study of Great Britain’s civil administration in the Middle Euphrates and the Great Rebellion, 1917-1920" (2018). College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations. 241. https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/241 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Occupation and Resistance in Southern Iraq: A Study of Great Britain’s Civil Administration in the Middle Euphrates and the Great Rebellion, 1917-1920 A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts March, 2018 BY Scott Jones Department of International Studies College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences DePaul University Chicago, Illinois Jones 1 Occupation and Resistance in Southern Iraq: A Study of Great Britain’s Civil Administration in the Middle Euphrates and the Great Rebellion, 1917-1920 Scott Jones International Studies Master’s Thesis Thesis Committee Advisor – Kaveh Ehsani, Ph.D., DePaul University Reader – Rajit Mazumder, Ph.D., DePaul University Reader – Eugene Beiriger, Ph.D., DePaul University Introduction – Occupation and Resistance in Southern Iraq 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Arab Revolt
    Keys to the Kingdom National Anthem The Office History The Great Arab Revolt Much of the trauma and dislocation suffered by the peoples of the Middle East during the 20th century can be traced to the events surrounding World War I. During the conflict, the Ottoman Empire sided with the Central Powers against the Allies. Seeing an opportunity to liberate Arab lands from Turkish oppression, and trusting the honor of British officials who promised their support for a unified kingdom for the Arab lands, Sharif Hussein bin Ali, Emir of Mecca and King of the Arabs (and great grandfather of King Hussein), launched the Great Arab Revolt. After the conclusion of the war, however, the victors reneged on their promises to the Arabs, carving from the dismembered Ottoman lands a patchwork system of mandates and protectorates. While the colonial powers denied the Arabs their promised single unified Arab state, it is nevertheless testimony to the effectiveness of the Great Arab Sharif Hussein bin Ali, King of the Arabs and King of the Hijaz. Revolt that the Hashemite family was able to secure Arab rule over © Royal Hashemite Court Transjordan, Iraq and Arabia. Archives In order to discern the motives of the Hashemites in undertaking the revolt, one must understand the policies undertaken by the Ottoman Empire in the years leading up to World War I. Following the Young Turk coup of 1908, the Ottomans abandoned their pluralistic and pan­ Islamic policies, instead pursuing a policy of secular Turkish nationalism. The formerly cosmopolitan and tolerant Ottoman Empire began overtly discriminating against its non­Turkish inhabitants.
    [Show full text]
  • Arab Nationalism from a Historical Perspective: a Gradual Demise?
    | 11 Yalova Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi Arab Nationalism from a Historical Perspective: A Gradual Demise? İsmail KURUN1 Abstract Arab nationalism emerged as a secular ideology in the early 20th century in the Ottoman Empire. During the First World War, it proved influential enough to motivate an Arab rebellion against the Ottomans and, following the war, several Arab states were founded. Its popularity rose in the interwar period, and many Arab mandates became independent after the Second World War. Its popularity peaked at the hands of Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1958 when Syria and Egypt united to form the United Arab Republic. After the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, Arab nationalism began losing its appeal and declined dramatically during the 1970s and 1980s. At the turn of the 21st century, Arab nationalism became an almost irrelevant ideology in the Middle East. This study examines the birth, the dramatic rise, and the sudden decline of Arab nationalism from a historical perspective and concludes that Arab nationalism today, as an ideology, is on the brink of demise. Keywords: political history;Arab nationalism; pan-Arabism; Islam Tarihsel Perspektiften Arap Milliyetçiliği: Tedrici Bir Ölüm Mü? Özet Arap milliyetçiliği 20. yüzyılın başlarında Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda seküler bir ideoloji olarak ortaya çıktı. Birinci Dünya Savaşı sırasında Osmanlılara karşı bir Arap ayaklanmasını motive edecek kadar etkili oldu ve savaştan sonra birkaç Arap devleti kuruldu. Arap milliyetçiliğinin popülaritesi iki savaş arası dönemde yükseldi ve birçok Arap devleti İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra bağımsız hale geldiler. 1958’de Suriye ve Mısır, Birleşik Arap Cumhuriyeti’ni kurmak için birleştiklerinde Arap milliyetçiliğinin popülaritesi zirve yaptı.
