17.02.2024, Sat -Şaban Aslan
In this article, I write about the British betrayal of the Kurds in Southern Kurdistan during the First World War:
During the First World War, the Kurds made mistakes. There is no point in denying this. The lack of communication among the Kurds and the hostility and relations of interest between the tribes played a significant role in preventing the unity of the Kurds. Forming a unified political attitude among the tribes made the unity and solidarity of the Kurds impossible. Aghas, beys, and sheiks, who were generally tribal leaders, made a big mistake in adhering to the plans of the British. Kurds wanted to take part in the administration with the traditional patronage system. They did not want to be subject to Arab rule.
Britain had assured the Kurds of guidance for the right of nations to self-determination. He expressed no opinion on how this principle would be implemented. Where there is war, there is destruction and tears.
When the British occupied Sulaymaniyah again, they made an attempt with the Iraqi state under a local self-government regime affiliated with a group hostile to Sheikh Mahmud Barzanji. Sheikh Mahmud’s opponents did not dare to come to power without the presence of the British military. When the British military unit withdrew a month later, the new administration of Sulaymaniyah resigned and fled to British positions. Sheikh Mahmud victoriously took back Sulaymaniyah on July 11. The Iraqi government grants Sheikh Mahmud a reduced regional administration to avoid conflict. (one)
During the First World War, the British officially occupied the entire Arabian Desert and Southern Kurdistan. They founded 22 states for the Arabs. They betrayed the Kurds, leaving them stateless and disintegrating them. No matter how much the Kurds in Southern Kurdistan insisted on the establishment of an independent Kurdistan under British mandate in all their meetings with the British officials, the British were constantly deceiving the Kurds by delaying them depending on the course of the war.
Some Kurdish tribal chiefs who cooperated with the advancing British in May 1918 faced reprisals when the British suddenly withdrew. Wilson later confessed, writing:
The Kurds, who had never had any ill will towards us, once again became suspicious. Assurances of support easily given by some irresponsible officers proved unreliable. We persuaded them to show their cards against the Turks, their enemies of the Kurds, and when they faltered, we abandoned them. Especially Hamawand leaders never forgave us. They continued their hostility towards us for years.
After the British invaded Mesopotamia, they sent their troops back to Kurdistan. In March 1919, Wilson signed an agreement with tribal leaders to obtain the following results. (2)
Since the British government announced that their aim with the war was to help the Eastern peoples to be saved from Turkish oppression and to achieve their independence, the tribal chiefs, who are the representatives of the people of Kurdistan, asked the British government to take them under British protection and attach them to Iraq, so that they would not be deprived of unity. The Mesopotamian Civil Commissioner requested that a representative be sent to them to provide the necessary assistance to enable the Kurdish people, under British support, to progress peacefully along the lines of civilization. They undertook to accept the instructions and recommendations of the British government if they helped and protected the Kurds.
To counter the increasing Turkish threat, the British apologized to Sheikh Mahmud and recalled him in September 1922. The British brought Mahmud Berzenci to create a bulwark against Turkish propaganda. (3)
Even though the British were the winners in the conflict within the war, the discourse of Independent Kurdistan and even autonomous states was subject to change. Wilson wrote the following in the telegram he sent to higher authorities in London after the Sheikh Mahmud uprising.
The latest developments are unique; I have not changed my views in any way regarding the necessity of implementing the policies approved by the British on May 9 regarding the Kurdish state. However, the level of supervision depends on the country’s needs and strategic assessments. (4)
Major Noel wrote: In October 1922, King Faisal issued an order to convene the Constituent Assembly. During the election registration process, it was decided that Kirkuk, where the Kurds opposed the oath to remain loyal to the King, would join the parliament. The people of Sulaymaniyah, who knew well what Baghdad thought, were excluded from the Constituent Assembly. (5)
I am against the universal suspicions, sometimes taken for granted, that we are determined to integrate the Kurds into Iraq by force or deception and that the election work (for the Constituent Assembly) is a complete illusion. I want to point out that the assurance that no Kurd would be forced to join Iraq would be incompatible in the minds of the Kurds with the principle of the Kirkuk region having an electoral college. (6) The source of trust of the British population in Iraq was the Kurds. The Kurdish group supported the British in the Constituent Assembly when the 1922 British and Iraqi treaty was adopted in June 1924. Since then, the Kurds have consistently supported British policy with their votes and influence.
