This was certainly not the intention of the mandatory powers, and the reasons for this outcome are specific to each of the five territories. It is a main aim of this book to investigate why it happened.
Western Imperialism in the Middle East D. K. Fieldhouse. Abstract. The term 'Fertile Crescent' is commonly used to refer to the group of territories. arunthodomen.ml: Western Imperialism in the Middle East ( ): D. K. Fieldhouse: Books.
Since this study is limited to these Middle Eastern territories it excludes both Egypt—occupied informally by the British since and declared a protectorate in —and Cyprus, under British protection from and made a colony in But a wider study would draw many parallels between these two and the five mandates studied here. An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page.
If the problem persists, please try again in a little while. No cover image. Read preview.
Synopsis The term "Fertile Crescent" is commonly used as shorthand for the group of territories extending around the Rivers Tigris and Euphrates. Much has been written on the history of these countries which were taken from the Ottoman empire after and became Mandates under the League of Nations. For the most part the histories of these countries have been handled either individually or as part of the history of Britain or France.
In the first instance the emphasis has normally been on the development of nationalism and local resistance to alien control in a particular territory, leading to the modern successor state. In the second most studies have concentrated separately on how either France or Britain handled the great problems they inherited, seldom comparing their strategies.
The aim of this book is to see the region as a whole and from both the European and indigenous points of view.
The central argument is that the mandate system failed in its stated purpose of establishing stable democratic states out of what had been provinces or parts of provinces within the Ottoman empire. Rather it generated essentially unstable polities and, in the special case of Palestine, one totally unresolved, and possibly unsolvable, conflict.
The result was to leave the Middle East as perhaps the most volatile part of the world in the later twentieth century and beyond. This work comprises three parts. The first part consists of two introductory chapters which map the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the plans for dividing up its Middle Eastern territories. More specifically, the first chapter synthesizes evidence about the importance of burgeoning Arab nationalism in determining the fate of Ottoman rule, while the second chapter evaluates the 'extraneous' factors between and The middle section devotes a chapter each to Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, and two chapters to Palestine.
Here Field-house addresses a wide range of issues, including the ambiguity of the Mandate concept, the religious and ethnic demographics of the territories, British and French economic, political and military interests, as well as the socio-economic structure of the local communities and their internal political evolution. In the eleven-page concluding chapter Fieldhouse turns his attention to the comparative aspect of his study. He approaches the comparison first by asking what might, 'theoretically, have happened if [Britain and France] had not taken control of these provinces in the form of Mandates' p.
Following that, he discusses various tests by which to judge the success of the different Mandates, such as the existence of 'cordial goodwill' between the European rulers and the local inhabitants, the quick establishment of self-governing institutions, and socio-economic improvements.
He concludes that the mandates' best accomplishment was to create 'a system of states with viable western-type governmental institutions with the potential to develop into nations' p.
However, he tempers this praise with criticism of the British and French styles of governance, notably as regards their reliance on the ruling elites, and their divisive policies which later caused particular problems in Palestine and Lebanon. Overall, the value of this work lies in its exceptional clarity and the succinctness of its synthesis, which make it ideal for students and the uninitiated. The slim, but judiciously chosen, select bibliography and the detailed index add to its usefulness.
Given the unfortunate paucity of comparative studies of the Middle Eastern mandates, it should also spur interest and research into a seminal era of Arab history. Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide.