AZERBAIJAN WILL DEFINITELY FREE OCCUPIED LAND -DEFENSE MINISTER

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Oct 12 2005

Baku, October 11, AssA-Irada
Azerbaijan is firm on liberating its territories from under Armenian
occupation, Minister for Defense Safar Abiyev has said.

“Armenia is unwilling to withdraw from our land. Azerbaijan will
definitely free its territories”, Abiyev said in a meeting with
Dimitros Panagiotu, deputy chief of staff of NATO’s United Forces
Command in Neapol, on Tuesday.

Abiyev noted that the country has been actively involved in NATO’s
Partnership for Peace program since 1994. Panagiotu’s visit will give
a further impetus to its cooperation with the alliance, he said.

The parties also discussed strengthening Azerbaijan’s integration
into NATO and the military-political situation in the South Caucasus
region.*

ABSORPTION
By Husnu Mahalli (Aksam)

Turkish Press
Oct 11 2005

Press Review
AKSAM

Columnist Husnu Mahalli comments on relations between Turkey
and the European Union. A summary of his column is as follows:
“If Europeans can absorb Turkey and Turks, they will make Turkey
a European Union member. However, those who talk about Europe and
Europeans absorbing Turkey and Turks don’t talk about Turkey in
turn absorbing Europeans. For example, what about European countries’
hypocrisy and double standards? Let’s consider the Cyprus issue. The EU
previously prodded Turkey and Turkish Cypriots and last year claimed
that it would do what was necessary, but did it really do this? The
Greek Cypriots who rejected United Nations Secretary-General Kofi
Annan’s plan in the April 2004 referendum were made EU members and
the Turkish Cypriots who accepted it were left in the cold. What’s
more, the EU then started to put pressure on Turkey and asked it to
recognize Greek Cyprus. It stated in the negotiating framework that
recognizing Greek Cyprus or opening our ports and harbors initially
was a precondition for continuing of the membership process.

Now, let’s talk about the Armenian issue. The European Parliament
called on Turkey to recognize the so-called Armenian genocide and said
that otherwise this issue would influence the process of membership. It
should be remembered that when our membership talks end, our possible
EU membership will face a vote in the European Parliament. Therefore,
I attach great importance to the European Parliament’s voting on the
issue of genocide.

I wonder if Turkey, which previously absorbed the EU’s hypocrisy
concerning the Cyprus issue, will be able to absorb its stance on the
Armenian issue. What’s more, the same Europe condoned the Armenian
ASALA terrorist group killing nearly 40 Turkish diplomats in the early
1980s. These diplomats were killed in Paris, Brussels, Athens, Geneva,
Madrid, Vienna and other major EU capitals. If I’m not mistaken, none
of these murderers have been caught. Such a Europe forgot its own
guilt by association and now it wants Turkey to recognize the genocide.

The most important issue is that the EU is leaving the countries free
to choose the method they will choose for making Turkey an EU member.

As part of this, countries will vote on the agreement concerning Turkey
in their parliaments or bring it to referendums. Right now there
are 25 EU members. If we add in Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia, that
makes 28. Now I wonder how many of these 28 parliaments will accept
Turkey’s membership. Let’s not forget that if even one turns us down,
Turkey won’t get in the EU. The same holds for the referendums. All
the publics of EU member states have always said in polls that they’re
against Turkey’s EU membership and everybody has their own grounds
for this. Austrians can’t forget the Siege of Vienna and the Greeks
still remember the conquest of Istanbul.

However, all of Europe remembers the Ottoman Empire. If you consider
economic and political interests and calculations, you can see how
difficult the situation is. So we can see at least 25 parliaments of
EU countries among the 28 member states would certainly reject our
EU membership.”

BAKU CALLED BSECO TO “APPLY ECONOMIC SANCTIONS” AGAINST ARMENIA

Pan Armenian
12.10.2005 19:28 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Azerbaijan called upon the member-states of the
Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization to apply sanctions against
Armenia. During the 16th sitting of the BSECO PA committee on cultural,
educational and social affairs held October 5-8 in Thessaloniki,
Greece, Azerbaijani parliamentarian Shaitdin Aliyev stated that “9
member-states of the Organization and the European Union should not
be indifferent on Armenia’s annexing the Azeri territories.”

STILL DOGGING US!
Tamer Korkmaz

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 12 2005

Turkey waited 42 years in order to start membership talks with the
European Union (EU). Ankara had squandered a huge opportunity by
not applying to the Community during the [Bulent] Ecevit government
in 1978.

