ht against them. SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30, February 1991
The fight for unity of the Arab nation Saddam Hussein has attempted to link the issue of his invasion of Kuwait with the oppression of the Palestinians by the Israeli state. While Saddam raises the issue of the Palestinians for his own demagogic reasons - to pose as the champion of the Arab nation - there is indeed a clear link between the question of the annexation of Kuwait and the denial of the rights of the Palestinians: that link is the issue of the Arab nation. To understand this question it is necessary to look at how the present Arab states came into being. Here, GEOFF RYAN looks at developments in the Mashreq (the part of the Arab world east of and including Egypt). In the Middle Ages the Arabs established an empire stretching from what is now Saudi Arabia to present-day Mauritania and as far North as modem Turkey and parts of Europe. The development and growth of the Arab empire created a single Arab nation - not a number of different Arab nations.
The conquest of the Arab empire by the Turkish Ottoman empire did not change this historical reality. The Turks created different provinces - but this was essentially for administrative purposes. Under the Ottoman empire there remained a single Arab nation, which waged a united campaign against Turkish oppression.
The creation of the present
Estates
The present states that exist in the Arab world are all products of the conquest of the Ottoman empire by Western - particularly SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30, February 1991
GULF SPECIAL British and French -imperialism.
The process of British and French intervention into the Arab world began in the 19th century. By 1830 France already controlled Algeria, from where it was able to gain control of Morocco and Tunisia; and by the end of the century Britain emerged as the dominant power in Egypt, even if this was still formally attached to the Turkish
British troops in Palestine empire and didn't become a British colony until after the First World War. In 1899 Britain gained control of Kuwait.
However, it was primarily the carve-up of the defeated Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War that brought about the creation of separate states in the Arab East. The states that came into existence - Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan, Palestine, Yemen, Egypt and the various small Gulf states - did not correspond to any national divisions; they were essentially geographical names. Hence Lebanon is the name of a mountain; Transjordan means "across the river Jordan", while "Saudi" Arabia is the name of the ruling family. The borders of these states corresponded to the imperialists" spheres of influence, not to any real geographical boundaries. Hence the borders of Iraq correspond to the sum total of the concessions granted to the Iraq Petroleum Company.
Although the Ottoman empire did have a province called 'Syria' (the name refers to the long dead Assyrian people, not to any existing nation) it was not precisely delimited. In fact the Ottoman province of Syria included the whole of the territory of Palestine. In the 19th century the terms Syria and Palestine were even used interchangeably.
And 'Syria' provides the most extreme example of how the present Arab states have no real historical basis. The French initially
divided it up into two small states - based on the Allacuite and Druze religious faiths - in order to try to weaken the Arab national movement. However, given the lack of enthusiasm of the Arab peoples of all religious beliefs this plan had to be abandoned.
The carve-up of the Arab East was not. however, simply a product of inter-imperialist agreement. It also contained large amounts of inter-imperialist rivalry which had its effects on the Arab national movement. British imperialism in particular recognised the growing strength of Arab nationalism and was prepared to use this nationalist feeling for its own ends.
In 1915 Sir Henry MacMahon, the British High Commissioner in Cairo promised Hussein, the Sharif of Mecca (and father of Faisal, future founder of the Hashemite dynasty), an Arab kingdom in return for Hussein leading a revolt against the Turks. Whilst Hussein was far from being a revolutionary nationalist - in fact he hoped by his alliance with British imperialism to defeat the rising nationalist movement - he allied himself with Nationalist army officers whose goals went much further than those of British imperialism. (Just to be on the safe side Hussein proclaimed himself King of the Arabs in 1916 whilst continuing to negotiate with the Turks both before and after the "Arab Revolt" of June 1916). Because of the weakness of its leadership, the "Arab
Page 15
Revolt" was, however manipulated by British imperialism - via the famous "Lawrence of Arabia". Hussein never gained his Arab kingdom, though his imperialist allies later gave the thrones of Irag and Jordan to his sons Faisal and Abdallah.
