Treaty of Sèvres (August 10, 1920) -- Conference of Lausanne--Turkey (July 1923) -

Conference of Lausanne--Turkey (July 1923)

Turkey proved to be the only member of the Central Powers defeated in World War I to negotiate with the Allies as an equal basis and to influence the provisions of the resulting peace treaty. The other World War I peace treaties were dictated by the Allies. Turkish diplomacy, their victory in the Greek-Turkish War, and strong military position around the Bosphorus/Dardanelles, forced the Allies to renegotiate the Sèvres Treaty. There was no political support in either Britain or France to renew hostilities with Turkey which was the only way of maintaining control over the Bosphorus/Dardanelles and other Treaty terms. After stopping hostilities with the Armistice of Mudanya, the Allies invited both the Ankara Republican and the Istanbul Ottoman governments to a conference at Lausanne to renegotiate the now dead Treaty of Sèvres (October 1922). Atatürk was, however, unwilling to compromise. He was determined that the republican nationalist government should be the only representative for Turkey. The Grand National Assembly moved to abolish the Ottoman Sultanate. Thus when the Conference opened, the republican government represented Turkey (November). Ismet Pasha was the chief Turkish negotiator. The 1919 National Pact served as the basis for the Turkish negotiating position. The Allies essentially accepted the provisions in the provisions of the Treaty. The United States participated in the conference but, because America had never declared war on Turkey, did not sign the treaty. The Treaty of Lausanne recognized the modern borders of Turkey with but two exceptions--the Mossul area and Hatay Province with the port of Alexandretta (present-day Iskenderun). The boundary in the east with Iraq was settled by a League of Nations initiative (1926). The southern boundary involving Iskenderun was settled when France ceded the port to Turkey (1939). France at the time was acting as the League of Nations mandatory power for Syria. This was probably a factor in Turkey remaining neutral in World War II. Especially detailed provisions of the treaty regulated use of the strategic Bosphorus/Dardanelles Straits. A Straits Commission under the League of Nations was established. The Allies were to withdraw, after which the Straits would be demilitarized. Turkey would hold the presidency of the Commission and the Soviet Union would be included as a member. The foreign administration of the Ottoman public debt was abolished, but the new Turkish Government assumed responsibility for 40 percent of that debt. The rest was apportioned among the states formed from other former Ottoman territories. Turkey agreed to maintain low tariffs on imports from signatory powers until 1929. Turkey also agreed to affirm the equality of Muslim and non-Muslim Turkish nationals. Turkey and Greece agreed to a mandatory exchange of their respective Greek and Turkish minorities. An exception was made for some Greeks in Istanbul and Turks in western Thrace. The Treaty was signed officially ending the War (July 1923). 

Greek-Turkish War (1920-22)

Greece sided with the Allies in World War I (1914-18), although the Allies had to engineer King Constantine I's replacement as he opposed the War. One of the primary reason Greece entered the War was to obtain Ottoman territory populated by the ethnic Greeks. Greek forces with the authorization of the Supreme Allied War Council occupied Adrianople (Edirne), Bursa, and Smyrna (Izmir). The Greeks landed with the support of an Allied flotilla (summer and fall of 1919). The Turks did not resist and the Greek forces advanced to Usak, 175 kilometers inland from Izmir. There was a substantial Greek population in western Anatolia. The Turks did resist the Greek advance into Anatolia. The initial fighting was inconclusive (1920). The military situation changed in 1921. Turkish forces commanded by Ismet Pasha stopped Greek offensives twice at Inönü (January and April 1921). This prevented any further Greek advances. A third Greek offensive drive the Turks back to Sakarya Nehri, only 80 km from Ankara (July 1921). Here Atatürk took personal command and decisively defeated the Greek Army in a bruising 20-day battle. Greek political developments alienated the British. The French and Italians withdrew from Anatolia (October 1921). The Turks launched an offensive against the Greeks (August 1922). The Turks call it the Battle of the Commander in Chief. The Turks soon reached Izmir, trapping retreating Greek soldiers. Many were evacuated by Allied ships. The Turks then turned to eastern Thrace. Here to get to the Greeks, the Turks faced Allied troops defending the Ottoman Government in Constantinople/Istambul and the Bosphorus/Dardanelles The French Government decided to withdraw its forces. The British prepared to defend their positions. The British did not, however, want a war with Turkey and suggested a compromise. Atatürk accepted the British-proposed truce. The Armistice of Mudanya (near Bursa) ended the fighting between Greece and Turkey (October 1922). The Greek troops withdrew beyond the Maritsa River. The Turks occupied eastern Thracee. The Turks as part of the Armistice accepted a continued Allied presence on the straits and in Istanbul until a comprehensive peace settlement could be negotiated. 

World War I

Greece sided with the Allies in World War I (1914-18), although the Allies had to engineer King Constantine I's replacement as he opposed the War. One of the primary reason Greece entered the War was to obtain Ottoman territory populated by the ethnic Greeks. The Ottoman Empire had sided with the Allies primarily to regain territory seized by the Russians. The suffered a series of disastrous defeat. First in the Caucuses at the hands of the Russians. And then in Palestine at the hands of the British. They were driven out of Arabia, Palestine, Syria, and Iraq with great losses. 

Allied Landings

Greek forces with the authorization of the Supreme Allied War Council occupied Adrianople (Edirne), Bursa, and Smyrna (Izmir). The Greeks landed with the support of an Allied flotilla (summer and fall of 1919). The Turks did not resist and the Greek forces advanced to Usak, 175 kilometers inland from Izmir. There was a substantial Greek population in western Anatolia. 

Treaty of Sèvres (August 10, 1920)

The first attempt to formally end World War I for the Ottoman Empire was the Treaty of Sèvres (August 10, 1920). This was the peace treaty between the Entente (Allies) and Associated Powers and the Ottoman Empire. As at Versailles, the Allies dictated the terms, dismembering the Empire. The Allies used the same approach as with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, dividing up the Empire into ethnically based nation states. The Ottoman Empire had already lost a great deal of territory as the result of largely British offensives, one through Palestine and Syria and the other through Iraq. The Hejaz (Saudi Arabia) was lost through the Arab Revolt supported by the British. An outline for the treaty had been reached at San-Remo Conference (April 1920). Several new states were to be created under the terms of the Sèvres Treaty. The Hejaz (Saudi Arabia) and Armenia were to become independent countries. Kurdistan was also to become independent and would include Mosul. The British and French during the War had reached the Sykes-Picot Agreement (February 1916). This was incorporated into the Treaty. The territories involved were made League of Nation Mandates. Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine were assigned to the British. Lebanon and Syria were assigned to the French. The Dodecanese Islands and Rhodes which had been occupied by Italy in an earlier war with the Ottomans (1911) and small areas of southern Anatolia were to become Italian territory. Thrace and Western Anatolia including İzmir/Smyrna would become Greek territory. The critical Bosphorus, Dardanelles and Sea of Marmara connecting the Black Sea and Mediterranean were to be demilitarized and internationalized. The Ottoman Army was restricted to a maximum 50,000 men. The Ottoman Navy was restricted to 7 sloops and 6 torpedo boats. The Ottomans were prohibited from creating an air force. Sèvres was near Paris and where the Treaty was signed. At the time the Allies occupied the Ottoman capital (Istanbul) and other areas of Turkey. The Ottoman Parliament had been forced to close earlier (April 1920) and thus could not ratify the Treaty. Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin did not ratify it, but he was a figurehead. The Turkish republican movement refused to ratify the Treaty. The republican movement was led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha who was the president of the Turkish Grand National Assembly based in Ankara which was not occupied by the Allies. The republican victory in the Turkish War of Independence made the Ankara republicans Tyurkey's real government. The Allies offered to adjust the Treaty, but the Ankara Government rejected it entirely. 

1920 Fighting

The Turks did resist the Greek advance into Anatolia. The initial fighting was inconclusive (1920). 

King Constantine

King Constantine had opposed Greece's entry into World War I. He was essentially deposed by the British to get Greece into the war. The Allies objected to Greece's reinstatement of King Constantine. Prince Andrew, the father of Britain's Prince Philip, was almost shot by the Greek Government in the recriminations that followed the War. 

1921 Fighting

The military situation changed in 1921. Turkish forces commanded by Ismet Pasha stopped Greek offensives twice at Inönü (January and April 1921). This prevented any further Greek advances. A third Greek offensive drive the Turks back to Sakarya Nehri, only 80 km from Ankara (July 1921). Here Atatürk took personal command and decisively defeated the Greek Army in a bruising 20-day battle. Greek political developments alienated the British. The French and Italians withdrew from Anatolia (October 1921). 

1922 Fighting

The Turks launched an offensive against the Greeks (August 1922). The Turks call it the Battle of the Commander in Chief. The Turks soon reached Izmir, trapping retreating Greek soldiers. Many were evacuated by Allied ships. The Turks then turned to eastern Thrace. Here to get to the Greeks, the Turks faced Allied troops defending the Ottoman Government in Constantinople/Istanbul and the Bosphorus/Dardanelles The French Government decided to withdraw its forces. The British prepared to defend their positions. The British did not, however, want a war with Turkey and suggested a compromise. Atatürk accepted the British-proposed truce. 

Treaty of Mudanya

The Armistice of Mudanya (near Bursa) ended the fighting between Greece and Turkey (October 1922). The Greek troops withdrew beyond the Maritsa River. The Turks occupied eastern Thracee. The Turks as part of the Armistice accepted a continued Allied presence on the straits and in Istanbul until a comprehensive peace settlement could be negotiated. 

Greek Refugees

Much of the Greek population of Anatolia left with the retreating Greek Army or in the repressions and forced resettlements conducted by the Turks after the war. 

Lausanne Treaty (1923)

Turkey's new republican government refused to accept the Sèvres Treaty the Allies attempted to impose (1920). The ability of the Turks to reconstitute a military force and the unwillingness of the Allies to support the Greeks or renew the War meant that another peace treaty had to be negotiated. The result was the Lausanne Treaty which with minor exceptions established Turkey's modern borders. Greece was one of the signatories. One of the provisions of the Treaty was a mandatory exchange of populations. 