In fact, even if we had not wasted that opportunity, not much would
have changed. The coup on September 12, 1980 would have rendered our
EU application meaningless!

Our application for candidacy dragged on until the era of former
Turkish Prime Minister and President Turgut Ozal in 1987. “Our joining
the EU will take up to 20 years,” public opinion was made to believe
at that time.

We crossed the most critical threshold ever during the wee hours of
Tuesday morning. However, remarks like “We have to wait 15 or 20 more
years,” are still dogging us.

If Turkey had “rebounded from the [goal] post” on October 3, this
would have been a very great loss. Had we had abandoned the negotiating
table, this would have hurt the prestige of both Turkey and the EU.

An introverted Turkey then would have been forgotten by the outside
world. And from the inside, we would have been surrounded by an
atmosphere that is more suitable for the Twilight Zone series.

Well, all right then…

Yet, at this point, we have to make a distinction between two events.

Our starting membership negotiations is a vital step; however, we
have to meticulously examine the mines on our negotiation path.

Underestimating or excluding the negotiating framework document mines
from the discussions, would be mere legerdemain. Not only the Cyprus
issue, which is still unsolved, but also the so-called Armenian issue,
are issues we will have to face. In future, Turkey will be told,
“If you want full membership, you must recognize the genocide!”

It is enough to be able to read the expressions with a special status
aroma in the negotiating framework document to see how the EU is
discriminating against Turkey!

The Croatia issue on October 3 once again proved that the EU does
not treat all candidate countries equally.

We cannot close our eyes to the fact that Austria made the start of
negotiations with Zagreb a condition for EU members to say “yes”
to Turkey. The criteria set for candidate countries so far were
immediately frozen when Croatia became a bone of contention!

The EU has sent a very dangerous message to countries hiding war
criminals (Serbia in particular) by giving Croatia the green light.

Let’s assume, for a moment, that Turkey was in Croatia’s position.

They wouldn’t have even allowed us to utter the letter “n” for
negotiations!

***

This is one side of the medallion. On the other side, there is the
“mangal (barbecue) issue” of the Turks!

Rauf Tamer says: “Bottled gas will not explode, houses will not remain
unplastered, cars will not swerve into sidewalks, and our children
will not attend classes with 80 pupils anymore. This is the meaning
of our negotiation process!”

I wonder whether we will be able to overcome these “seemingly small”
problems during the negotiations.

Do you think guns fired in the air during weddings in certain
neighborhoods will stop during the negotiation process? Or will Turkey
organize the biggest armed celebrations in its history on the night
it is admitted as a full EU member? (I hope the day will come).

Or will barbecues at parks in several German cities be extinguished
during negotiations?

Will the Austrian businessman, who went crazy after seeing pickled
anchovies floating in the cabin luggage of a THY (Turkish Airlines)
plane that landed in Vienna in the beginning of 2000, forget this
moment of insanity and say “yes” to Turkey’s full membership in a
referendum that will be held years later?

Or how many times will a Turkish worker, who voted for Angela Merkel
in the last general elections in Germany, abandon his attempts to
build a squatter house somewhere in Berlin?

Will the Higher Education Council (YOK) in Turkey really abandon its
attitude of challenging the political party in power during the EU
process? Will negotiations save our 2,500 school buildings without
toilets?

Let’s wait and see!

NOBEL JUDGE QUITS IN DISGUST – A YEAR AFTER ‘PORN’ WINNER
>>From Charles Bremner in Paris

The Times, UK
Oct 12 2005

MYSTERY surrounded the resignation of a member of the Nobel Academy
yesterday, 48 hours before the prize for literature is due to
be awarded, amid speculation of a split over whether to honour a
dissident Turkish writer.

Knut Ahnlund said that he had resigned in protest over the award
last year to the little-known Elfriede Jelinek, of Austria, whose
work he described as “violent pornography”. Mr Ahnlund, 82, did not
explain why he had waited almost a year before lodging his protest,
increasing talk of a rift among members over the award for this year.

The announcement of this year’s literary honours had been delayed for
a week after the academy was reported to have disagreed on whether
to anoint Orhan Pamuk, 53, who has upset authorities in his country
by campaigning for official recognition that Turkey had carried
out genocide against the Armenians after the First World War. He
has been charged with “public denigration of the Turkish identity”,
and a prize for him would be certain to anger Turkey.

Mr Ahnlund wrote in the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper that Jelinek’s
work was “a mass of text that appears shovelled together without
trace of artistic structure”. The 2004 prize, he said, “has not
only caused irreparable damage to all progressive forces, it has
(also) confused the general view of literature as art. After this
I cannot even formally remain in the Swedish Academy.” Jelinek is
known to the right-wing Austrian media and political parties as
“the red pornographer”. The conservative US Weekly Standard said
that the academy had given the prize to “an unknown, undistinguished,
leftist fanatic”. In making last year’s decision, the academy cited
the “musical flow of voices and counter-voices” in her writing,
which draws heavily on sexuality and violence.

The Nobel Academy will announce this year’s winner tomorrow. In
addition to Pamuk, other writers tipped for the £760,000 prize
include Philip Roth and Joyce Carol Oates, of the United States,
Margaret Atwood, of Canada, and Nuruddin Farah, of Somalia. Some
Swedish insiders believe that the academy may award the prize to a
non-fiction writer. Two British precedents for this exist: Winston
Churchill, in 1953, and Bertrand Russell, in 1950.

Yesterday Horace Engdahl, permanent secretary of the academy, played
down Mr Ahnlund’s resignation, saying that he had not taken part in
the academy’s work since 1996.

The debate over the 2004 award has been in keeping with the disputes
that have often erupted around the sometimes quirky and politically
correct choices of the academy, whose 18 members are appointed for
life. Mr Ahnlund’s withdrawal reduces the active membership to 15.

Two other members, Kerstin Ekman and Lars Gyllensten, left in 1989
in protest at the academy’s failure to express support for Salman
Rushdie after the fatwa against him by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,
the late Iranian leader.

The academy, which has been awarding the prize since 1901, has often
honoured mainstream authors such as Gabriel García Marquez and Rudyard
Kipling. It has also courted disfavour with governments by elevating
anti-establishment writers, and perplexity by anointing figures
little-known in their own countries. Boris Pasternak, the author of
Dr Zhivago, was forced by the Kremlin in 1959 to reject the prize,
which it deemed to have been motivated by anti-Soviet intentions.

Mr Engdahl said that criticism of the academy came largely from the
Englishspeaking publishing world. “A French or a German reader, or
writer or critic, is more likely to have access to the great dialogue
of literatures that Goethe called Weltliteratur,” he said.

–Boundary_(ID_KaGznGHUdPDheiAp8T1L/A)–

TEST FOR EAST AND WEST
Salman Rushdie

Calcutta Telegraph, India
Oct 12 2005

– On both sides of the Bosphorus, Orhan Pamuk’s case matters

The work room of the writer Orhan Pamuk looks out over the Bosphorus,
that fabled strip of water which, depending on how you see these
things, separates or unites – or, perhaps, separates and unites –
the worlds of Europe and Asia.

There could be no more appropriate setting for a novelist whose work
does much the same thing. In many books, most recently the acclaimed
novel Snow (Knopf, 2004) and the haunting memoir/portrait of his
home town, Istanbul: Memories and the City (Knopf, 2005), Pamuk has
laid claim to the title, formerly held by Yashar Kemal, of “Greatest
Turkish Writer”.

He is also an outspoken man. In 1999, for example, he refused the
title of “state artist”.

“For years I have been criticizing the state for putting authors in
jail, for only trying to solve the Kurdish problem by force and for
its narrow-minded nationalism…,” he said. “I don’t know why they
tried to give me the prize.”

He has described Turkey as having “two souls”, and has criticized
its human-rights abuses.

“Geographically we are part of Europe,” he says, “but politically?”

I spent some days with Pamuk in July, at a literary festival in the
pretty Brazilian seaside town of Parati. For those few days he seemed
free of his cares, even though, earlier in the year, death threats
made against him by Turkish ultranationalists – “He shouldn’t be
allowed to breathe,” one said – had forced him to spend two months
out of his country.

But the clouds were gathering. The statement he made to the Swiss
newspaper Tages Anzeiger on February 6, 2005, which had been the
cause of the ultranationalists’ wrath, was about to become a serious
problem once again.

“Thirty thousand Kurds and one million Armenians were killed in
Turkey,” he told the Swiss paper. “Almost no one dares to speak out
on this but me.”