By not granting an autonomous status to Southern Kurdistan, the British officially committed a crime by betraying the Kurds. The invasion of Kurdistan in 1918 ended in disgrace when the high hopes of British political officials failed, and the establishment of the Iraqi state was the biggest disgrace for the British. .(7)
By 1926, the promises and policies declared in 1918 were reduced to the rights the League of Nations promised. Kurdish leaders may have shortcomings in the political field. The British committed the crime of treason against the Kurds. (8)
When the Kurdish fighters, the Peshmerga, fought against the armies of King Faisal, British Royal warplanes were flying in the skies of Kurdistan, and British pilots were mercilessly raining cluster bombs on the Kurdish nation, which had no army. King Faisal, who was in a difficult situation and was starting, was asking for help by fulfilling all the requests of the British. The British had no thoughts other than oil. They were sacrificing the Kurds for oil as if they were defying the world.
While these turbulent days continued, Sheikh Mahmut Berzenci, who had no confidence in the British, started a war against the British by raising the Kurdistan flag. He was on the front lines. He was wounded in the first operation and captured by the British. Sheikh Mahmut continued his heroic war against the British, who had a superpower, with the Peshmerga he took with him again until May 1931, by refusing to go into exile in Iran when he had no means to fight. Kelleş had to surrender to the British. The war in Kurdistan is not over. Sheikh Ahmet Barzani, elder brother of the late Molla Mustafa, continued the war in the mountains of Kurdistan.
In February 1928, Sheikh Ahmet Barzani was contacting and meeting not only with his formidable neighbors, the Zebaris and Surchis, but also with Sheikh Mahmud Berzenji and İsmail Ağa (Sımko), who lived in Iranian Kurdistan. Fearing the start of an uprising in Southern Kurdistan, the British preferred compromise. But Sheikh Ahmet was always ready for war. Kurdish fighters in the Barzan region badly defeated an Iraqi strike force sent to the Barzan region in December 1931. The survivors were rescued with support from the British air force.
In the spring of 1932, a new force invaded Mergasor in the east of the Barzan region and wanted to enter the Barzan region once again. The Iraqi army is defeated for the second time with significant losses. The Iraqi army, supported by the British air force, was able to enter the Barzan region in June 1932. While Sheikh Ahmet was continuing his war in the mountains, unexpectedly, British Royal warplanes were bombing the villages in Kurdistan with cluster bombs, brutally killing or maiming the Kurds. In June 1932, Sheikh Ahmet crossed the border and sought asylum in Turkey without surrendering to the Iraqi forces.
The war of the Kurds did not end with Sheikh Ahmet taking refuge in Turkey. His two brothers, Muhammed Sadık and Molla Mustafa, continued the battle along the border and in the Mazuri Bala region. In June 1933, leaflets about an amnesty were dropped by planes. Sheikh Ahmet, who was in Turkey (Eskişehir), proposed to his brothers that they accept Iraq’s conditions. It was noteworthy that the Kurdish warriors returned home with their weapons after swearing loyalty to King Faisal. In the air attack before the amnesty, 1,365 of the 2,382 people living in 79 villages were destroyed. It was against the Hague Convention 1907 and the British Manual of Military Law (1914). Cluster bombs caused the death and disability of many civilians. (9)
Kurds were among the first to learn that there was no discrimination between victims of air warfare. In this situation, the Kurds had no trust in the Iraqi government. Bomber Arthur Harris wrote in 1924:
Now they (Arabs and Kurds) know what live bombs mean in terms of human casualties; They now know that within 45 minutes, an entire village can be destroyed and a third of its inhabitants either killed or injured.
It is estimated that Sheikh Ahmet Barzani, who received a life guarantee, returned to Iraq and was exiled to Mosul with his brothers. Then, they were sent to Nasiriyah and then to Sulaymaniyah. At that time, Mazuri tribal chief Halil Hushawi was also fighting with the Iraqi army. Khalil Hushawi’s war continued until 1936. (10)
SOURCE:
1. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 228
2. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk publishing Ankara First edition 2004 Page: 228
3. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk publishing Ankara First edition 2004 Page: 229
4. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 228
5. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 236
6. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 228
7. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 228
8. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 230
9. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 253
10. Footnote: Modern Kurdish History David McDowall Doruk Publishing Ankara 2004 First Edition Page: 260
Comments are closed.