Population Exchange

This was complicated by 500 years of living together and the high level of mixing of people and culture as well as the absence of distinct ethnic differences between Greeks and Turks. The two countries decided to only consider religion in determining the people that were to be exchanged. Other matters such as language and ethnicity were decided to be irrelevant. Even religion was complicated. Not only Christians were exchanged with all Muslims. Only the Greek-Orthodox Christians were exchanged with the Sunnite Muslims. Catholic and Protestant Greeks were not deported, but Turkish speaking Sicilian Orthodox Christians were exchanged. There were other exceptions, Turkish speaking Karamanlides were sent to Greece while Greek speaking Cretan Muslims were deported to Turkey. Substantial numbers of people were involved. Records released through 1928 indicate that Turkey deported nearly 1.2 million Greeks, most from Asia Minor. Greece deported about 0.4 million Turks. The Greeks deported 0.4 million Turks. After the exchanges, about 0.2 million Greeks remained in Turkey, mostly in Istanbul. The Greeks of Istanbul and the Turks of Western Thrace had been exempted from the forced repatriations. Even as late as the 1940s, there were 0.14 million Greeks living in Istanbul. 

World War I: Ottoman Empire

Figure 1.--The individuals here are unidentified. Here we see what appears to be an Ottoman Army officer and perhaps his three teenage sons. Or perhaps the boys are his students. The portrait was taken just after the War in 1922.

The Ottoman Empire which was heavily courted by Germany had been hard-pressed by Russia saw the opportunity to win back lost territory and joined the Central Powers. The Ottomans entered the War after the Western Front had settled down to static trench warfare, but the Germans had achieved major victories against the Russians on the Eastern Front. The Ottomans declared war on Russia on October 29, 1914. The first operation was a combined German-Turkish bombardment of Russian Black Sea ports. Russia and Britain and France quickly declared war on Turkey (November 2-5). The first Ottoman offensive was aimed at the Russian Caucuses (December). After initial successes, the Russian retook much lost ground (August 1915). Russian pleas for assistance was one of the factors leading to the disastrous Allied offensive at Gallipoli (February 15). The Turkish forces at Gallipoli were commanded by Mustafa Kemal who later as Kemal Attaturk was to found the Turkish Republic. After heavy losses of both ships and men, the Allies withdrew (December 1915). British Indian forces launched an offensive against Turkish held Mesopotamia (late 1914). The campaign there seesawed Back and forth (1915). A British Army was destroyed, but the British finally took Baghdad and moved into northern Mesopotamia. The campaign in Egypt and Palestine began with an Ottoman attack on Suez. The British struck back and finally took Jerusalem. The Arab Revolt further undercut the Ottoman position. The final British offensive destroyed three Ottoman armies. The Ottomans with their armies being destroyed in the field agreed to an armistice on Mudros, ending the fighting. After four centuries of dominating the Balkans and the Middle East, the Ottoman Empire collapsed. 

The Ottoman Empire

The image of the Empire founded by Othman in the 13th century is not a popular one in the modern mind. There are no romantic images as surround many other great empires such as those of Greece and Rome. The images that are most in the public mind are those of a war-like, uncivilized people conquering the great jewel of Christianity--Constantinople, the enslavement of Christian children, the assault on Christian Europe, and the suppression of the Greeks in the 19th century. The new sultan's murder of his brothers and the titillating stories of harems did nothing to improve the Ottoman image. The genocide of the Armenian people is also often blamed on the Ottomans, although it seems more the result of the rise of Turkish nationalism and the modern secular Turkish state. The image of the Ottomans is generally that of the declining Ottoman state of the 19th century when it had become the backward, corruption-ridden Sickman of Europe. This is very different than the state of the Empire at it height. Art and education flowered under the Ottomans at a time when it was many Christian kingdoms that were backwards. Much of the negative evaluation of the Ottomans comes from the application of 20th century standards which of course is inappropriate. The Ottomans were in fact more open and tolerant through much of their history than contemporary Christian kingdoms. It is true that there were practices such as child gatherings and the forced conversion and enslavement of Christian children. It is also true as slaves of the Sultan their living conditions were often notably improved. It is also necessary to note what was happening to Jewish and Islamic populations in Christian kingdoms. There were no expulsions and forced mass conversions as after the Reconquista in Spain and Portugal, no excesses like the Holy Inquisition in Catholic countries, no devastating religious wars, and no terrifying massacres such as the St. Barthomew Day Massacres in France and ghettos and periodic pogroms for the Jews throughout Christendom. In fact, dissenting Christian communities usually fared better under the Ottomans than Byzantine and Roman Catholic sovereigns. This is not to say that many subject people did not suffer under Ottoman rule. Subject people usually do. Under the Ottomans some did suffer, but others flourished. It is to say that the role of the Ottoman Turks in European history has often not been accurately or fairly presented. 

Russian Designs

Russia after the Napoleonic Wars renewed its 18th century campaign to seize Ottoman territory, posing itself as the protector of Christians in the Balkans. The other great powers (except Prussia) were concerned with Russian expansion and supported the Ottomans by fighting the Crimean War (1853-56). The Great Powers not so much supported the Ottomans, but could not agree on how to partition the Empire. The Russo-Turkish War (1877–78) resulted in varying degrees of autonomy bordering on independence for Bulgaria, Romania, and Serbia although there was still nominal allegiance to the sultan. 

Young Turks

The chronic weakness of the Ottoman Empire and the desultory leadership of the sultan inspired progressive university students and military cadets to conspire against the Government. This had to be done secretly as political activity was not permitted. Thus the Young Turks were organized as a secret society with a cell organization. The Young Turks seized power from Sultan Abdul Hamid II, but retained him as a figurehead (1908). The Young Turks were officially known as the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). The CUP officially deposed and exiled Hamid in 1909. They replaced him with Mehmed V, essentially a non-entity. The Young Turks had many liberal ideals. They continued the Ottoman reform process, Especially notable was opening schools to women and moving on legislative to recognize women’s rights. They forced Sultan Abdul Hamid to end abolitionist rule and approve a constitution as well as install a liberal government. The Young Turks were also staunch Turkish nationalists. Many believed in a more ethnically pure Turkish state to replace the multi-national Ottoman Empire. The reforms, however, had only limited impact on the Ottoman state in the limited time before the outbreak of World War I. Foreign threats prevented the Young Turks from focusing on domestic reports. The Ottomans suffered other defeats in a war with Italy (1911–1912) and the Balkan Wars (1912–1913). The CUP seized power in the midst of the Second Balkan War (1913). After the outbreak of World War I, the CPU conducted secret diplomatic negotiations with the Germans and decided to enter the War as a member of the Central Powers. 

Balkan Wars (1911-13)

The Balkans Wars are very complicated and involved extensive assaults and killing of civilians by all sides. Italy began the assault on the Ottoman Empire by declaring war in this case to secure a new colony in North Africa--Libya. The Italy-Turkish War (1911-12) also fought a war with the Ottomans, While fought outside the Balkans, it further weakened Ottoman troops. In this case the Ottomans largely ceded ton Italian demands because of the worsening situation in the Balkans. The First Balkan War (1912) was essentially a continuation of the wars for independence from the Ottoman Empire. This meant by the 20th century dividing up the spoils of the Ottoman territories in Europe. The new Balkan states (Bulgaria, Greece, and Serbia) combined to drive the Ottomans from Eastern Romania (Lower Thrace and Macedonia). Unfortunately for the people of Macedonia and other Balkan lands, there was no agreed plan for partitioned the territory liberated from the Ottomans. Which lead to the Second Balkan War (1913). This time the primary target was Bulgaria. Romania joined this war to get a slice of Bulgaria--Southern Dobrudža. Even the Ottomans attacked Bulgaria which had occupied areas desired by its neighbors. The First Balkan War had been fought by the Balkan states ostensibly to liberate Christian peoples from Muslim Turkish rule. The Second Balkan War was largely fought among those Christian states and involved atrocities and ethnic cleaning that still affect the people of the Balkans today. While not active participants, the Wars also involved Russia and Austria-Hungary. The rivalries involved were probably a factor in the ability of the two Empires to contain the escalating conflict after the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand which finally led ton World War I. In the end, Bulgaria was outraged by the territories that it had to surrender. In particular it had to renounce its claims to Macedonia and cede Southern Dobrudža back to Romania. This left an embittered Bulgaria, once World War I (1914) broke out, willing to join the Central Powers to regain these territories. 

German Diplomacy

Turkey which was heavily courted by Germany had been hard-pressed by Russia saw the opportunity to win back lost territory and joined the Central Powers. The Germans cultivated the Ottomans during the late 19th and early 20th century. After military defeats at the hands of the Balkan states and Italy (1911-13), the Young Turks who seized power asked for military assistance. The Germans dispatched military mission (1913). 

Outbreak of War (August 1914)

France had learned its lesson in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71). Never again would France attempt to fight the Germans without allies. Bismarck had effectively kept France isolated. His restrained polices changed with the accession of the bellicose Wilhelm II (1883). As a result of Wilhelm's policies, France was able to sign an alliance with Russia meaning that Germany would have to fight a two-front war. The French were less successful with Britain, but Wilhelm's bellicose policies and decision to build a High Seas Fleet paved the way for military cooperation. The French war plan was Plan XVII. Field Marshal Ferdinand Foch personally devised the plan. It was adopted by French Commander-in-Chief Joseph Joffre in 1913. The plan entailed an offensive to take Alsace and Lorraine, seized by the Germans in the Franco-Prussian War. The Germans had a opportunity to win the War in a massive strike against France. The Allies had an advantage against Germany in population and resources. But the Germans had the strongest army at the onset of the War and the Schiliffen Plan directed the bulk of that army at France. The Germans launched a massive invasion through Belgium (August 1914). The goal was to seize Paris and force the French to accept Germany terms, quickly ending the War. If the War was to be won by the Allies, it was the French Army that would have to stop the German invasion. The Russians could distract the Germans on the Eastern Front. The Belgians could slow the Germans and the British could assist on the left flank and to hold the Channel Ports, but it was the French Army that would have to stop the Germans. This occurred on the Marne--the Miracle of the Marne. (September 1914). The war then bogged down into a war of attrition and deadly trench warfare. 

