Faisal’s Reign Over Iraq: A Historical Analysis and Its Context

The birth of modern nations in the Middle East after World War I was a complex process filled with political intrigue, territorial disputes, and the influence of colonial powers. One intriguing episode during this period is the creation of the Arab Kingdom, which included Iraq and Syria under Faisal I. This article delves into the factors that led to Faisal being made king of Iraq rather than Syria, providing a detailed historical context enriched with insights from political science and international relations.

Colonial Mandates in the Levant

The end of World War I marked a shift in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, prompting the major European powers to establish mandates under the League of Nations. France was awarded a mandate over Syria, while Britain was granted the mandate over Iraq and additional territories, including parts of what is now Syria.

The French Mandate for Syria was characterized by a desire to maintain a strong French presence and influence, whereas the British were not as deeply entrenched in Syria. This difference in their mandates set the stage for the eventual conflicts that would arise over the leadership of the Arab Kingdom.

The Arab Kingdom and King Faisal

In the aftermath of World War I, the Levantine Arabs, under the leadership of King Faisal I of Mecca, sought to create a united Arab state that would encompass Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, and parts of Iraq. The concept of a pan-Arab state was met with support from the British, who viewed it as a way to control the region from behind the scenes.

King Faisal’s appointment as the head of the Arab Kingdom faced several challenges, primarily due to the secret deals made by his father, King Hussein of Mecca, with the British. These deals ensured that British influence would extend into the region. However, the French, who controlled Syria, were not as amenable to British overreach.

What Led to Faisal Being King of Iraq?

Faisal was ultimately made king of Iraq, rather than Syria, due to a combination of factors:

British Influence: The British were committed to maintaining their mandate over Iraq and did not wish to lose influence over the region. They found Faisal to be a more malleable choice for their strategic interests in the area. French Opposition: The French, who controlled Syria, were resistant to the notion of a pan-Arab state that could potentially challenge their dominance in the Levant. Political Negotiations: The political negotiations between Britain and France, and their respective effects on the region, played a crucial role. The secret Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Middle East between British and French control, shaped the way these powers interacted with Faisal and his potential claims. Personal Characteristics: Faisal’s character traits, including his political acumen and diplomatic skills, may have influenced the British to prefer him over other potential leaders.

Consequences and Legacy

Following World War I, the creation of modern Arab states was not straightforward. The division of the old Ottoman Empire led to significant changes in the region. Faisal's reign in Iraq, while initially promising, faced numerous challenges and ultimately led to several conflicts, including the 1920-1921 Iraq Rebellion and the British relocation of Faisal from Iraq to Saudi Arabia.

Conclusion

Understanding why Faisal was made king of Iraq rather than Syria involves examining the complex interplay of colonial powers, regional politics, and the aspirations of the Levantine Arabs. It underscores the importance of recognizing the historical context and the intricate negotiations that shaped the modern Middle East.

Related Keywords

British Mandate, French Mandate, Faisal I, Levantine Arabs, Arab Kingdom