    [Show full text]
  • The Committee of Union and Progress and World War I
    The Student Researcher: A Phi Alpha Theta Publication Volume 2 Volume 2, Issue 1 (2016) The Student Article 6 Researcher: A Phi Alpha Theta Publication 2017 The ommittC ee of Union and Progress and World War I Ella Shipp Western Kentucky University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_researcher Part of the European History Commons, and the Islamic World and Near East History Commons Recommended Citation Shipp, Ella (2017) "The ommittC ee of Union and Progress and World War I," The Student Researcher: A Phi Alpha Theta Publication: Vol. 2 , Article 6. Available at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_researcher/vol2/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in The tudeS nt Researcher: A Phi Alpha Theta Publication by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Shipp: The CUP and World War I The Committee of Union and Progress and World War I Ella Shipp Published by TopSCHOLAR®, 2017 1 The Student Researcher: A Phi Alpha Theta Publication, Vol. 2 [2017], Art. 6 The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), which was born out of the Young Turks (founded in 1889), had the stated goal of restoring the 1876 Constitution and Parliament, and was inspired by Young Ottomans such as Namik Kemal.1 However, the group also had a strong streak of nationalism and Social Darwinism influenced by strands of European thought. It became increasingly dominated by rigid thinking and unexperienced young officers who ultimately formed a triumvirate and brought the Ottoman Empire into WWI on the side of the Germans.
    [Show full text]
  • James J. Schneider, Guerrilla Leader: TE Lawrence and the Arab Revolt. New York, NY
    Journal of Military and Strategic VOLUME 14, ISSUE 2, 2012 Studies James J. Schneider, Guerrilla Leader: T.E. Lawrence and the Arab Revolt. New York, NY: Bantam Books, 2011. Bruce E. Stanley James J. Schneider is Professor Emeritus of Military Theory formerly at the School of Advanced Military Studies, US Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Schneider has written extensively on military theory. He is best known for his original work on the development of the theory of operational art, which heavily influenced the education and doctrine of the US Army from the mid- 1980’s to the present. Schneider is currently working on the theory of strategic design. His work on military theory, the theory of operational art, and strategic leadership are the lens through which Schneider analyzes T.E. Lawrence as a guerrilla leader during ©Centre of Military and Strategic Studies, 2012 ISSN : 1488-559X JOURNAL OF MILITARY AND STRATEGIC STUDIES the Arab Revolt. The narrative that Schneider presents covers Lawrence’s experience as a British military advisor to the Arab Revolt from October 1916 to September 1918. The author asserts that “to the extent that Lawrence had any kind of impression among the military – any military – it was when he resonated with a particular kind of rare officer; the military intellectual who saw Seven Pillars of Wisdom [Lawrence’s autobiographical account of the period] and other writings as a psychological and intellectual window into the mind of a desert warrior and guerrilla leader” (xxi-xxii). As such, the author’s goal is to examine Lawrence’s crucial role in the early transformation of the Middle East while he lead the Arab revolt against the Turkish Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • Islam and the Great War in the Middle East, 1914–1918
    Journal of the British Academy, 4, 1–20. DOI 10.5871/jba/004.001 Posted 19 January 2016. © The British Academy 2016 Rival jihads: Islam and the Great War in the Middle East, 1914–1918 Elie Kedourie Memorial Lecture read 8 July 2014 EUGENE ROGAN Abstract: The Ottoman Empire, under pressure from its ally Germany, declared a jihad shortly after entering the First World War. The move was calculated to rouse Muslims in the British, French and Russian empires to rebellion. Dismissed at the time and since as a ‘jihad made in Germany’, the Ottoman attempt to turn the Great War into a holy war failed to provoke mass revolt in any part of the Muslim world. Yet, as German Orientalists predicted, the mere threat of such a rebellion, particularly in British India, was enough to force Britain and its allies to divert scarce manpower and materiel away from the main theatre of operations in the Western Front to the Ottoman front. The deepening of Britain’s engagement in the Middle Eastern theatre of war across the four years of World War I can be attributed in large part to combating the threat of jihad. Keywords: Ottoman Empire, Great War, jihad, WWI, Middle East. The Ottoman entry into the First World War should have provoked little or no concern in European capitals. For decades, the West had dismissed the Ottoman Empire as Europe’s sick man.1 Since the late 1870s, the European powers had carved out whole swathes of Ottoman territory for their empires with impunity. The Russians annexed the Caucasian provinces of Kars, Ardahan and Batum in 1878.
    [Show full text]