Ottoman Army

The Ottoman Army was not prepared for war. It totaled about 0.6 million men organized into 38 divisions. The High Command planned to expand the Army to about 1 million men in time of war. (Christian subjects were exempt from military service and instead paid a tax.) The Army had experienced substantial casualties in the Balkan Wars. The Army had not performed well in clashes with the relatively poorly equipped Balkan armies. The prospect of war with the major powers was daunting. The Ottomans did not produce modern artillery and weapons like machine guns. They were equipped with mostly German and Austro-Hungarian and some French weapons. Ottoman units were less well equipped with such weapons than the British and French and even the less well equipped Russians. Other military units such as supply and medical services were also woefully inadequate. While waging war against the major European powers seems folly, key Ottoman officials were impressed with German military and industrial powers. German victories on the Eastern Front seemed to offer the prospect of regaining territory lost to the Russians. Some even dreamed of retaking Egypt (with Suez) and other former North African possessions. While the Turkish divisions were of uncertain quality, they represented a serious threat to critical points in the Middle East (Persian oil fields and Suez). Historians disagree as to the effectiveness of the Ottoman Army. Many historians describe the Ottoman Army as poorly led and organized. One historian argues that the Balkan Wars (1912-1913) led to major reforms and left the Ottoman Army with a cadre of experienced veterans. [Erickson, Ottoman] This was not the case with British Commonwealth troops. Some authors credit Turkish successes to German medical advisers, but it is unclear just what impact they had. At least one observer believes that they arrived far too late to have any major impact. [Erickson, Ottoman] 

Declaration of War (October 1914)

The two countries signed a secret military alliance (October 2). The Treaty was aimed at Russia and pledged "joint action" if Russia intervened to protect Serbia from Austria-Hungary. The Ottomans mobilized their army, but did not declare war (October 3). Britain and France did not move to dissuade The Ottomans from entering the War. When Enver Pasha offered to remain neutral if given a substantial loan and if they agreed to end previous financial concessions. Britain moved to hold two dreadnoughts being built in British yards for the Ottoman Navy. Money for these ships had been collected from public fund raising in Turkey. The Turkish public was outraged. Germany at the same time offered to give the Ottoman Navy two ships )the battler cruiser Goeben and the light cruiser Breslau, both ships had been in he Mediterranean when war broke out and escaped from the Royal Navy by seeking refuge in the Dardanelles. The Ottomans unilaterally abolished the financial capitulations (September 8). The initial engagements of the War suggested the Germans would win. The Germans Western offensive occupied almost all of Belgium and a substantial part of northern France. Even more importantly, German armies smashed the Russians on the Eastern Front. (Tannenburg was fought Augest 26-30.) The two German ships (renamed the Sultan Yacuz and Midelli, but under German command commenced attacks on Russian ships and ports in the Black Sea (October 28). This was essentially a declaration of War. Russia declared War (November 4), Britain and France followed (November 5). The Ottoman officially declared war (November 14). Mehmed who was only a figurehead politically, but retained his religious authority, declared a jihad (holy war). The Ottoman Empire was the world's only important Islamic power. The Sultan hoped to engender revolt in French and British colonies (especially Egypt) and enthusiasm in the centuries old struggle against Russia. Unlike the situation in Europe at the beginning of the War, however, there was no public enthusiasm for the War. The first operation was a combined German-Turkish bombardment of Russian Black Sea ports ( Odessa, Sevastopol, and Theodosia). 

Significance

The primary significance of the Turkish action wax it closed the Dardanelles to Allied shipping. This isolated Russia, making it very difficult for the Allies to supply the hard-pressed Russians. Russia had a huge army, but only a small industrial sector. Isolating Russia meant that the superior industrial resources of Britain and France could not help supply Russia in a meaningful way. This would substantially weaken the Russian war effort and eventually prove decisive on the Eastern Front. The Ottoman Empire also bordered on Egypt bringing it dangerously close to the Suez Canal. The Canal was vital to the British war effort and Britain had to mobilize forces to protect the Canal, forces that could have been deployed on the Western Front. 

Caucuses Offensive

The first Ottoman offensive was aimed at the Russian Caucuses (December). Enver Pasha as Minister of War was the supreme commander of the Turkish armed forces. He had ambitious dreams of not only retaking the Caucuses, but of conquering central Asia and uniting all Turkish peoples. He proved to be unequal to the task. [Fromkin, p. 119.] He launched an offensive against the Russians in the Caucasus (December 1914). He launched a force of 100,000 Ottoman troops in frontal attack against well defend Russian positions in the mountains. Worst still the offensive was launched in freezing winter conditions. This proved to be one of the most disastrous campaign in Ottoman military history. After some initial successes, Ottoman losses were horrendous. Enver lost about 85 percent of his force at the Battle of Sarikamis (December 22, 1914 to January 17, 1915). Ever Pasha derived a strategy based on mobility and a vigorous time table, much as the Germans devised for the Schiliffen Plan in the West. It was something the poorly trained Ottoman troops would have difficulty with in the best conditions. Enver expected them to achieve the goals set in the winter conditions over the challenging trainer of the Allahüekber mountains.[Erikson, Ordered, p.60] It was from the onset a recipe for disaster. Tens of thousands of Ottoman troops had to retreat in freezing conditions. Many froze to death. Historians differ as to the death toll. Many estimate losses totaling 90,000 men. The Russians retook much lost ground (August 1915). The Turks and the Russians fought for 3 years in the Caucasus Mountains. The Russians occupied important Ottoman Black Sea ports, but after the Revolution and collapse of the Tsarist Army on the Eastern Front had to withdraw. 

Armenian Genocide (1915-16)

More than a million mostly Christian Armenians were murdered by Ottoman authorities during World War I. Clara Barton led the first Red Cross relief effort conducted outside the United States. While most of the killings occurred during the War, Ottoman actions against the Armenians began in the 1890s. Western newspapers carried articles about "barbaric Mohammedans" murdering Christian martyrs during 1894-96. The killings provoked wide-spread international contamination, but no country intervened to stop the killings. Another series of pogroms occurred in 1909. The Ottomans entered World war I on the side of the Central Power (Germany and Austria-Hungary) in late 1914. The wide-spread, organized genocide against the Armenians began in 1915. Accounts on the numbers of Armenians vary. The estimate of 1.0 million is often used, but some accounts are as high as 1.5 million. [Balakian] The Ottomans used World war I as the NAZIs used World War II as a cover for the killings. The Turkish Government denied at the time and Turkish Governments even today continue to deny that the killings took place and were coordinated by Turkish authorities. 

Gallipoli (1915)

Russian armies on the Eastern Front suffered massive losses as a result of German offensives (1914-15). Russia was able to mobilize a huge army, but was unable to adequately equip them. Russian pleas for assistance was one of the factors leading to the disastrous Allied offensive at Gallipoli. The Dardanelles were an important Allied objective from an early point in the War. (The Crimean War was largely fought to ensure the Russians would not destroy the Ottoman Empire and seize the Dardanelles. The Royal Navy vessels first shelled the Turkish forts in the Dardanelles (November 30). The Allies opened the Gallipoli campaign with a naval bombardment of the Ottoman forts along the Dardanelles (February 19-March 18). They hoped to force their way through Dardanelles to put the Ottoman capital of Constantinople under their big guns. The British believed that this might force the Ottomans out of the war. The Royal Navy used some of its older battleships. The best ships in the Royal Navy were kept for the Grand Fleet in the North Sea to confront the German High Seas Fleet. This action proved costly to the Royal Navy. Three battleships were sunk by mines. Three others were badly damaged. The action was led by Admiral Roebuck. After the losses he withdrew (March 18). He did not realize that the Ottomans were essentially defeated. His withdrawal allowed them to move in fresh troops and artillery. The British next prepared an infantry force in Egypt as a landing force to seize the Dardanelles (March-April). The British landed on the Gallipoli peninsula, providing the name of the campaign (April 25). The landings were poorly executed and the initial surprise was not exploited. The Turks were able to contain the Expeditionary Force, with a large Australian component. There were 3 months of intense fighting with heavy losses on both sides. The Fifth Army behind prepared defensive positions and good equipment effectively resisted the Allied assaults. The Ottoman Mustafa Kemal commanded the Ottoman forces. It was the most successful Ottoman action of the War--and the most vital. It meant that Russia would remain isolated. After the war as Kemal Attaturk would found the Turkish Republic. The Expeditionary Force made few gains. The British staged additional landings. The Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZACs) under Stopford landed at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli which became known as ANZAC Bay (August 6-8). The ANZACs achieved some success, but Stopford did not pursue the attack vigorously and the Ottomans were able to contain them. The British relieved General Ian Hamilton (October 15). It was clear by their time that despite heavy losses, the Gallipoli campaign had failed. General Sir Charles Monro replaced him. Monro recommended that the Expeditionary Force be evacuated. This was approved and the evacuation begins (November 23). The evacuation was largely completed (December 10). The British withdrew the final 35,000 men (January 8-9, 1916). Somehow this was achieved without the loss of a singe man. The Ottomans do not detect the operation. The evacuation proved to be the most successful part of the campaign. 