The Sykes-Picot agreements
At the same time as MacMahon was discussing with Hussein, more meaningful negotiations were going on between the British and French diplomats Sir Mark Sykes and Charles-François-Georges Picot. These produced the famous Sykes-Picot Agreements which agreed on the division of the spoils of the Ottoman empire between British and French imperialism.
Obviously the Sykes-Picot Agreements were totally at odds with the promises made to Hussein making no provision for any independent Arab kingdom. Naturally they were kept secret until published by the Bolsheviks after the Russian October Revolution. The revelation of the Sykes-Picot Agreements finally broke any alliance between the Arab nationalist movement and Britain.
It was for this reason that, not convinced of the ability of the Hashemites and other reactionary Arab leaders to keep the national movement in check, Britain turned to another source of support - the Zionist movement.
Balfour Declaration
In November 1917 the British Minister of Foreign Affairs Lord Balfour wrote to Sir Lionel de Rothschild to inform him that "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people".
The formula of "a national home" was of course deliberately vague in order to win support for British imperialism's plans from the Zionist movement - and particulary to encourage the Zionists to mobilise American and Russian Jews to support Britain's continuing war effort, as well as isolate the Bolsheviks - whilst at the same time avoiding incensing Arab national feelings.
The "Balfour Declaration" was certainly a long way short of agreeing to the setting up of a Jewish state in Palestine and at times British imperialist interests were to conflict with those of the Zionists. For Britain the "Balfour Declaration" was simply a way of creating another useful tool to use against Arab national aspirations.
After the partition of the Arab East the Arab national movement found itself having to face up to a very new situation. Firstly, instead of being oppressed by a single, and relatively weak, power - Turkey - it was now confronted by two major imperialist powers, Britain and France.
Moreover, the movement now found itself divided up between a number of small states, a situation which suited the reactionary Arab feudal landowners and politicians, since it permitted them to cling to imperialism and conPage 16
GULF SPECIAL tinue to enjoy their privileges, protecting their social, economic and political positions. French imperialism was particularly adept at manipulating religious differences to further divide the movement. Finally there was the problem of the Zionist colonisation of Palestine.
Despite all these problems the Arab national movement did grow, and gained an influence in all the states of the region. Moreover, the limited industrialisation that occured created an Arab working class which mapidly became involved in the national movement. Its ranks were joined by peasants thrown off the land. Previously confined to a movement of intellectuals the Arab national movement became more and more a movement of the masses.
Nasser: no democrat
Mass campaigns were led in Egypt by the nationalist Wafd party in the 1920s and 1930s, which forced the British to make major concessions, and in Syria a 50-day General Strike led to promises of independence by the French. A major insurrection took place in Iraq-
The movement was marked by strong secular tendencies. The founder of the Egyp tian Wafd party, Said Zaglal, who played a major role in developing the revolutionary nationalist movement in the early 1920s, put forward the slogan "Religion for God and the Fatherland for Everybody", which contrasts very favourably with the dominant current in present day Arab nationalism.
The extent of this secular approach can also be seen in the attitude taken towards the partition of India by the Arab nationalists. The nationalists supported the Hindu-dominated Congress Party - which argued against partition - and denounced the Muslim League as agents of British imperialism for their support for the creation of a Muslim Pakistan.
Unfortunately, in Palestine the Arab national movement remained under the control of the big landowners. They were able to divert the nationalist movement into violently anti-Semitic channels, including allying themselves with the Nazis. This aided not only the bourgeois nationalists and the British rulers, but also the Zionists themselves. In fact many of the leaders of the national movement were actually in the pay of the Zionists, some of whom were themselves quite willing to work with Nazis.
Nevertheless there were major clashes between Arab nationalists and British imperialism. In 1933 a General Strike took place, for once directed not against the Jews but against the British Mandate. Small scale guerrilla actions began in 1935 and a further General Strike - which lasted 6 months -began in 1936. Gradually the movement developed towards full-scale rebellion in which the workers and peasants played an ever increasing role.