He was referring to the killings by Ottoman forces of thousands of
Armenians between 1915 and 1917. Turkey does not contest the deaths,
but denies that they amounted to genocide. Pamuk’s reference to
“30,000” Kurdish deaths refers to those killed since 1984 in the
conflict between Turkish forces and Kurdish separatists.

Debate on these issues has been stifled by stringent laws, some
leading to lengthy lawsuits, fines and, in some cases, prison terms.

On September 1 Pamuk was indicted by a district prosecutor for the
crime of having “blatantly belittled Turkishness” by his remarks. If
convicted he faces as long as three years in jail.

Article 301/1 of the Turkish penal code, under which Pamuk is to be
tried, states that “A person who explicitly insults being a Turk,
the Republic or Turkish Grand National Assembly shall be sentenced
to a penalty of imprisonment for a term of six months to three years…

Where insulting being a Turk is committed by a Turkish citizen in a
foreign country, the penalty shall be increased by one third.” So,
if Pamuk is found guilty, he faces an additional penalty for having
made the statement abroad.

You would think that the Turkish authorities might have avoided so
blatant an assault on their most internationally celebrated writer’s
fundamental freedoms at the very moment that their application for full
membership of the European Union – an extremely unpopular application
in many EU countries – was being considered at the EU summit.

However, in spite of being a state that has ratified both the United
Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and
the European Convention on Human Rights, both of which see freedom
of expression as central, Turkey continues to enforce a penal code
that is clearly contrary to these same principles and, in spite of
widespread global protests, has set the date for Pamuk’s trial. It
will begin, unless there is a change of heart, on December 16.

That Pamuk is criticized by Turkish Islamists and radical nationalists
is no surprise. That the attackers frequently disparage his works as
obscure and self-absorbed, accusing him of having sold out to the
West, is no surprise either. It is, however, disappointing to read
intellectuals such as Soli Ozel, a newspaper columnist and a professor
of international relations at Istanbul Bilgi University, criticizing
“those, especially in the West, who would use the indictment against
Pamuk to denigrate Turkey’s progress toward greater civil rights –
and toward European Union membership.”

Ozel wants the charges against Pamuk thrown out at the trial, and
accepts that they represent an “affront” to free speech, but he
prefers to stress “the distance that the country has covered in the
past decade”.

This seems altogether too weak. The number of convictions and prison
sentences under the laws that penalize free speech in Turkey has
indeed declined in the past decade, but International PEN’s records
show that more than 50 writers, journalists and publishers currently
face trial. Turkish journalists continue to protest against the
revised penal code, and the International Publishers Association,
in a deposition to the UN, has described this revised code as being
“deeply flawed”.

EU commissioner Jose Manuel Barroso says that Turkey’s entry into the
EU is by no means assured, that it will have to win over the hearts
and minds of the deeply sceptical EU citizenry.

The Turkish application is being presented, most vociferously by
Britain’s prime minister Tony Blair and foreign secretary Jack Straw,
as a test case for the EU. To reject it, we are told, would be a
catastrophe, widening the gulf between Islam and the West. There is
an element of Blairite poppycock in this, a disturbingly communalist
willingness to sacrifice Turkish secularism on the altar of faith-based
politics.

But the Turkish application is indeed a test case for the EU: a
test of whether the EU has any principles at all. If it has, then its
leaders will insist that the charges against Pamuk be dropped at once –
there is no need to keep him waiting for justice until December – and
further insist on rapid revisions to Turkey’s repressive penal code.

An unprincipled Europe, which turned its back on great artists and
fighters for freedom, would continue to alienate its citizens, whose
disenchantment has already been widely demonstrated by the votes
against the proposed new constitution.

So the West is being tested as well as the East. On both sides of
the Bosphorus, the Pamuk case matters.

DISTRIBUTED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES SYNDICATE

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

“IRAN SYMPHONY” TO BE PERFORMED

IranMania
Wednesday, October 12, 2005 – ©2005 IranMania.com

LONDON, October 12 (IranMania) – The Iranian composer of “Iran
Symphony”, Shahin Farhat, said that Honar Academy of Culture is
commissioned to perform the “Iran Symphony”.

The symphony represents the national glory, history and folk music,
while old melodies have been included in the piece in a modern way.

He told IRNA that the symphony has been written based on Iranian
themes.

Not making any reference to the expected date the piece will be
played , he said, “Following the successful performance of Persian
Gulf and Damavand symphonies in Armenia, which was hailed warmly,
I decided to repeat the concert on the domestic scene due to its
purely Iranian themes.”

The musician referred to the performance of the symphony in Iran as
a privilege and expressed his constant interest in presenting his
works on the domestic scene.

Farhat also pointed out that one of his musical pieces will be
performed by Ali Rahbari in the near future.

Turning to the difficulties facing the performance of orchestral works
in Iran, he said, “Lack of proper musical instruments and equipment
as well as secondary facilities such as synchronous recording make
the conductor of the orchestra unable to arrange the rhythms.

“Nowhere in the world are classical musical pieces played in such an
order as to start with string instruments, proceed with recording
percussion instruments and eventually mix the resulting tunes,”
concluded Farhat.

–Boundary_(ID_3NcjEYyc8y91NTrbfTxJ9A)–

ARMENIA HONORS IRANIAN POET, AHMAD NOURIZADEH

IranMania
Wednesday, October 12, 2005 – ©2005 IranMania.com

LONDON, October 12 (IranMania) – A ceremony to honor the Iranian poet
and translator, Ahmad Nourizadeh and to release his recent books was
held at the Center for Armenian Writers in Yerevan.

Head of the Center for Armenian Writers Leon Ananian spoke at the
ceremony, reported Fars news agency on Sunday quoting Islamic Culture
and Communications Organization.

In his speech, Ananian referred to the historical and cultural ties
between the two nations and described Nourizadeh as among the evident
manifestations of bilateral friendship.

?Few countries can boast of such a personality who has made every
endeavor to promote Armenian culture, literature and civilization,?

he stated.

Addressing the same gathering, Iran?s cultural attache in Armenia,
Reza Atoufi thanked the center for holding the ceremony, describing it
as an indication of the high-level bilateral relations in all fields,
particularly in the cultural sector.

Pointing to the two countries? great cultural heritage and
capabilities, he also said that great world civilizations have been
influenced by the Iranian and Armenian cultures and civilizations.

At the ceremony, a number of writers and poets also discussed the
literary status of Nourizadeh and significance of his works in
promoting Armenian literature among Iranians.

–Boundary_(ID_aHACihgBtj2f5q9HEscY8w)–

THE FOOD SNOOPBY MASHA GUTKIN

San Francisco Bay Guardian
Oct 12 2005

SOME OF BEULAH’S friends call her “Grandma,” “because at Grandma’s
house, you get to have anything you want, like chocolate, pot, and
booze.” (Quote from an anonymous, chocolate-smeared guest.) I’d like,
though, to call her “Den-Ma.” Sounds like “Grandma,” and this title
more nearly captures the heart of Beulah’s role: consummate hostess,
purveyor of decadence, provider of almost miraculously endless bottles
of easy-down rioja for a motley crew comprising students, memoirists,
filmmakers, archivists, and at least one newly minted American pro dom.

Beulah’s equally adept at serving straight-up Bailey’s in lieu of
coffee to the unexpected morning visitor (Jo-Jo, a flaming queen
in town for Fashion Week and a last hurrah pre-rehab) as she is at
talking Mandelshtam while simultaneously smoking and sauteing for a
dinner group of 10 assembled round her multitasking coffee table. Her
shower’s also blessed with perfect water pressure, another sign that
she’s a favorite with the gods of hospitality.

Beulah grew up in Yerevan, Armenia, followed by Glendale, Calif. The
other night she made a lamb stew from the mother country. Now,
depending on whom you ask, this stew belongs to a number of Caucasian
(as in the mountain range, the Caucasus) peoples. In Georgian it’s
called chanakhi and can also feature rice. Called chanakh in Armenian,
this stew shares its moniker with a feta-like cheese.

Beulah’s grandmother speculates that the shared name likely refers
to the type of clay pot, also known as chanakh, in which both stew
and cheese are made.

Traditionally, chanakh is slow-baked in its namesake pot, with a
layer of lavash (flat bread) at the top, in a tonir – a traditional
Armenian (also Turkish, also Iranian) pit oven. Beulah, lacking a
tonir, eschews the oven entirely for her version. In keeping with
Beulah’s role as the Benevolent BoHostess, she’s found the perfect
(albeit carnivore-centric) meal. This satiating stew’s a meal-in-one,
and its long, untended cooking time allows for leisurely anticipatory
intoxication for guests and host alike.