Mesopotamia

British Indian forces launched an offensive against Turkish held Mesopotamia (late 1914). The British concern was the Persian oil fields and transshipment point which was near Basra near the path the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. The Persian oil fields were vital to the Royal Navy. The British landed a largely Indian Expeditionary Force which would become the 6th Indian Division near Basra, Mesopotamia (October 23). The British Indians force took Basra (November 23). Safe guardian the Persian oil fields made sense and the Gallipoli campaign could be justified, but the campaign into Mesopotamia hardly seems designed to have any significant impact on the primary objective of the British, to defeat the Germans on the Western Front. The Indian Government promoted the campaign, eager to avert any hold war in Persia and Afghanistan which might destabilize India. The relatively British-Indian force thus struck northwest up the Tigris-Euphrates valley toward Baghdad January-June 1915). The British (Townshend's 6th Indian Division) reach Amara (June 3). The British victory defeat a Turkish garrison at Nasiriya (July 24). Townshend reaches Kut-al-Amara where he defeats an Ottoman force (September 27-28). He continues north reaching Ctesiphon (November 11-12). The Ottomans win the Battle of Ctesiphon (November 22-26). Ottoman reinforcements arrived to turn back the over extended British force. Townshend is forced to retreat, fighting a rearguard action at Umm-at-Tubal (December 1). The British reach Kut an set up a defensive position at Kut (December 3). Kut was about 100 miles south of Baghdad. The British force was a small one and drive deep into Ottoman territory had been a risky gamble. The Ottomans surrounded Townshend at Kut and layer siege. Two British commanders, Aylmer and then Gorringe, try to relieve him taking 21,000 casualties. Townshend is forced to surrender his force of 2,000 British and 6,000 Indian troops. (April 29, 1916). The British regrouped in southern Mesopotamia under the command of General Sir Stanley Frederick Maude. The British decided to commit the resources needed to take Baghdad. The Allies had resources that the Ottoman Empire even with German assistance could not hope to cope. The British virtually rebuilt Basra as a modern port. In addition a railway and metal road was built. The British also significantly improved river transportation on the Tigris to move supplies. Maude began the second drive north along the Tigris River toward Baghdad (December 13). He commanded a force of 166,000 men, more than half Indian. Maude fights the Second Battle of Kut-al-Amara (February 22-23). The British victory clears the way for another drive on Baghdad which the British finally reach (February 22-23). Maude fought the Battle of Ramadi (September 27-28) opening the way into central Mesopotamia and the important oil fields at Mosul. Maude dies of cholera and was replaced by General Sir William R. Marshall. The Ottomans planned a counterattack, but the forces were instead committed in Palestine to stop Allenby's offensive on Jerusalem. The High Command orders . Marshall to stop his drive. Thus the fighting in Mesopotamia grinds to a halt. 

Home Front

The Ottoman Empire was one of the large multi-ethnic empires that dominated much of Europe in the 19th century. Throughout the 19th century, the Empire's European holding steadily declined. Even so at the onset of World war I, Turks were still a minority in the Empire, but Turkish nationalism was growing, as was the desire to replace the Empire with a Turkish state based on ethnic Turks. Many countries experienced profound political change after the War. In Turkey in came before the War. The inability of the Sultan to reverse Ottoman losses in the Balkans and Caucuses and the losses in wars with the Balkan States and Italy (1911-13) undermined the Empire and strengthen the Young Turks. The result was major political change, Turkey's entry into World War I, and the Armenian Genocide. We do not yet have much information on civilian living conditions in the Ottoman Empire during the War, but believe that deteriorated badly because of declines in both food production and the economy in general. The war for the most part was fought in the non-Turkish Arab regions of the Empire (Arabia, Palestine, and Mesopotamia). The Allied Gallipoli offensive was contained the Russians only entered the eastern fringe of Anatolia. The Empire's Anatolian heartland was untouched even when the Allies after the Bulgarians capitulated, occupied Istanbul (Constantinople) (1918). The conscription of Turkish opponents from the Anatolian heartland heavy war losses meant that a significant labor shortage developed in Anatolia. The War literally destroyed the Ottoman economy which had a liberal, multi-ethnic character and laid the foundation for a Turkified economy. 

Arab Revolt

The Arab revolt in the Hejaz broke out, surprising the Ottomans (June 5, 1916). British and French agents played a major role in inducing the Arab rising. The Arab Revolt, led chiefly by Col. T.E. Lawrence, Emir Faisal, and his father Sherif Hussein, "King of the Hejaz". The first major success was tasking the Ottoman garrison at Aqaba. The Arab Revolt broke out in full force (January-September 1918). The Arabs took control of Arabia cutting rail lines. Isolated Ottoman garrisons were besieged throughout the Peninsula. The Ottomans hard pressed by the British in Palestine were unable to deal with the Arab Revolt. 

Egypt and Palestine

Suez was vital for the British Empire as it provided the maritime connection with India. A much larger fleet of merchant vessels would be needed to move trade around Africa and the Cape of Good Hope. The Ottomans at the time controlled Palestine. The Sultan declared a jihad, hoping that Muslims in Egypt would rise against the British. Primarily concerned with Suez, the British declared Egypt to be a protectorate (December 18, 1914). A small military force was moved in to protect the canal--seen by both the British and Germans as the Empire's "jugular vein". Australia rapidly prepared a largely untrained force which they rushed to Egypt. Australia and the other Dominions in both wars play an important role in the Allied victory. The Turks with pontoon bridges provided by the Germans launched a surprise attack on the Suez Canal and empire an Islamic revolt in Egypt. The Ottomans achieved limited crossings (early February 1915), but there was no Islamic revolt among the Egyptians. The Indian Army and British units badly maul the attacking Ottomans. They would not attempt another attack on Suez. The threat posed to the Empire, however, is significant. A new commander, General Sir Archibald Murray, former Chief of the Imperial General Staff in London, began to build up men and supplies. Murray decided to widen the Suez defensive zone. The British moved into the Sinai Desert toward Palestine (January-July 1916). The British in 1915, however, decided that the greatest priority un 1915 was to break through the Dardanelles to open a supply route to the Russians. The Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF) gradually shifted from the defense of Suez to an invasion of Ottomans-held Palestine. Eventually when forces are available the British will attack into Palestine to destroy the Ottoman threat. The Sinai Desert itself was a major obstacle with sand storms, limited water holes, and soaring temperatures. Water was a major problem. The British put tens of thousands of camels and drivers into service. The Ottomans had a rail line to supply its troops. The British had to build both a water pipe and a railway from Egypt. The Ottomans trying to drive the British back to Suez, attack the British railhead in Sinai, bit loose the Battle of Rumani (August 3). The British attacked the remaining Ottoman positions in the Sinai and win the Battle of Magruntein (January 8-9, 1917). The High Command authorizes Murray to proceed into Palestine. The British fight two battles in Gaza March 26 and April 17-19). Each time they are driven back by the Ottomans. Murray attempts to disguise the defeat. Murray in the Second Battle of Gaza relieves his field commander, Dobell. Murray himself is interned relieved and replaced by , and for which he in turn was relieved, being replaced by General Sir Edmund Allenby. He had commanded the British Third Army in France. He was the ablest British commanded in the Egyptian theater. He proceeded to attack toward Jerusalem in an effort to "take Jerusalem by Christmas" as Murray had been ordered. Allenby fought the Third Battle of Gaza (Battle of Beersheba) against the Turkish 7th and 8th Armies (October 31). This evolved one of the most famed actions of the campaign. Allenby was an old Calvary man. He sent the Australian Light Horse Division on a daring mission to turn the Ottoman flank. (The Australian infantry had been committed to the Western Front.) The Australians fought a daring battle for the wells of Beersheba. Taking the Wells was critical as the horses needed water. The Australians staged perhaps the last successful cavalry charge, breaking through prepared Ottoman positions defended with barbed wire and machine guns. The Ottomans retired from Palestine. The Ottoman 8th Army fell back along the coast. The 7th Army retreated back to Jerusalem. Allenby used cavalry and aircraft to attack the retreating Ottoman troops (November 6-13). Ottoman reinforcements arrived. They were commanded by General von Falkenhayn who had planned the 1916 battle of Verdun. (After the huge losses and failing to take Verdun, he was replaced.) Falkenhayn with his reinforcements fought the Battle of Junction Station (November 13-14). This reestablished an Ottoman front before Jerusalem, temporarily blocking the British. Allenby regroups his forces and renews the drive on Jerusalem (December 8-9). Allenby enters Jerusalem (December 8-9). The British realized that with their victory in Russia that the Germans would launch a massive offensive in Spring 1918. As a result, some of Allenby's force was moved to France to strengthen forces on the Western Front. It was not until the summer that Allenby received needed replacements. The replacements were Indian troops. He prepared his final offensive against the Ottomans (September 18). Air supremacy left the Ottoman's blind as to where Allenby would strike. There was also a successful deception plan. The Battle of Megiddo began with an attack along the Mediterranean coast (September 19-21). The attack opened a huge gap in the Ottoman right and Allenby pored his cavalry through that hole to rapidly exploit it. The whole Ottoman front collapsed. The Ottoman 8th Army was destroyed in the initial attack. The 4th and 7th Armies retreated north along the Jordan River. Allenby hotly pursued them, hammering them with both cavalry and airpower (September 22-October 30). 

Armistice (October 30, 1918)

The Ottomans with their armies being destroyed in the field agreed to an armistice on Mudros, ending the fighting. 

Treaty of Sèvres (August 10, 1920)

World War I for the Ottoman Empire was formally ended by the Treaty of Sèvres (August 10, 1920). This was the peace treaty between the Entente (Allies) and Associated Powers and the Ottoman Empire. As at Versailles, the Allies dictated the terms, dismembering the Empire. The Allies used the same approach as with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, dividing up the Empire into ethnically based nation states. The Ottoman Empire had already lost a great deal of territory as the result of largely British offensives, one through Palestine and Syria and the other through Iraq. The Hejaz (Saudi Arabia) was lost through the Arab Revolt supported by the British. An outline for the treaty had been reached at San-Remo Conference (April 1920). Several new states were to be created under the terms of the Sèvres Treaty. The Hejaz (Saudi Arabia) and Armenia were to become independent countries. Kurdistan was also to become independent and would include Mosul. The British and French during the War had reached the Sykes-Picot Agreement. This was incorporated into the Treaty. The territories involved were made League of Nation Mandates. Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine were assigned to the British. Lebanon and Syria were assigned to the French. The Dodecanese Islands and Rhodes which had been occupied by Italy in an earlier war with the Ottomans (1911) and small areas of southern Anatolia were to become Italian territory. Thrace and Western Anatolia including İzmir/Smyrna would become Greek territory. The critical Bosphorus, Dardanelles and Sea of Marmara connecting the Black Sea and Mediterranean were to be demilitarized and internationalized. The Ottoman Army was restricted to a maximum 50,000 men. The Ottoman Navy was restricted to 7 sloops and 6 torpedo boats. The Ottomans were prohibited from creating an air force. Sèvres was near Paris and where the Treaty was signed. At the time the Allies occupied the Ottoman capital (Istanbul) and other areas of Turkey. The Ottoman Parliament had been forced to close earlier (April 1920) and thus could not ratify the Treaty. Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin did not ratify it, but he was a figurehead. The Turkish republican movement refused to ratify the Treaty. The republican movement was led by Mustafa Kemal Pasha who was the president of the Turkish Grand National Assembly based in Ankara which was not occupied by the Allies. The republican victory in the Turkish War of Independence made the Ankara republicans Turkey's real government. The Allies offered to adjust the Treaty, but the Ankara Government rejected it entirely. 

Turkish War of Independence

The Turkish National Movement, gathered around the Turkish Grand National Assembly successfully emerged as the replacement to the Ottoman Empire. 

Turkish Diplomacy

The new Turkish Government totally rejected the Sèvres Treaty. Instead they negotiated a series of treaties with the former belligerent powers. Here the Republican success in organizing a viable military force was an important factor. Another was the fact that the Allies excluded the Soviet Government from the peace talks. The Turks first negotiated the Treaty of Moscow with the new Soviet Government (March 16, 1921). The Soviets were the first European country to recognize Turkey. The Treaty set the boundary between the two countries and divided the area that the Allies had planned to create as an Armenian state. Next Turkey negotiated the Accord of Ankara with France ending the Cilicia War. the Treaty of Alexandropol and the Treaty of Kars established Turkey's eastern borders. Settling these issues enabled the Turks to focus on the western border and the war with Greece. Here Greek political developments had alienated the British who withdrew their support. 

Greek-Turkish War (1920-21)

Greek forces with the authorization of the Supreme Allied War Council occupied Adrianople (Edirne), Bursa, and Smyrna (Izmir). The Greeks landed with the support of an Allied flotilla (summer and fall of 1919). The Turks did not resist and the Greek forces advanced to Usak, 175 kilometers inland from Izmir. The Turks did resist the Greek advance into Anatolia. The initial fighting was inconclusive (1920). This changed in 1921. Turkish forced commanded by Ismet Pasha stopped Greek offensives twice at Inönü (January and April 1921). This prevented any further Greek advances. A third Greek offensive drive the Turks back to Sakarya Nehri, only 80 km from Ankara (July 1921). Here Atatürk took personal command and decisively defeated the Greek Army in a bruising 20-day battle. Greek political developments alienated the British. The French and Italians withdrew from Anatolia (October 1921). The Turks launched an offensive against the Greeks (August 1922). The Turks call it the Battle of the Commander in Chief. The Turks soon reached Izmir, trapping retreating Greek soldiers. Many were evacuated by Allied ships. The Turks then turned to eastern Thrace. Here to get to the Greeks, the Turks faced Allied troops defending the Ottoman Government in Constantinople/Istanbul and the Bosphorus/Dardanelles The French Government decided to withdraw its forces. The British prepared to defend their positions. The British did not, however, want a war with Turkey and suggested a compromise. Atatürk accepted the British-proposed truce. The Armistice of Mudanya (near Bursa) ended the fighting between Greece and Turkey (October 1922). The Greek troops withdrew beyond the Maritsa River. The Turks occupied eastern Thracee. The Turks as part of the Armistice accepted a continued Allied presence on the straits and in Istanbul until a comprehensive peace settlement could be negotiated. 

Armenian War (1919-21)

The Armenians proclaimed a republic (1919). The Allies supported an Armenian state. The Armenian population in eastern Anatolia, however, had been decimated by the Turkish Genocide during the War. The Turks defeated the Armenians and occupied the Kars region (Summer 1921). The rest of Armenia was annexed by the Soviet Union. 

Conference of Lausanne (July 1923)

Turkey proved to be the only member of the Central Powers defeated in World War I to negotiate with the Allies as an equal basis and to influence the provisions of the resulting peace treaty. The other World War I peace treaties were dictated by the Allies. Turkish diplomacy, their defeat of the Greeks, and strong military position around the Bosphorus/Dardanelles, forced the Allies to renegotiate the Sèvres Treaty. There was no political support in either Britain or France to renew hostilities with Turkey which was the only way of maintaining control over the Bosphorus/Dardanelles and other Treaty terms. After stopping hostilities with the Armistice of Mudanya, the Allies invited both the Ankara Republican and the Istanbul Ottoman governments to a conference at Lausanne to renegotiate the now dead Treaty of Sèvres (October 1922). Atatürk was, however, unwilling to compromise. He was determined that the republican nationalist government should be the only representative for Turkey. The Grand National Assembly moved to abolish the Ottoman Sultanate. Thus when the Conference opened, the republican government represented Turkey (November). Ismet Pasha was the chief Turkish negotiator. The 1919 National Pact served as the basis for the Turkish negotiating position. The Allies essentially accepted the provisions in the provisions of the Treaty. The United States participated in the conference but, because America had never declared war on Turkey, did not sign the treaty. The Treaty of Lausanne recognized the modern borders of Turkey with but two exceptions--the Mossul area and Hatay Province with the port of Alexandretta (present-day Iskenderun). The boundary in the east with Iraq was settled by a League of Nations initiative (1926). The southern boundary involving Iskenderun was settled when France ceded the port to Turkey (1939). France at the time was acting as the League of Nations mandatory power for Syria. This was probably a factor in Turkey remaining neutral in World War II. Especially detailed provisions of the treaty regulated use of the strategic Bosphorus/Dardanelles Straits. A Straits Commission under the League of Nations was established. The Allies were to withdraw, after which the Straits would be demilitarized. Turkey would hold the presidency of the Commission and the Soviet Union would be included as a member. The foreign administration of the Ottoman public debt was abolished, but the new Turkish Government assumed responsibility for 40 percent of that debt. The rest was apportioned among the states formed from other former Ottoman territories. Turkey agreed to maintain low tariffs on imports from signatory powers until 1929. Turkey also agreed to affirm the equality of Muslim and non-Muslim Turkish nationals. Turkey and Greece agreed to a mandatory exchange of their respective Greek and Turkish minorities. An exception was made for some Greeks in Istanbul and Turks in western Thrace. The Treaty was signed officially ending the War (July 1923). 

Turkish Republic

The Grand National Assembly in response to Allied desires to include both the new Republican Government and the Ottoman Istanbul government in peace negotiations approved a resolution separating the offices of sultan and caliph and abolished the office of the sultan (November 1922). This essentially brought the Ottoman Empire to an end. The Assembly took the position that the Istanbul Ottoman government ceased to be the government of Turkey when the Allies occupied the city. Mehmed VI who for several years had been a figurehead went into exile on Malta, a British possession. His cousin, Abdülmecid, was named caliph. The Grand National Assembly proclaimed the Republic of Turkey (October 29, 1923). Atatürk was named Turkey's first president. Ankara became the first capital. Atatürk pursued a policy of modernization, reform, and industrialization. An important aspect of Atatürk's program was the secularization of Turkish society. He substantially reduced Islam's once pervasive role in Turkish society. He replaced Arabic with the Latin alphabet for the Turkish language. Atatürk died in 1938. Gradually parliamentary government and a competitive multiparty system became accepted in Turkey, although there were periods of instability and even periods of military rule. 

Sources

Erickson, Edward J. Ottoman Army Effectiveness in World War I: A Comparative Study.
Erickson, Edward J. Ordered to Die: A History of the Ottoman Army in the First World War. (Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001). 256p.
Fromkin, David. A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (New York: Owl Books, 2001). 

MILESTONES: 1914–1920

The Paris Peace Conference and the Treaty of Versailles

The Paris Peace Conference convened in January 1919 at Versailles just outside Paris. The conference was called to establish the terms of the peace after World War I. Though nearly thirty nations participated, the representatives of the United Kingdom, France, the United States, and Italy became known as the “Big Four.” The “Big Four” dominated the proceedings that led to the formulation of the Treaty of Versailles, a treaty that ended World War I.

The Treaty of Versailles articulated the compromises reached at the conference. It included the planned formation of the League of Nations, which would serve both as an international forum and an international collective security arrangement. U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was a strong advocate of the League as he believed it would prevent future wars.

Treaty of Versailles

Negotiations at the Paris Peace Conference were complicated. The United Kingdom, France, and Italy fought together as the Allied Powers during the First World War. The United States, entered the war in April 1917 as an Associated Power. While it fought alongside the Allies, the United States was not bound to honor pre-existing agreements among the Allied Powers. These agreements focused on postwar redistribution of territories. U.S. President Woodrow Wilson strongly opposed many of these arrangements, including Italian demands on the Adriatic. This often led to significant disagreements among the “Big Four.”

Treaty negotiations were also weakened by the absence of other important nations. Russia had fought as one of the Allies until December 1917, when its new Bolshevik Government withdrew from the war. The Bolshevik decision to repudiate Russia’s outstanding financial debts to the Allies and to publish the texts of secret agreements between the Allies concerning the postwar period angered the Allies. The Allied Powers refused to recognize the new Bolshevik Government and thus did not invite its representatives to the Peace Conference. The Allies also excluded the defeated Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, and Bulgaria).

According to French and British wishes, the Treaty of Versailles subjected Germany to strict punitive measures. The Treaty required the new German Government to surrender approximately 10 percent of its prewar territory in Europe and all of its overseas possessions. It placed the harbor city of Danzig (now Gdansk) and the coal-rich Saarland under the administration of the League of Nations, and allowed France to exploit the economic resources of the Saarland until 1935. It limited the German Army and Navy in size, and allowed for the trial of Kaiser Wilhelm II and a number of other high-ranking German officials as war criminals. Under the terms of Article 231 of the Treaty, the Germans accepted responsibility for the war and the liability to pay financial reparations to the Allies. The Inter-Allied Commission determined the amount and presented its findings in 1921. The amount they determined was 132 billion gold Reichmarks, or 32 billion U.S. dollars, on top of the initial $5 billion payment demanded by the Treaty. Germans grew to resent the harsh conditions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles.

Henry Cabot Lodge

While the Treaty of Versailles did not satisfy all parties concerned, by the time President Woodrow Wilson returned to the United States in July 1919, U.S. public opinion overwhelmingly favored ratification of the Treaty, including the Covenant of the League of Nations. However, in spite of the fact that 32 state legislatures passed resolutions in favor of the Treaty, the U.S. Senate strongly opposed it.

