Iraq, the Manipulated Nation

Iraq, a nation since 1920, war-torn, conflict-ridden, plagued by despotic rulers, and western political and economic aspirations. The area we now know as Iraq is also the site of many ancient civilizations. Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Persians, and Arabians all built their monuments and cities in this area. A little overwhelmed with my self-driven project to find out more about the history of this “nation” I’ve read almost too much. Now I’m faced with the fact that I wrote a blog that is 3 single-spaced pages. Don’t worry I cut the lot and will not bore you with the whole thing. Do people really care about what the Persians called their Iraq province or when the Mongols sacked Baghdad? Well, perhaps a few people care, but I think my blog is already long enough for most of your TV-addled attention spans.

Basically, I’ll take up at the beginning of the formation of Iraqi identity that we are currently familiar with. Around 1831 the Ottoman empire re-established direct rule and began a campaign to settle and subdue the unruly Iraqi tribes which had previously dominated the politics of the area we now know as Iraq. This was done by giving the tribes land and promoting the position of their Sheikh leaders to landowners and revenue farmers. Although many Sheikhs profited from this policy, over the 19th and early 20th century the tribal cultures disintegrated. In the ensuing social havoc, revolts erupted, many Sheikhs lost their power to control tribesmen, and many turned to religion—particularly Shi’ism—for comfort. Ottomans contributed to the conversion from Sunni to Shi’i by giving land to Sayyids—religious leaders/figures who claimed descent from the Prophet—to help fill the power vacuum. The end result of all these changes was a vastly increased settled and even urban population by the turn of the 20th century as well as a Shi’i majority by WWI. For those of you who don’t know Shi’i/Shia/Shiite Muslims are a minority amongst Muslims world-wide, believing the only legitimate leaders of Islam are blood-descended from the Prophet via his daughter Fatima and cousin Ali (in a very small nutshell). Iran has the largest majority of Shi’is and Iraq famously has a 60-65% majority which is one of the causes of current inner turmoil.
On top of this conversion to Shi’ism a rise of so-called Pan-Arab Nationalism around the turn of the 20th century influenced Iraqi politics. This seems to come from a few factors. First, the Ottoman empire began to encourage Islamic equality, or Pan-Islam identity, which is part of what led them to encourage the spread of Shi’i Sayyids in Iraq. Second, the rise of the Young Turks movement and subsequent take over of Ottoman administration led to an Arab Nationalist response in the Middle East. The Young Turks were Turkish nationalists who changed the administrative language from Arabic to Turkish and exiled Sharif Hussein, the influential Hashemite ruler and custodian of Mecca and Medina. Third, the British encouraged this Pan-Arab identity to help in their fight against the Ottoman empire during WWI and subsequently turned heavily to Pan-Arabs like the Hashemites in their set-up of Iraqi administration in the aftermath of the war. Of course, this Pan-Arab nationalism, as it began to be taught in schools by the ruling elite and rising western-educated “effendiya” began to splinter and backfire, resulting in anti-western attitudes.
During World War I Britain occupied most of Iraq—with the help of the Indian army—and courted the local leaders for support in the war. Famous/infamous Brits ran around the countryside collecting intelligence on tribes, Sheikhs, and religious leaders to help in their fight. They made deals with Ibn Saud, Sharif Hussein and his family, Jews, and local Iraqi Sheikhs and religious leaders that if they would only support Britain against the Turks they would receive independence when the Turks were defeated. To many who were tired of Ottoman rule, this seemed like a good choice. Well, with a grant of money to both Ibn Saud and Sharif Hussein armies were given weapons and marched against the Turks in different areas throughout the Middle East. Unfortunately, large Arabic kingdoms were promised to both Ibn Saud and Sharif Hussein, the Balfour Declaration promised European Jews a Palestinian homeland, and Syria was promised to both Faisal—a son of Sharif Hussein—and the French. Although this helped drive the Turks out of the Middle East you can imagine what difficulties came of these intrigues following the war.

After the war the British were hard-pressed to find a real ruler for Iraq so a League of Nations Mandate established Iraq as a ‘protectorate’ in 1920 under a British High Commissioner. The race was on to find the perfect, yet malleable, Iraqi ruler/government. There were two concerns. First, oil was an important need for the British navy at this point so some sort of continued control and influence seemed necessary in Iraq. Second, promises to Arab rulers and the costs of direct rule meant that some sort of self-government was needed in Iraq. The British dragged their feet and to make the choice more difficult, rebellion started. The borders of Iraq had been drawn at the end of WWI by the upper class British woman cum “Iraq” expert, Gertrude Bell and encompassed 3 different Ottoman districts. These three districts represented the diversity of the people within the drawn borders. Kurdish, Sunni, Shi’i all suspicious of one another and many, at the same time, suspicious of the British. The local tribes revolted. Where was the independence they had been promised? Why was the British military still stationed there? On top of this distrust, many Iraqis of different tribes and ethnicities were resentful of the heavy tax imposed by the British to help finance their military occupation. “Recalcitrant” tribes who refused to pay the heavy colonial taxes made the installation of an Arab government all the more important, yet at the same time, very difficult. The British needed a government that upheld British interests yet could still retain a majority of support from the Iraqi people whether Sunni or Shi’i. Basically, the British had voluntarily gotten themselves into a quicksand mire. The Cairo Conference was organized by Churchill in 1921 in which Faisal, the Hashemite son, was chosen to be ruler of Iraq and a less expensive military strategy of RAF bombing to subdue “recalcitrant” tribes was deemed appropriate. Thus began one of the first bombing campaigns of its kind with unknown civilian casualties while British authorities covertly arrested and exiled Sayid Talib, the only viable possibility for an Iraqi leader and crowned Faisal King that year.

Unfortunately, Faisal was considered a foreigner by many Iraqis because he was not from Iraq nor did he have much knowledge of Iraq. Sporadic rebellion continued. Finally in 1932 Iraq was turned into an official monarchy with Faisal still as head, albeit with British military bases and support. Faisal’s tumultuous reign did not last long and his son who followed had a difficult time as well. Basically, after the end of the mandate Iraq has suffered from a string of different princely and military rulers who have always had difficulty gaining mass support. Iraq is, after all, more than one nation. The years of British occupation with a foreign ruler—Faisal—put together with wars, bombing, tribalism, urbanization, and Shi’i conversion only increased these divisions in Iraqi society. Faced with this history, what is one to do? The real question is, does Iraq really need more foreign meddling in its affairs? It seems like anyone who’s enacted “well-meaning” changes whether Ottoman or British has suffered rebellion and high monetary costs—while in the long run, affecting the local society in unforeseen ways whether it be increasing the Shi’i population, social divisions, or religious nationalism. It makes you wonder what sort of unforeseen consequences are brewing right now as a result of foreign meddling.

Sources:
Eppel, Michael. “The Elite, the Effendiyya, and the Growth of Nationalism and Pan-Arabism in Hashemite Iraq, 1921-1958.” International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 30 (1998), 227-250.

Nakash, Yitzhak. “The Conversion of Iraq’s Tribes to Shi’ism.” International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 26 (1994), 443-463.

Satia, Priya. “The Defense of Inhumanity: Air Control and the British Idea of Arabia.” The American Historical Review, Vol. 111, Issue 1.

Wallach, Janet. “Desert Queen: The Extraordinary Life of Gertrude Bell, adventurer, adviser to Kings, ally to Lawrence of Arabia.” New York: Nan A. Talese/Doubleday, 1996.