Stovetop chanakh/chanakhi (serves four to six)

You will need a cast-iron or otherwise thick pot that holds four quarts
and has a lid. Beulah cooks chanakh while chain-smoking illegally
imported duty-free cigarettes from Switzerland. You may skip this step.

2 1/2 to 3 lbs. lamb (any cut that has some bone and fat, such as
shoulder chop)

4 medium-size potatoes (peeled if the skin is rough) sliced into
1/4-inch rounds

2 medium sweet and/or hot peppers, seeded and chopped into chunks

2 medium onions, roughly diced

1 large eggplant, peeled in stripes (i.e., some of the skin left on),
cut into 1/2-inch cubes, salted and sweated

1/5 bunch purple basil (green basil may be substituted)

1/3 bunch cilantro, roughly chopped

1/3 lb. trimmed string beans or whole, tender, young okra

2 to 3 large cloves garlic, roughly diced

2 to 3 (peeled) tomatoes, chopped into chunks

1/2 Tbs. butter

Salt and pepper

Salt the lamb to taste (but generously), add pepper (go light if
you’re including hot peppers), and let it rest for 5 minutes. Heat
the butter and brown the lamb on high heat. This takes about 10 to
15 minutes and may be done in batches for optimum browning. When the
lamb is browned, set it aside. You should have a nice reservoir of
juices from the browned lamb remaining in the pot.

Turn down the heat to medium-low, and toss in the onions. Saute them
till they’re at least translucent. Add the tomatoes, and let them
simmer. In a few minutes, move the onion-tomato mix to the side of
the pot, and layer a third of the browned lamb on the pot bottom.

Then progressively arrange single layers of the other ingredients
(e.g., potato, topped by eggplant, then tomato, peppers, green beans,
lamb again, etc.). Try to include some of the onion-tomato mix in the
successive layers. NB: Sprinkle cilantro, basil, and garlic between
each layer.

Cover the pot. Keep the heat medium-low. In a half hour or so, use a
long-handled spoon to make a couple of little wells in the stew to help
the flavors meld. When possible – likely around 45 minutes to an hour
into the cooking time – use a spoon or spatula to gently press down on
the top of the stew so that all the layers are submerged in the stew’s
juices. Once all the ingredients are submerged, let the stew simmer
gently for about another 15 minutes. Take a component-comprehensive
taste. If everything is tender and luscious, the chanakh is set to
be served. Garnish it with fresh herbs, such as a twig of purple
basil and a sprinkling of chopped cilantro. If you have lavash on
hand, serve it alongside. Some enjoy chanakh with a side of Greek
(a.k.a. Armenian) salad.

LOGICAL IDEA THAT COULD HAVE PREVENTED STRIFE
Michael Binyon

Kurdistan Regional Government, Iraq
Oct 12 2005

HAD Lawrence’s plan been accepted, much of the anti-Western bitterness
of Arab nationalism might have been avoided. There would have been no
quasi-colonial rule over Syria and Jordan; a state between Iraq and
Turkey might have become a homeland for the Kurds; and the Armenians
might have found refuge in a state north of Syria.

The plan would probably have done little to forestall the partition
of Palestine. Lawrence knew of the Balfour Declaration, which offered
the Jews a national homeland. On his map Palestine is marked as a
separate entity not awarded to any Arab ruler.

His map was drawn up at the height of his influence, when he was
attending the Versailles conference as an aide of Prince Feisal,
the leader of the Arab delegation. It is unclear whether it was an
attempt to sabotage the Anglo-French plan for Middle East “mandates”,
or a genuine attempt to reward the sons of Sherif Hussein of Mecca
with kingdoms of their own.

Lawrence proposes a Frenchcontrolled state in the mountains inland
from Beirut, the traditional Christian enclave around Mount Lebanon.

This later was enlarged by France to include an equal number of
Muslims and separated from Syria to form Lebanon.

Lawrence did not specify that the kingdom awarded to Zaid, the youngest
son of Sherif Hussein, would be a Kurdish state, but its boundaries
are very close to the area now populated by Kurds, who resent the
failure to award them a homeland after the First World War.

Since the map does not split Ottoman Syria into northern, French and
British zones, the state awarded to Feisal would have had geographic
and historical coherence. Iraq is placed under British administration,
but unites only two of the three Ottoman provinces, comprising the
Shia region in the south and the Sunnis around Baghdad. This would
not have prevented anti-British uprisings and Shia-Sunni tensions.

;RubricNr=&ArticleNr=6643&LNNr=28&RNNr=70