British Attitude Towards Southern Kurdistan Between 1917 and 1919

Available online at http://jgu.garmian.edu.krd Journal of University of Garmian https://doi.org/10.24271/garmian.196353 British Attitude Towards Southern Kurdistan between 1917 and 1919 Ranjdar Mohammed Azeez Department of History, College of Human Sciences, University of Halabja Abstract Article Info To undertake a historical study on the political, military, economic and diplomatic positions of the British representatives in Iraq and the region in Received: June, 2019 general during the transformation from Ottoman rule to a new, independence- seeking political unit of Iraq, after the First World War, it is important to Revised:August,2019 examine the perspectives of the British civil and military authorities and their Accepted:August,2019 plan toward the Kurdish districts of the Mosul vilayet, especially southern s Kurdistan and protecting the northern frontier of Iraq. Keywords Although detailed studies of British post-war strategy towards Iraq have already been undertaken by Western and Eastern historians, much of the World War 1, British officials, historical work that has been done on the British view and their attitude Southern Kurdistan, towards southern Kurdistan in general and the local government in Sulaimaniya government, Sulaymaniyah in particular, tends more to use imperfect narrations writing Sheick Mahmoud from the standpoint of ideological, ethic and political interests. Therefore, through an exhaustive use of British official archives, and analysing original British unpublished documents from various departments of government, this Corresponding Author study attempts to objective understanding of the attitude of British officials in [email protected] London, India and Iraq, toward the future of southern Kurdistan. This study consists of two main sections, the first section examines the situation of southern Kurdistan in the course of World War I. The second one investigates the beginning of the emergence of the Anglo - Kurdish political relations, as well as an analysis of the official position of British representatives toward the local government in Sulaymaniyah. This study rests upon official British and unpublished documents found in the British National Archives, British Library and Parliamentary Archives in London and the Middle East Centre at Oxford University and others were relied upon. Introduction From the early sixteenth century until the First groups, whom moved towards western Iran and World War, the land that had been known the mountain system of Zagros, probably Kurdistan was under the Safavid (Persian) and between 4000 and 2000 B.C. The Kurds then Ottoman (Turkish) empires. Kurdistan had been claimed their origin to the Medes, who ruled the home to the Kurds and various minorities, such Median Empire from 678 to 549 B.C. A as Arabs, Turkmens, Persian and Christian geographical border of greater Kurdistan groups such as Assyrians and Armenians. The demarcated to the north beyond the Araxes Kurds were part of the Indo–European speaking River; to the west as far as Sivan, Erzurum, Journal of the University of Garmian 6 (3), 2019 Marash, the Mesopotamian plain around Kirkuk, leaders in Sulaimaniyah. After the death of his and the mountains of Jebel Hamrin, and to the father by the Turkish authorities in Mosul on 5 east to Tabriz and Hamadan. As a result of the January 1909, and due to his present in the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the redrawn political situations during the First World War, political map of the Middle East, the Kurds were Mahmud’s influence had dramatically evolved. now split over four countries, namely Turkey, He led his followers to fight the British in Shu Syria, Iraq and Iran, whilst a large number also ‘aiba village to the north-west of Basra (known remained in Armenia and Azerbaijan, in the as the Battle of Shu ‘aiba) on 12 April 1915. Soviet Union. This work aims to assess the Due to the existence of different opinions position of southern Kurdistan in British policy. amongst scholars about the number of Kurdish According to a British document, the frontiers of participants in the battle, it is not clear yet how southern Kurdistan consisted of the Greater Zab many they were. Rafiq Hilmi, one of Mahmud’s in the north, the hill range of Hamrin in the close friends, counted the number as 1000 men, south, the Turco-Iranian boundary in the east, who came from the most prominent of the and the line from the Great Zab to Diyala in the Kurdish tribes, but an assessment by the War west. Office estimated the number to be 3000 men. Due to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, a However, the Ottoman forces were defeated, and turning point in the modern history of the Kurds as a result, the Kurds sacrificed a large number was begun, as they found a historic opportunity of fighters. to assert their political rights and claim self- The participation of Kurdish fighters from determination. Like other such groups within the different tribal elements with their own Ottoman Empire, Kurds were inspired by weapons, showed their unanimous view of the President Woodrow Wilsons’s fourteen points, British forces as invaders rather than liberators, especially point 12 which stated that the nations especially as some of these tribes had not in the Ottoman Empire should be assured of previously recognised the leadership of having a free right to determine their own Mahmud, but they subordinated to him in order political destiny and autonomous development. to fight the British. However, whatever the result Southern Kurdistan During the First World War of the war, it provided a chance for Mahmud to In the early part of the war, in order to fight extend his spiritual influence further than ever against Britain, the Ottoman Empire tried to before. mobilize its nationalities by means of pan- There are no record of any formal relations Islamic propaganda (Jihad). The character of the between the Kurds and British political officers Holly War was promoted both Shia and Sunni until the occupation of Baghdad, apart from elements in Mesopotamia to fight against Sharif Pasha’s attempt to contact British Britain. In this regard, the report of the Civil government in connection with Kurdish affairs. Administration of the occupied territories of Iraq Sir Percy Cox (the Civil Commissioner in indicated that ‘both at Qurna and Shu ‘aiba the Mesopotamia, 1916-1918 and the High enemy was supported by large bodies of Arab Commissioner in Baghdad, 1920-1923) reported Mujahidin drawn from every tribe and every his hour talk with Sharif at Marseilles on 3 June class in the Iraq’. While the pan-Islamism, 1918, during which Sharif asked about the future nationalist and pan-Turkish propaganda led the of southern Kurdistan and demanded guarantees Arabs and Turks to become hostile to Britain, for Kurdish autonomy under British protection. the Turks also tended to mobilize the Kurds in Cox also noted that Sharif wished to propose the southern Kurdistan against Britain, using the suggestion which he made in a letter addressed religious propaganda. The Kurds joined the to British government for independence of Ottoman forces under the leadership of Sheikh Kurds of 23 November 1914, which he had Mahmud Barzanji, who was from the important made at several times since then. After taken Qadiriyah Sufi family of the Barzanji Clan. His Baghdad by British forces in March 1917, there grandfather, Sheikh Ahmmad, was one of the was a satisfaction believe by local populations significant notables in the Ottoman Empire in that Britain should assume to take responsibility general, and the most significant religious to hold frontiers further north. The Kurdish Page 263 Journal of the University of Garmian 6 (3), 2019 tribes in the region had consider taking a benefit occupation of Kifri, Duz-Khirmatu, Alton- from emerged opportunity and they contacted Keupri and Ain Farsis in early May. It resulted the British political officers, in the hope that in Turkish losses of about 10,000 men, amongst Britain would allow them to conduct their own whom 7,500 were taken prisoner, with capturing affairs, under the terms of the British Baghdad 30 guns and some more materials. The Kurdish proclamation to the Arabs. Khanikin was tribes helped Britain by not offering supplies to marked as the first Kurdish city where British the Turkish forces. A telegram from the political officers were appointed, after the autumn office on Baghdad described the tribes in the campaign of 1917. Although British officers east of the River Zab as becoming very hostile to had expected to take Khanikin earlier and the Turks, and that those who still doubted despite the request made by Mustafa Pasha would show their loyalty to Britain, after the city Bajlan, the most important political figure in the of Kirkuk had been retaken. It could be argued city, for British protection, British troops were that without Kurdish help, the British troops unable to enter the city, as it was already would not be able to advance to the north so occupied by the Russian troops. The reasons for easily. The Kurdish support helped Townshend taking the city by Britain before the other to capture Kirkuk without Turkish resistance on Kurdish distracts were explained by Cox as the 7 May 1918. The inhabitants in the city political aim of controlling Khanikin in order to welcomed the British troops, especially the secure British interests and control over the famous tribe of Hamawand. Although the Kurdish tribes who already cooperated with Hamawand tribe with other tribes and nationalist British officers. groups had fought against Britain in Shu ‘aiba, British economic interests may have been the they were now to welcome the British forces. major factor in taking the city. To support this, it This was an indication of the alteration of should be noted that Khanikin was considered to Kurdish political opinion about the British be a significant point on the trade route from forces when compared to the early part of the Mesopotamia to Tehran, due to the Khanikin First World War.

Load more