It was the start of WWI when Britain first occupied Mesopotamia, now Iraq, then part of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans had allied with Germany and Britain justified its 1914 invastion as a move to protect its oil field in neighboring Iran (hmmmm where have we heard a similar story recently?). This followed the 1916-18 Arab revolt against the Ottman Empire. This revolt, as you may recall from the movie, was "encouraged" by the British military liason officer T.E. Lawrence. At the time of the occupation, the British Gen. Stanley Maude commander of the British Forces, proclaimed "Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies but as liberators" (hmmm where have we heard that recently?).

In 1920 The newly formed League of Nations, predecessor to the United Nations, gave Britain a "mandate" over Iraq. At the same time the League of Nations mandated Britain to govern Palestine, France to govern Lebanon and Syria. This mandating was a useful disguise to maintain the old colonial system in place. BTW: "Iraq" is a seventh-century name meaning "well-rooted country." As for Kuwait, it had been a separate British protectorate since 1899 and by WWI was already splitting from the Ottoman Province of Basra which we know became a part of Iraq.

(MORE LATER)

Very interesting, Quentin. I'm looking forward to the "more
later."

Thanks Edith. I appreciate your interest.

[CONTINUED FROM ABOVE]
By 1920 Iraqi nationalism out-weighed pro-British feeling and at first Britain didn't know how to deal with it. But soon it was decided over the protests of a delegation of Iraqis to turn Iraq into an appendage of Britain's colonial rule in India. Iraqi protests increased, with one leader issuing a fatwa, or religious decree, saying British rule violated Islamic law, and called for a jihad or holy war against British rule. The Sunnis, Shites and rival sheikhdoms united in a common cause to such an extent the Kurds joined in the armed rebellion. Sone 6,000 Iraqi and 500 British and Indian soldiers were killed before the revolt was put down.

What followed was a plan by Winston Churchill, then colonial secretary for Iraqi affairs; that is, a constitutional monarchy, with Winston claiming it would be a sure path to a stable and prosperous Iraqi (with Britain still ostensibly controlling). So in 1921 British-picked King Faisal (1921-1933) was placed on the throne. [More later...I love this stuff....smiling].

waiting . . .

[CONTINUED FROM ABOVE]
One reason Faisal, age 35, son of Sharif Hussein of Mecca (now part of Saudi Arabia) was chosen was he had fought with Lawrence against the Turks), and the Colonial Office believed he had the charisma to hold the new country together. Although Faisal could trace his lineage to Muhammad he had never set foot in Iraq. So once chosen he set out to his new kingdom from Mecca, birth place of the Prophet. Later in a national referendum on his monarchy Faisal was officially declared to have won with 96% of the vote. Some 1500 diginitaries assembled in a government building on the banks of the Tigris River for his cornation with British Army officers and colonial administrators mingling with Shite Arabs from Basra, Kurds from Mosul near Turkey, and Sunni Arabs from Baghdad to witness the installation of this foreign prince. Gertrude Bell, a British colonial official who had recommended Faisal and who would be his staunchist supporter exclaimed: "We've got our King crowned." The new country and king had no anthem, so a band struck up "God Save the King."

Bell wanted Faisal to incorporate Syria and Palestine into Faisal's kingdom, but Faisal, a Sunni himself, apparently thought he had enough trouble already. At this time about half of the population was Shite Arabs, concentrated in the south; about 20% were Kurds, mostly in the north. The remainder included Jews, Assyrians and other minorities. Faisal tried hard to be a good king, balancing British and Iraqi demands. The Constitution written, of course, by the British gave him a prime minister to help. His bigggest problem during his rule was the new Anglo-Iraq treaty which provided for maintenance of British military bases, gave British officials a veto over legislation and to perpetuate British influence over financial and international matter. Faisal ruled until his mandatef term ended in 1933. His successor is another story. [TO BE CONTINUED]

Waiting with bated breath. This is interesting!

me too Edith..Quentin, I would love to have the name of the book you are copying from. That would be worth reading. Please don't say you found this info on the net..I never find anything that informative.."S"

Shar, shame on you. I am not copying from a book. It is from a magazine....smiling. The above posts are a very long condensed version of an excellent article in this month's issue of "Smithsonian." Here we go again:

Iraq did achieve a modicum of independence during Faisal's reign: It joined the League of Nations. It had a press that was open and critical of the British. In foreign policy it did not always follow Britain's lead but seemed to be increasingly pro-German during the 30s. King Faisal didn't live long after his term as king ended in 1932, dying of a heart attack the following year at the age of 48. After his death, the British were able to undermine the government and the monarch by constantly involving, in particular, oil and foreign affairs in the gulf region.

