In 1918 the British were marching north against the Ottomans
in Mesopotamia as World War I was coming to a conclusion. An armistice
was signed on October 30, 1918, but the British were not satisfied and
continued fighting until they took the Mosul vilyaet in the middle of November.
This last conquest would raise an important question, what to do with the Kurds
of the area? Much has been written since then that not giving the Kurds their
own nation was a huge mistake and ignored their right to self-determination.
Historian Peter Sluglett and Professor Michael Gunter however have argued that
there was no strong Kurdish nationalist movement at that time as the community
was divided by tribalism, and was more concerned with autonomy of each clan
rather than their own state.
The British were hoping to co-opt the Kurds to help them rule
their new conquests in Mosul, but that proved very difficult. The city of Mosul
was taken
on November 3, 1918, giving the British control of most of the province. The
British then sought out local leaders to help them administer the territory.
The civil commissioner in Baghdad ordered a council of chiefs to be created,
and two colonial officers were dispatched to begin talks. What the English
quickly realized was that the Kurds were divided amongst an array of tribes
that were only loosely connected to each other. For example, the British appointed
Sheikh Mahmoud Barzinji to be the head of Sulaymainiya, but other clans in
Halabja, Dohuk, Irbil, Zakho, and other areas did not accept him. In fact, by
May 1919 London had to remove Barzini because so many were angry with him inside
Sulaymaniya itself. According to historian Peter Slugglet the British were only
welcomed because that meant the Ottomans would leave, and the Kurdish tribes
could be left alone to their own devices. While a few were talking of Kurdish
nationalism, it was a new concept foreign to most in the area. While there are
some that claim
nationalism is a natural desire that for the Kurds dates back to ancient
history such as Medes who overthrew the Assyrian Empire in 612 B.C. or the poem
Mem u Zin written by Ahmad Khan in 1692 the idea did not exist in the world
back then. Historians date the emergence of nationalism to 18th
Century France, and it didn’t spread to the Middle East until after World War
I.
Those calling for a Kurdish state were actually mostly
Europeans, but that quickly changed. One of the British colonial officers in
Mosul E.W.C. Noel recommended a Kurdish nation from Eastern Anatolia in Turkey
to Mosul in Iraq. Then the British decided to include the Mosul vilyat in the
Iraq Mandate in March 1920. Later, the August 1920 Treaty of Sevres that
divided up the Ottoman Empire called for a Kurdistan, but that was cancelled by
Turkey. The newly anointed King Faisal was also afraid of a Kurdistan fearing
that it would lead to instability in the region. The Kurds themselves continued
to be divided as Sulaymaniya rejected being part of the new Iraq, but Dohuk,
Amadiya, and Zakho were not opposed to the idea.
Today many talk about this period as a lost chance for the
Kurds. Things were not as simple as hindsight might make it out to be however.
There were no nationalist leaders back then to rally the tribes together.
Instead those groups appeared more interested in their own autonomy than coming
together into a nation.
SOURCES
Gunter, Michael, “The Contemporary Roots of Kurdish
Nationalism In Iraq,” Kufa Review, Winter 2013
Sluglett, Peter, Britain
in Iraq: Contriving King and Country, New York: Columbia University Press,
2007
- “The Kurdish Problem and the Mosul Boundary: 1918-1925,” Global
Policy Forum, 1976
No comments:
Post a Comment