In this thesis the influence of the Israel lobby group on the relationship between Israel and the United States is examined. subsequently, the dependency of Israel on the US is analysed, as this...Show moreIn this thesis the influence of the Israel lobby group on the relationship between Israel and the United States is examined. subsequently, the dependency of Israel on the US is analysed, as this will correlate with the influence of the Israel lobby group.Show less
This thesis analyses the considerations of British officials when arriving at positions on granting sovereignty/ authority to: (i) the Greeks in Smyrna, southwest Anatolia; (ii) the Armenians...Show moreThis thesis analyses the considerations of British officials when arriving at positions on granting sovereignty/ authority to: (i) the Greeks in Smyrna, southwest Anatolia; (ii) the Armenians within north-eastern Anatolia; (iii) the Kurds within south-eastern Anatolia; (iv) and the Kurds within the Mosul vilayet (Southern Kurdistan/ present-day northern Iraq), from 1918-1926. The concepts of “Orientalism” and “civilisation” provide the theoretical basis and are applied to the sources analysed. The thesis argues that Britain’s actions were influenced by the prevailing stereotypes of each people and “civilisation”, but ultimately rooted in political and economic interest. The Paris Peace Conference presented an opportunity to strengthen Britain’s position in the eastern Mediterranean and in the Middle East through support for the design of friendly states and re-drawing the political map of the territory within the former Ottoman empire. Each case was part of the process of erecting a new imperial structure in the Middle East. This new structure was to be based upon the organising principle of ethnic nationalism, as promoted by the Allied powers, including Britain. The British role in each case can be described as: the leading supporter of Greek goals in Anatolia; predominantly a supportive observer of Armenian goals in Anatolia, leaving the French to play the role of lead supporter; a cautiously supportive observer of the Anatolian Kurds with little authority outside of its dictation of the Treaty of Sèvres; and a cautious detractor of the autonomy of southern Kurds, having occupied the Mosul vilayet in 1918 and held full colonial authority over it, experimenting with autonomy but ultimately deciding on its abandonment. By 1926, the goals of the Greeks, Armenians, and Kurds in Anatolia and Southern Kurdistan had not been achieved, and all had withered away in British Middle Eastern policy.Show less
