The Formation of Modern Iraq and Syria [Paperback]

Eliezer Tauber (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0714641057 | ISBN-13: 978-0714641058 | Publication Date: November 3, 1994 | Edition: 1

This volume examines the impact of clandestine and overt political organizations in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq after World War I. It analyzes Amir Faysal's short-lived state in post-war Syria, relations between Syrians, Iraqis and Palestinians, and nationalist activity within Iraq.

Editorial Reviews

Language Notes

Text: English (translation)
Original Language: Hebrew --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Product Details

• Paperback: 432 pages
• Publisher: Routledge; 1 edition (November 3, 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0714641057
• ISBN-13: 978-0714641058
• Product Dimensions: 8.8 x 6.7 x 1.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #4,428,599 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Formation of Modern Syria and Iraq., July 26, 2001

By 

Daniel Pipes, Middle East Forum, Philadelphia (Philadelphia, PA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Formation of Modern Iraq and Syria (Paperback)

Tauber continues the work begun in his two pathbreaking studies of 1993, The Emergence of the Arab Movements and The Arab Movements in World War. As in those volumes, he here establishes the basic facts of the Arab nationalism movement in the World War I era. His main conclusion concerns the fate of the movement: he deems Arabs, not Westerners, responsible for the dissipation of Arab unity in favor of Lebanese, Syrian, and Iraqi independence. In the author's words, "there was no basis for placing the blame for the emergence of the local movements on the shoulders of European imperialism. . . . When the peoples of the Fertile Crescent faced the choice, they preferred separate states." In great detail, he shows how the Arabs of one region either feared or dominated those of others. Some Syrians, for example, feared domination by Hijazis (residents of today's western Saudi Arabia) more than Zionists. And, in fact, King Faysal (originally of the Hijaz) reigned but did not rule during his two years in Damascus, 1918-20. Instead, the secret Arab society Al-Fatat was "the main political power" in the country during his time.

Tauber writes in the terse and relentlessly factual style that characterizes much of Israeli scholarship and many of Frank Cass's Middle East publications. His exemplary scholarship has settled many of the abiding controversies of the World War I period. But beware: this superb study is not intended for any but the most serious reader.

Middle East Quarterly, June 1996

1 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Would 'No Nationalism May Mean No Arab Nation' - Hmm!, August 2, 2001

By 

Khaled El-bizri (Palo Alto, CA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Formation of Modern Iraq and Syria (Paperback)

The book offers an insight into the development of the Middle East into separate states. The absence of any credible evidence to support the central thesis does not seem to sway the author. The existence of bucketful of contrary evidence equally fail in affecting the author's judgment. In both cases, selectivity in evidence keeps intellectual curiosity of Mr. Tauber's satisfied.

Take for example the Young Arab Association (Al-Fetat), considered to be the main political force in the Middle East. Its constitution speaks of the creation of a united Arab dominion that included not only greater Syria, but the Arab peninsula, Saudi Arabia today. Members of the association spread out reaching Latin American Arabs in their effort to rally support to their pan Arab cause. The impact of the association within French-occupied Syria was rather limited. It was supplanted internally by very active political parties and blocks that made of independence and Arab unity their avowed aim. Some later paid with their lives for it.

In 1906 the Sykes-Picot agreement divided greater Syria into four domains. Some to be taken over by the French and others by Britain. The Bolsheviks exposed the secret treaty, as they did many 'conspiracies' documented in secret treaties.

The division of the territories, imposing separatism and starting feuds between minorities and majorities was not unique to Africa. Take for example, Syria. At one stage the Syrian Republic, which is only a part of modern day Syria, was divided by the French into six republics: Alawite, Druze, North, Damascus, Lebanon Mountain and Lebanon. Every effort was made to maintain separateness. The contingent of Syrians who crossed to Iraq to help in the Rashid `Aali Al-Kilani's rebellion against British rule, should be quite sufficient to force a revision of the central theme of the book. Note that those arrested by the British authorities in Iraq were shipped to Al-Remleh Al-Beida prison in Beirut, Lebanon.

But while one must assume that there must have been separatists and separatist tendencies it would not be smart to assume that Arab nationalism existed only in the minds of Oriental scholars and a few Arabs following a night on the town. Even while Syria fought for the unity of it northern edges against the French, Syrian envoys were in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt briefing their respective leaders and working out steps to achieve unity - as is the Charter of the Arab League grandly proposes in the middle forties!

Mr. Tauber's analyses does not provide a sufficient cover for colonialism, ancient or modern. The emperor is still naked, whether Turkish, French, British, etc. Nor does it convince one that the Arabs are a collection of disparate people with no national dream - not unlike that of the Welsh or the Scottish, and may be before that the American! Whether the dream survived colonialism or is being reborn with the continued crisis are different matters that only the future can tell. That future is hardly a continuation of the history related by Mr. Tauber. I almost expected Mr. Tauber to deny that a French soldier ever entered Syria, and if they did, it was to spend an evening listening to Arab poetry, or that the Iraqi government was free under Feysal (who was thrown out of Syria by the French) and Nuri As-Saeed, to the extent that the British forces were enjoying an R & R in Arbeel.

But the book does the Orientalists, old and new, proud. It is a new twist in their annals. One that somehow puts forward the thesis that "if we take away nationalism from the Arabs we can stop treating them as a nation and, guess what, ignore the national aspirations of one of their awkward contingents."

While such theories and efforts may flourish for one or ten years, evidence already at hand will finally eliminate distortions in the history of those peoples, and strip such works of their assumed academic quality. +