Senate opposition cited Article 10 of the Treaty, which dealt with collective security and the League of Nations. This article, opponents argued, ceded the war powers of the U.S. Government to the League’s Council. The opposition came from two groups: the “Irreconcilables,” who refused to join the League of Nations under any circumstances, and “Reservationists,” led by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Henry Cabot Lodge, who wanted amendments made before they would ratify the Treaty. While Chairman Lodge's attempt to pass amendments to the Treaty was unsuccessful in September, he did manage to attach 14 “reservations” to it in November. In a final vote on March 19, 1920, the Treaty of Versailles fell short of ratification by seven votes. Consequently, the U.S. Government signed the Treaty of Berlin on August 25, 1921. This separate peace treaty with Germany stipulated that the United States would enjoy all “rights, privileges, indemnities, reparations or advantages” conferred to it by the Treaty of Versailles, but left out any mention of the League of Nations, which the United States never joined.

MILESTONES: 1914–1920

Wilson’s Fourteen Points, 1918

The immediate cause of the United States’ entry into World War I in April 1917 was the German announcement of unrestricted submarine warfare and the subsequent sinking of ships with U.S. citizens on board. But President Woodrow Wilson’s war aims went beyond the defense of U.S. maritime interests. In his War Message to Congress, President Wilson declared that the U.S. objective was “to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the life of the world.”

President Woodrow Wilson delivering his Fourteen Points to Congress

In several speeches earlier in the year, President Wilson sketched out his vision of an end to the war that would bring a “just and secure peace,” not merely “a new balance of power.” He then appointed a committee of experts known as The Inquiry to help him refine his ideas for peace. In December 1917, he asked The Inquiry to draw up specific recommendations for a comprehensive peace settlement. Using these recommendations, Wilson presented a program of fourteen points to a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1918. Eight of the fourteen points treated specific territorial issues among the combatant nations. Five of the other six concerned general principles for a peaceful world: open covenants (i.e. treaties or agreements) openly arrived at; freedom of the seas; free trade; reduction of armaments; and adjustment of colonial claims based on the principles of self-determination. The fourteenth point proposed what was to become the League of Nations to guarantee the “political independence and territorial integrity [of] great and small states alike.”

Though Wilson’s idealism pervades the Fourteen Points, he also had more practical objectives in mind. He hoped to keep Russia in the war by convincing the Bolsheviks that they would receive a better peace from the Allies, to bolster Allied morale, and to undermine German war support. The address was immediately hailed in the United States and Allied nations, and even by Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, as a landmark of enlightenment in international relations. Wilson subsequently used the Fourteen Points as the basis for negotiating the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war. Although the Treaty did not fully realize Wilson’s unselfish vision, the Fourteen Points still stand as the most powerful expression of the idealist strain in United States diplomacy.

MILESTONES: 1914–1920

The League of Nations, 1920

The League of Nations was an international organization, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, created after the First World War to provide a forum for resolving international disputes. Though first proposed by President Woodrow Wilson as part of his Fourteen Points plan for an equitable peace in Europe, the United States never became a member.

Cartoon critizing U.S. lack of participation in the League of Nations

Speaking before the U.S. Congress on January 8, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson enumerated the last of his Fourteen Points, which called for a “general association of nations…formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.” Many of Wilson’s previous points would require regulation or enforcement. In calling for the formation of a "general association of nations," Wilson voiced the wartime opinions of many diplomats and intellectuals on both sides of the Atlantic who believed there was a need for a new type of standing international organization dedicated to fostering international cooperation, providing security for its members, and ensuring a lasting peace. With Europe’s population exhausted by four years of total war, and with many in the United States optimistic that a new organization would be able to solve the international disputes that had led to war in 1914, Wilson’s articulation of a League of Nations was wildly popular. However, it proved exceptionally difficult to create, and Wilson left office never having convinced the United States to join it.

David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom

The idea of the League was grounded in the broad, international revulsion against the unprecedented destruction of the First World War and the contemporary understanding of its origins. This was reflected in all of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, which were themselves based on theories of collective security and international organization debated amongst academics, jurists, socialists and utopians before and during the war. After adopting many of these ideas, Wilson took up the cause with evangelical fervor, whipping up mass enthusiasm for the organization as he traveled to the Paris Peace Conference in January 1919, the first President to travel abroad in an official capacity.

Wilson used his tremendous influence to attach the Covenant of the League, its charter, to the Treaty of Versailles. An effective League, he believed, would mitigate any inequities in the peace terms. He and the other members of the “Big Three,” Georges Clemenceau of France and David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom, drafted the Covenant as Part I of the Treaty of Versailles. The League’s main organs were an Assembly of all members, a Council made up of five permanent members and four rotating members, and an International Court of Justice. Most important for Wilson, the League would guarantee the territorial integrity and political independence of member states, authorize the League to take “any action…to safeguard the peace,” establish procedures for arbitration, and create the mechanisms for economic and military sanctions.

Georges Clemenceau of France

The struggle to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and the Covenant in the U.S. Congress helped define the most important political division over the role of the United States in the world for a generation. A triumphant Wilson returned to the United States in February 1919 to submit the Treaty and Covenant to Congress for its consent and ratification. Unfortunately for the President, while popular support for the League was still strong, opposition within Congress and the press had begun building even before he had left for Paris. Spearheading the challenge was the Senate majority leader and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Henry Cabot Lodge.

Motivated by Republican concerns that the League would commit the United States to an expensive organization that would reduce the United States’ ability to defend its own interests, Lodge led the opposition to joining the League. Where Wilson and the League’s supporters saw merit in an international body that would work for peace and collective security for its members, Lodge and his supporters feared the consequences of involvement in Europe’s tangled politics, now even more complex because of the 1919 peace settlement. They adhered to a vision of the United States returning to its traditional aversion to commitments outside the Western Hemisphere. Wilson and Lodge’s personal dislike of each other poisoned any hopes for a compromise, and in March 1920, the Treaty and Covenant were defeated by a 49-35 Senate vote. Nine months later, Warren Harding was elected President on a platform opposing the League.

Henry Cabot Lodge

The United States never joined the League. Most historians hold that the League operated much less effectively without U.S. participation than it would have otherwise. However, even while rejecting membership, the Republican Presidents of the period, and their foreign policy architects, agreed with many of its goals. To the extent that Congress allowed, the Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover administrations associated the United States with League efforts on several issues. Constant suspicion in Congress, however, that steady U.S. cooperation with the League would lead to de facto membership prevented a close relationship between Washington and Geneva. Additionally, growing disillusionment with the Treaty of Versailles diminished support for the League in the United States and the international community. Wilson’s insistence that the Covenant be linked to the Treaty was a blunder; over time, the Treaty was discredited as unenforceable, short-sighted, or too extreme in its provisions, and the League’s failure either to enforce or revise it only reinforced U.S. congressional opposition to working with the League under any circumstances. However, the coming of World War II once again demonstrated the need for an effective international organization to mediate disputes, and the United States public and the Roosevelt administration supported and became founding members of the new United Nations.