Faisal's son, Ghazi, assumed the throne in 1933 at age 21. He did not have his father's skills nor a work ethic. He like partygoing more than governing. Six years after becoming king, in 1939 Ghazi crashed his sports car into a utility pole in Baghdad after an evening of drinking. His two British physicians summoned to the scene of the dying king insisted on an Iraqi colleague to come as well being fearful that if an Iraqi doctor was not present the populace might see anglo mischief making. Even so, violence broke out, street demostrations erupted in Baghdad. In Mosul, a mob killed the British consul. For years, many Iraqis insisted that Ghazi was killed by the British and their allies. Ghazi was succeed by his son Faisal II. [TO BE CONTINUED]

This is most interesting, Quentin. Had me worried for a bit - I kept thinking I remembered Faisal. Now I realize it must have been Faisal II.

There are two books that back this up - The Kingdom of Saud and, (what else?) Lawrence of Arabia. I have both here; very good histories.

Snowden, you must have an extensive library to have the two books you mentioned. I bet they are very, very interesting. You may know that Faisal II was only four (4) years old when his father, Ghazi, was killed in 1939. By then WWII was beginning in Europe and the Arab anger against the British presence in Iraq became even stronger because of the growing numbers of European Jews migrating to Palestine, among other things. They wanted to be rid of the British mandate as well, and when the Brits supressed a revolt by Palestinian Arabs in 1939, Iraqi Army officers invited the defeated leader, the Mufti of Jerusalem, to live in Baghdad to this. Then when WWII began, Iraqi's antipathy to Britain turned into support for Hitler. Also, it was widely acknowledged at the time that most of the junior officers in the Iraqi Army were pro-German and anti-British. Then in 1948 anti-British passions were further inflamed by the outbrreak of the war in Palestine, where Iraqi troops fought the on the Arab side against the Israelis, whose utlimate victory, most arabs believed, rightly or wrongly, could not have been achieved withouT British and American assistance. Faisal II, being a child, ruled through a regent for 14 to 15 years (until he was 19 or 20) when he and the royal family were massacred by Iraqi Army officers led by Abdul Karim Qassem who was installed in 1958 as ruler following the bloody coup. [TO BE CONTINUED]

Keep it coming, Quentin!!!!

[CONTINUED FROM ABOVE] This coup by Abdul Karim Qassem, destroying the Iraqi monarchy once and for all, had it's birth, and the fuel for the later flames, when two years earlier in 1956 the British and France attempted to wrest the Suez Canal back from Eqyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser. The massacre of the Iraqi royal family was followed by even greater instability ending with a coup in 1968 by army officers linked to the Baathists, a pan-Arab socialist movement that opponents have described as neo-Facist. A jubilant Saddam Hussein, 31, rode through Baghdad atop a tank. His kinsman, Gen. Amhad Hassan al Bakr, had led the coup and became president. Like Bakr, Hussein was from Tikrit, a Sunni town north of Baghdad that historically fielded a disproportionate share of the army officers. President Bakr, who as a general, had long been impressed with Hussein for his toughness and ability to organize street gangs that disrupted opponents' political rallies and later graduating to assassin (for which he spent two years in prison and in exile for political murders or attempted killings), appointed Hussein to run the national security apparatus. In that capacity he set out to eliminate his main rivals and place relatives and fellow Tikrits in positions of power and influence in the Baath Party, the armed forces, and government. As Bakr's power broker, Hussein nationalized foreign oil holding in 1972, then accepted acclaim as Iraq's annual revenues rose eight fold , to $8 million over the next three years, then tripled over the next five. [TO BE CONTINEUD].

Quentin, I seem to remember Bakr had a bit of a shock coming. Did he? I was not paying a lot of attention to Iraq at that time, but this is indeed fascinating.

Do keep going. Your patience in presenting this is most impressive. It's most interesting, too; despite the US involvement I believe comes into it.

Still reading...still fascinated.

Awwhh with compliments like that I will do anything. (: [HERE WE GO AGAIN]

Saddam Hussein did not have to wait long beyond his training and learning period to become "el presidente." In 1979 Hussein became president following Bakr's "resignation." Hussein most certainly engineered it. Allah didn't permit Bakr to worship long after his resignation. He died in 1982. Many Iraqis thought Saddam Hussein would lead them into prosperity. Most of Hussein's rivals having been killed, he ruled despotically for nearly a quarter of a century waging war on Iran (with American backing) and killing many thousands of Iraqis, including thousands of Kurds killed by chemical weapons. Hussein dragged his oil-rich, once-ascendent nation into poverty, and his pursuit, some say, of weapons of mass destruction put him on a collision course with the world's lone superpower.

Now, as Paul Harvey, the american radio newscaster, used to say (maybe still does) "Now you know the rest of the story." It's been fun and educational for me. Thanks for your indulgence.

Well done, Quentin. A most interesting and educational experience all around.

Thanks for posting it.

Thanks Quentin!

Thank you, Quentin. This has been a fascinating journey. Now -- what else is in the pipeline?????????????