World War One: Paris Peace Settlement, Treaty of Versailles, 1919

Transcript

1. 1. Paris Peace Settlement 1919 Sunday, 2 February 14
2. 2. Syllabus • the roles and differing goals of Clemenceau, Lloyd George and Wilson in creating the Treaty of Versailles Sunday, 2 February 14
3. 3. Toll of WWI • “Total war” • 65 million mobilised. • Historians estimate that up to 10 million men died and around 21 million were wounded. Sunday, 2 February 14
4. 4. Toll of WWI Sunday, 2 February 14
5. 5. Toll of WWI Casualties of the Allied countries: Sunday, 2 February 14
6. 6. Toll of WWI Casualties of the Allied countries: ◦Britain: 750,000 killed, 1,500,000 wounded ◦France: 1,400,000 killed, 2,500,000 wounded ◦Belgium: 50,000 killed ◦Italy: 600,000 killed ◦Russia: 1,700,000 killed ◦USA: 116,000 killed Sunday, 2 February 14
7. 7. Toll of WWI Casualties of the Central Powers • Germany: 2,000,000 killed • Austria-Hungary: 1,200,000 killed • Turkey: 325,000 killed • Bulgaria: 100,000 killed Sunday, 2 February 14
8. 8. Vast areas of north-eastern Europe were destroyed • The homes of 750,000 French people were destroyed along with infrastructure • Roads, coal mines, telegraph poles had all been destroyed, which hindered economic restoration • Sunday, 2 February 14
9. 9. •The Treaty of Versailles was signed on 28 June 1919 (exactly five years after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand) •Consisted of 440 Articles •The treaty was greeted with shock and disbelief in Germany. Sunday, 2 February 14
10. 10. Versailles Conference • Delegates from 32 countries were invited to participate in talks held at the Palace of Versailles • The conference was controlled Allied delegates in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles witness the German delegation's acceptance of the terms of the Treaty Of Versailles Sunday, 2 February 14 by the “Big Three” and took months of, often bitter, negotiations
11. 11. The “Big Three” George  Clemenceau,   France -­‐  France  had  been  devastated   and  2/3  soldiers  had  been   injured  or  Killed -­‐  Germany  should  be  harshly   punished  and  pay  for  the  war Sunday, 2 February 14 Woodrow  Wilson,   USA -­‐    Believed  in  peaceful   coopera?on  among  na?ons   and  the  right  to  self-­‐ determina?on David  Lloyd  George,   Great  Britain -­‐  Was  usually  in  the  middle   ground  between  Clemenceau   and  Wilson -­‐  Germany  should  be  punished   but  not  harshly  to  prevent  a   new  war
12. 12. The Tiger • Georges Clemenceau of France argued that Germany should be split up and weakened to the point that it could never start a war again. • Clemenceau insisted upon the complete humiliation of Germany, requiring German disarmament and severe reparations; France also won back AlsaceLorraine. He was unhappy with the final treaty and believed it was not harsh enough • He believed that Woodrow Wilson was too idealistic Sunday, 2 February 14
13. 13. Sunday, 2 February 14 !
14. 14. The Peacemaker US President Woodrow Wilson (14 Points) he wanted a “just peace” that would ensure war could not ever occur on this scale again 1) no more secret treaties 2) countries must seek to reduce their weapons and their armed forces 3) national self-determination should allow people of the same nationality to govern themselves and one nationality should not have the power to govern another 4) all countries should belong to the League of Nations. However, Wilson’s desire for the US to take a leading role internationally was unpopular at home as most politicians supported an isolationist position - US never ratified the treaty Sunday, 2 February 14
15. 15. The middle man British PM, David Lloyd George, had two views on how Germany should be treated. His government was facing elections and Lloyd George's public image reflected the punitive public mood. "Hang the Kaiser" and "Make Germany Pay" were common slogans and Lloyd George publicly backed these views. However, privately he was concerned about what the effects of a harsh treaty would be. In the context of the 1917 Russian revolution, he feared the spread of Bolshevism in Germany. Sunday, 2 February 14
16. 16. Sunday, 2 February 14
17. 17. Germany is going to pay. We will get everything you can squeeze out of a lemon, and a bit more. The Germans should hand over everything they own. From a speech in 1918 by Sir Eric Geddes, a British politician standing for election as an MP. Sunday, 2 February 14
18. 18. Sunday, 2 February 14
19. 19. ToV • June 1919 • Treaty with Germany • Was signed in the Palace of Versailles • Germany not allowed to take part in negotiations presented with terms - became known as the diktat or dictated peace • Germany had to agree to accept full responsibility for the outbreak of the First World War (the hated Clause 231 or the “War Guilt Clause”) Sunday, 2 February 14
20. 20. Territorial Losses • • • • • • • • The Saar (highly industrialised, Saar coal fields) administered by the League of Nations for 15 years The creation of an independent Polish state West Prussia and Posen (rich farmlands) were given to Poland Alsace-Lorraine was given back to France Danzig was appointed as an international city Plebiscites in Upper Silesia, West Prussia and Schleswig Germany lost colonies and investments  Loss of 13% land mass, 12.5% of its population,100% overseas colonies Joining of German and Austria forbidden Sunday, 2 February 14
21. 21. Territorial Losses Sunday, 2 February 14
22. 22. New map of Europe Sunday, 2 February 14
23. 23. Military • Regular army limited to 100,000 military personnel  • No tanks or heavy artillery • No airforce • Navy restricted to six battleships, no submarines (15,000 sailors) • End of compulsory enlistment into the armed forces • Rhineland to be occupied for 15 years by the allied military forces Sunday, 2 February 14
24. 24. Economic • • • • • Germany to pay £6,600 million (132 billion gold marks) Reparations where to be paid in regular instalments, some in gold and some in goods The Allies struggled to get payments from Germany from 1921 to 1923 Dawes Commission 1924 France occupied the Ruhr in 1923 Germany completed the reparations payments in 2010, (£60 million) 60million Sunday, 2 February 14
25. 25. Political • WWI ended the House of Hohenzollern with the forced abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II • Economic burden of the treaty affected the new government, led by the Social Democrats (SPD) • Gave rise to the Dolchstosslegende (stab in the back theory) • The politicians who signed the treaty became known as the “November Criminals” Sunday, 2 February 14
26. 26. A 1924 right-wing German political cartoon showing Philipp Scheidemann, the German Social Democratic politician who proclaimed the Weimar Republic and was its second Chancellor, and Matthias Erzberger, an anti-war politician from the Centre Party, who ended WWI by signing the armistice with the Allies, as stabbing the German Army in the back Sunday, 2 February 14
27. 27. • Controversial German historian Fritz Fischer wrote of the stab in the back: But even after the defeat of 1918, many Germans, and especially those who had played leading parts in political and economic life up to 1918, preserved...a political and historical image of themselves which was coloured by illusions. Because the German army on the western front had held to the last hour an unbroken defensive front outside the frontiers of the Reich, and had marched home in order, these people failed to understand that Germany had been defeated.Thus the idea took root and spread that the cause of the collapse of Germany was not her own policy or exhaustion in the face of an enemy army made stronger than her own by active American intervention, but a 'stab in the back' behind the front.The accusation was [eventually] levelled . . . against the Weimar democracy which had been forced to accept the 'dictated Treaty of Versailles' owing to 'treachery at home'.This view . . . had been propagated by the German Army Council and the press...since November, 1918.TheEvangelische Kirchenzeitung, for example, wrote on October 20 -­ before the November revolution: 'Collapse behind the front ­ not collapse of our heroic front, that is the shattering phenomenon of these last days . . . .The home has not held out.' Sunday, 2 February 14
28. 28. German Response • Germany had hoped for a treaty more in line with Wilson's Fourteen Points • Hated having to take responsibility for the start of the First World War • Resented that it was forced to sign the treaty without any negotiations of the terms • Disagreed with the reparations and especially the territorial losses • Angered by the exclusion from the principle of selfdetermination • The German population was angered by the treaty and wanted to see it revoked - Hitler used this to great effect Sunday, 2 February 14
29. 29. German magazine Simpliccimus on June 3, 1919. The principal judges and executioners were (from left to right) the American president Wilson, the French president Clemenceau and the British Prime Minister Lloyd George Sunday, 2 February 14
30. 30. Sunday, 2 February 14
31. 31. Historiography Historian (British-Canadian) Martin Kitchen argues that the impression the country was crippled by the reparations was a myth. He further states that, instead of a weak Germany, the reverse was true; that Germany was strong enough to win substantial concessions and a reduced reparation amount. Sunday, 2 February 14
32. 32. A.J.P. Taylor, in The History of the First World War, 1963: Though the Germans accepted the treaty in the formal sense of agreeing to sign it, none took the signature seriously. The treaty seemed to them to be wicked, unfair, dictation, a slave treaty. All Germans intended to repudiate it at some time in the future, if it did not fall to pieces of its own absurdity. Sunday, 2 February 14
33. 33. Douglas Newton, in Germany 1914-1945, 1990: Whether Germany was treated justly or unjustly by the victors at the Peace Conference is not a question of fact but of moral judgment. Some argue that, if the Versailles Treaty was harsh, so too would have been any framed by a victorious Germany, as in the case of Brest-Litovsk. Others argue that any peace which fell short of the ideals of reconciliation was unjust because of the high ideals for which Allied statesmen had claimed to be fighting . . . What is beyond question is that the process of peacemaking or rather the absence of any genuine peace negotiations . . . made all of Germany believe that the [Weimar] Republic had been treated shabbily. Sunday, 2 February 14
34. 34. German historian Detlev Peukert Opinions range from the traditional verdict that the national budget and economy were intolerably squeezed to the opposite view that the burden was scarcely larger than present-day aid to developing countries. For once, the truth really seems to lie somewhere between these positions. It is certainly true that the flexibility of the German economy, already constrained by the low post-war level of economic activity in any case, was further restricted by the need to pay reparations. On the other hand, the actual payments that had to made were perfectly manageable. Reparations were not, therefore, an utterly intolerable burden, especially since any clear-sighted politician could reckon that after a few years of uninterrupted payment and reduced international tension there was a reasonable chance that the overall size of the debt would be cut down Peukert argued that the reasons for German economic problems in the early 1920s were not reparations, but rather the legacy of World War I Sunday, 2 February 14
35. 35. “The British economic historian Niall Ferguson in his 1998 book The Pity of War argued that Germany could have paid reparations had there been the political will. Ferguson began his argument by noting that all of the belligerent countries in World War I had endured significant economic losses, not just Germany, and that in 1920–21, German net national product grew at 17%.” Sunday, 2 February 14
36. 36. Sources http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7//wwi/versailles.html http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ treaty_of_versailles.htm http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/ clemenceau.htm http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/ media_nm.php?MediaId=1620 http://ibguides.com/history/notes/terms-of-theparis-peace-treaties-1919-20-versailles-stgermain-trianon-neuilly-sevres-lausanne-1923 Sunday, 2 February 14

The conference and the Big Three

In January 1919 delegates from 32 countries met in Paris to make peace after the First World War - the peace they hoped would 'end all wars'. The conference was dominated by David Lloyd George, Georges Clemençeau and Woodrow Wilson, the leaders of Britain, France and America, often known as the 'Big Three'.

The conference and the Big Three

Delegates from 32 countries met in January 1919, but the conference was dominated by the Big Three - Lloyd George (Britain), Clemençeau (France) and Wilson (USA). The delegations made presentations to them, after which the Big Three made their decision.

Negotiations were difficult. Each of the Big Three wanted such different things, that by March 1919 it looked as though the conference was going to break up.

Lloyd George Prime Minister 1916-1922

Lloyd George saved the conference. On 25 March 1919, he issued theFontainebleau Memorandum, and persuaded Clemençeau to agree to the League of Nations and a more lenient peace treaty that would not destroy Germany. Then he went to Wilson and persuaded him to agree to the War Guilt Clause.

The Germans were shown the proposed Treaty of Versailles. There was no negotiation. The Germans published a rebuttal, arguing that the treaty was unfair, but they were ignored. On 28 June 1919, the delegates met at the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles, near Paris, and forced two Germans to sign the treaty.

Expectations of the peace treaty

The Armistice of 11 November 1918 was greeted with great joy. The people of Europe wanted lasting peace, and also to make Germany pay for the damage done, and revenge.

The Germans had expected that the peace treaty would be based on President Wilson's Fourteen Points. The six key principles of the Fourteen Points were:

1. Setting up a League of Nations
2. Disarmament
3. Self-determination for the people of Europe - the right to rule themselves
4. Freedom for colonies
5. Freedom of the seas
6. Free trade

The Big Three expected to base the peace treaty on the terms of the armistice, which were much harsher:

1. German army disbanded, and Germany to give up its navy.
2. Allied troops to occupy the Rhineland.
3. Reparation for damage done and war losses.

What did the Big Three want?

The Big Three: Lloyd George, Clemenceau and Wilson (l - r)

The conference was initially planned as a pre-meeting of the big three to decide what terms they were going to ask from Germany at an official peace conference, but the pre-meeting quickly became the meeting where the decisions were made.

The problem was the big three had different ideas about what the terms of the treaty should be.

Wilson's aims:

• To end war by creating a League of Nations based on his Fourteen Points.
• To ensure Germany was not destroyed.
• Not to blame Germany for the war - he hated the Guilt Clause.

Clemenceau's aims:

• Revenge and to punish Germany.
• To return Alsace-Lorraine to France.
• No League of Nations.
• An independent Rhineland.
• Huge reparations.
• To disband the German army so that Germany would never be strong enough to attack France again.

Lloyd George:

• A 'just' peace that would be tough enough to please the electors who wanted to 'make Germany pay', but would leave Germany strong enough to trade.
• Land for Britain's empire.
• To safeguard Britain's naval supremacy.

Revision tip and answer preparation

Revision tip

Write out the various aims of the big three on separate pieces of paper and then match the aims to the correct person.

Answer preparation

As part of your revision, think about thearguments and facts you would use to explain:

1. In what sense people's hopes for the treaty might be said to be unrealistic.
2. Why the big three disagreed at the conference.
3. Why the Germans claimed that the peace treaty was unfair.
4. What the motives and aims of the big three were at Versailles.

THE SAN REMO CONFEERENCE IN CONTEXT

It is impossible to understand the complex legal implications of the Arab-Israel conflict without an acquaintance with the basics of following context.

THE SAN REMO CONFERENCE
in relation to
McMAHON, SYKES-PICOT, THE BALFOUR DECLARATION, AND THE BRITISH MANDATE

Article 6 of the Mandate, charged Britain with the duty to facilitate Jewish immigration and close settlement by Jews in the territory which then included Transjordan, as called for in the Balfour declaration, that had already been adopted by the other Allied Powers. As a trustee, Britain had a fiduciary duty to act in good faith in carrying out the duties imposed by the Mandate.Furthermore, as the San Remo resolution has never been abrogated, it was and continues to be legally binding between the several parties who signed it.It is therefore obvious that the legitimacy of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and the Jewish state all derive from the same international agreement at San Remo.

The 1915 McMahon-Hussein Agreement

In 1915 Sir Henry McMahon made promises on behalf of the British government, via Sherif Hussein of Mecca, about allocation of territory to the Arab people. Although Hussein understood from the promises that Palestine would be given to the Arabs, the British later claimed that land definitions were only approximate and that a map drawn at the time excluded Palestine from territory to be given to the Arab people. However in a subsequent change of policy in recognition of the McMahon correspondence, and in violation of its mandate, Britain separated the territory east of the Jordan River namely Transjordan (since renamed Jordan) from Palestine west of the Jordan.In his book “State and economics in the Middle East: a society in transition” (Routledge, 2003), Alfred Bonné included a letter from Sir Henry McMahon to The Times of London dated July 23,1937 in which he wrote, “I feel it my duty to state, and I do so definitely and emphatically, that it was not intended by me in giving this pledge to King Hussein to include Palestine in the area in which Arab independence was promised. I also had every reason to believe at the time that the fact that Palestine was not included in my pledge was well understood by King Hussein.”Bonné considered the letter to be of such importance that he published it in full as copied below

The May 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement

This secret agreement between Britain, France and Russia was concluded by British diplomat, Sir Mark Sykes and French diplomat Georges Picot. In seeking to divide the entire Middle East into areas of influence for each of the imperial powers but leaving the Holy Lands to be jointly administered by the three powers, it clashed materially with the McMahon Agreement. It was intended to hand Syria, Mesopotamia, Lebanon and Cilicia (in south-eastern Asia Minor) to the French and Palestine, Jordan and areas around the Persian Gulf and Baghdad including Arabia and the Jordan Valley to the British.Although intended to be secret, the Arabs learned about the agreement from communists who found a copy in the Russian government’s archives.

The 1917 Balfour Declaration

he Balfour Declaration is contained in the following letter from Lord Arthur Balfour, the British foreign secretary, to Lord Rothschild, president of the British Zionist Federation,Foreign OfficeNovember 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,
Arthur James Balfour

The declaration was accepted by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 and embodied in the mandate that gave Great Britain administrative control of Palestine as d escribbed in more detail below.

THE SAN REMO CONFERENCE 1920

After ruling vast areas of Eastern Europe, South-western Asia, and North Africa for centuries, the Ottoman Empire lost all its Middle East territories during World War One. The Treaty of Sèvres of August 10, 1920 abolished the Ottoman Empire and obliged Turkey to renounce all rights over Arab Asia and North Africa. It was replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923.The status of the Ottoman Empire’s former possessions was determined at a conference in San Remo, Italy on April 24-25, 1920 attended by Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and as an observer, the United States. Syria and Lebanon were mandated to France while Mesopotamia (Iraq) and the southern portion of the territory (Palestine) were mandated to Britain, with the charge to implement the Balfour Declaration.While the Balfour Declaration was in itself not a legally enforceable document, it did become legally enforceable by being entrenched in international law when it was incorporated in its entirety in a resolution passed by the Conference on April 25. Significantly, the only change made to the wording of the Balfour Declaration was to strengthen Britain’s obligation to implement the Balfour Declaration. Lord Curzon described the San Remo resolution as “the Magna Carta of the Zionists”.

Though borders were not yet precisely defined, the conference gave Palestine a legal identity. Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister at the time used the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” that was often used in subsequent documents.

The conference’s decisions were confirmed unanimously by all fifty-one member countries of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 and they were further endorsed by a joint resolution of the United States Congress in the same year,

The San Remo resolution received a further US endorsement in the Anglo-American Treaty on Palestine, signed by the US and Britain on December 3, 1924, that incorporated the text of the Mandate for Palestine. The treaty protected the rights of Americans living in Palestine under the Mandate and more significantly it also made those rights and provisions part of United States treaty law which are protected under the US constitution. The U.S. Senate ratified the treaty on February 20, 1925 followed by President Calvin Coolidge on March 2, 1925 and by Great Britain on March 18, 1925.

Britain was specifically charged with giving effect to the establishment of the Jewish National Home in Palestine that was called for in the Balfour declaration that had already been adopted by the other Allied Powers. It is therefore obvious that the legitimacy of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and a Jewish state in Palestine as defined before the creation of Transjordan, all derive from the same binding international agreement at San Remo, that has never been abrogated.

Commemoration of the San Remo conference

In April 2010, a ceremony attended by politicians and others from Europe, the U.S. and Canada was held in San Remo at the house where the signing of the San Remo declaration took place in 1920. At the conclusion of the commemoration, the following statement was released:”Reaffirming the importance of the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920 – which included the Balfour Declaration in its entirety – in shaping the map of the modern Middle East, as agreed upon by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers (Britain, France, Italy, Japan, and the United States acting as an observer), and later approved unanimously by the League of Nations; the Resolution remains irrevocable, legally binding and valid to this day.”Emphasizing that the San Remo Resolution of 1920 recognized the exclusive national Jewish rights to the Land of Israel under international law, on the strength of the historical connection of the Jewish people to the territory previously known as Palestine.

“Recalling that such a seminal event as the San Remo Conference of 1920 has been forgotten or ignored by the community of nations, and that the rights it conferred upon the Jewish people have been unlawfully dismissed, curtailed and denied.

“Asserting that a just and lasting peace, leading to the acceptance of secure and recognized borders between all States in the region, can only be achieved by recognizing the long established rights of the Jewish people under international law.”

THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE

As stated above, the San Remo Conference decided to place Palestine under British Mandatory rule making Britain responsible for giving effect to the Balfour declaration that had been adopted by the other Allied Powers. The resulting “Mandate for Palestine,” was an historical League of Nations document that laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in Palestine and the San Remo Resolution together with Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations became the basic documents on which the Mandate for Palestine was established.The Mandate’s declaration of July 24, 1922 states unambiguously that Britain became responsible for putting the Balfour Declaration, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, into effect and it confirmed that recognition had thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.It is highly relevant that at that time the West Bank and parts of what today is Jordan were included as a Jewish Homeland. However, on September 16, 1922, the British divided the Mandate territory into Palestine, west of the Jordan and Transjordan, east of the Jordan River, in accordance with the McMahon Correspondence of 1915. Transjordan became exempt from the Mandate provisions concerning the Jewish National Home, effectively removing about 78% of the original territory of the area in which a Jewish National home was to be established in terms of the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo resolution as well as the British Mandate.

This action violated not only Article 5 of the Mandate which required the Mandatory to be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power but also article 20 of the Covenant of the League of Nations in which the Members of the League solemnly undertook that they would not enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

Article 6 of the Mandate stated that the Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

Nevertheless in blatant violation of article 6, in a 1939 White Paper Britain changed its position so as to limit Jewish immigration from Europe, a move that was regarded by Zionists as betrayal of the terms of the mandate, especially in light of the increasing persecution of Jews in Europe. In response, Zionists organized Aliyah Bet, a program of illegal immigration into Palestine.

CONCLUSION

The frequently voiced complaint that the state being offered to the Palestinians comprises only 22 percent of Palestine is obviously invalid. The truth is exactly the reverse. From the above history it is obvious that the territory on both sides of the Jordan was legally designated for the Jewish homeland by the 1920 San Remo Conference, mandated to Britain, endorsed by the League of Nations in 1922, affirmed in the Anglo-American Convention on Palestine in 1925 and confirmed in 1945 by article 80 of the UN. Yet, approximately 80% of this territory was excised from the territory in May 1923 when, in violation of the mandate and the San Remo resolution, Britain gave autonomy to Transjordan (now known as Jordan) under as-Sharif Abdullah bin al-Husayn.Furthermore, as the San Remo resolution has never been abrogated, it was and continues to be legally binding between the several parties who signed it.It is therefore obvious that the legitimacy of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and a Jewish state in Palestine all derive from the same international agreement at San Remo.

In essence, when Israel entered the West Bank and Jerusalem in 1967 it did not occupy territory to which any other party had title. While Jerusalem and the West Bank, (Judea and Samaria), were illegally occupied by Jordan in 1948 they remained in effect part of the Jewish National Home that had been created at San Remo and in the 1967 6-Day War Israel, in effect, recovered territory that legally belonged to it. To quote Judge Schwebel, a former President of the ICJ, “As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.

See Selected Writings of Stephen M. Schwebel on the subject