The British Civil Service and police force were driven out of Arab towns and a rebel administration was set up in the liberated areas, including the Old City of Jerusalem. Support committees were set up in all the neighbouring Arab countries, whilst volunteers from Syria, Iraq and Jordan joined the guerrilla struggle.
The Second Arab Revolt lasted until 1939, and was only defeated by massive British military intervention, including by the RAF; it confirmed a number of points about the nature of the Arab revolution. Firstly it showed that the feudal land-owners and the Arab bourgeoisie were incapable of leading any real struggle against imperialism. By 1939 the Mufti of Jerusalem, head of the powerful Husseini family, had succeeded in diverting the struggle into virulent anti-Semitism. The Mufti was, in fact, moving closer and closer to Nazism. Morcover, the Husseinis were more concered with maintaining their own posi tions; they carried out terrorist attacks against their political opponents within the nationalist movement.
The Revolt had begun in 1936 as an alliance of the big landowners, the middle class and the intellectuals supported by the working class and peasantry. However, even by September 1936 sections of the bourgeoisie and landowners had withdrawn from the struggle. Some were even prepared to accept the proposals of the Peel Commission, which called for the partition of Palestine. When the Armistice of 1936 broke down and the strug gle flared up again many of the landlords fled to neighbouring countries.
Secondly the Arab working class was very weak - Zionist policy of only employing Jews made it very difficult for an Arab working class to grow to any great extent - and unable to win the leadership of the national struggle away from the feudal and bourgeois forces. SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30, February 1991
Thirdly, the Revolt con- firmed Trotsky's observations that the peasantry is incapable of developing an independent political leadership of its own: it either follows the working class or the bourgeoisie. The peasantry played a heroic role in the struggle against British imperialism but was unable to take the leadership of the movement in its own interests. In the absence of a working class leadership the Arab peasantry was doomed to fol- low the treacherous lead of the landowners and bour- geoisie. Fourthly the massive sup port for the Revolt throughout the Arab world, including the sending of volunteer guerril- las, demonstrated the aware- ness amongst the Arab nationalist movement that there is a single Arab nation. With the defeat of the Palestinian Revolt and the success of the Mufti in taking the movement in a blatantly pro-Nazi direction there developed strong anti-Semitic inother Arab currents countries, and local Jews, fre- quently anti-Zionist, were at- tacked. However in Egypt, where the Arab nationalist movement was most ad- vanced, the nationalists inter- vened to defend the Jewish population. After the 2nd World War the Arab national movement again began to assert itself. In 1946 in Egypt there was a wave of strikes and demonstrations against the British presence. In Cairo and Alexandria joint committees were organised by workers and students who not only raised anti-imperialist demands but also also slogans against the local land-owners and capitalists. Throughout the Arab East left- wing parties and trades unions were formed. This movement was only halted by the out- break of war with the newly created state of Israel in 1948. But the groundswell of Arab nationalism would not go away. Nasserism In 1952 a group of young army officers, led by Kemal Abdul Nasser, overthrew the British-supported monarchy in Egypt. They destroyed the power of the feudalists by an agrarian reform and carried out some impor- tant nationalisations. Schools and universities were secularised, attempts were made to raise the general level of culture throughout the country whilst a programme of providing SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30, February 1991
GULF SPECIAL man'y baby it Egypr's new King FAROUK ABDICATES She sends a A tearful forewell-after message to the shets outside Palace woner af Britain Britain's rockets can chase HE FIGHTS IKE housing for the poor was embarked on. military dictatorship.
THE PEOPLE JET GENIUS WHITTLE WAS SACKED 09
In reality these reforms were fairly limited in scope; for example only about 10% of the landless or poor peasants received any land
weapons. through the agrarian reform. Moreover, the Nasser regime was extremely brutal in its dealings with its political opponents. Immediately after the overthrow of King Farouk the workers of Cairo and Alexandria organised mass strikes to fight for their own interests. These were suppressed by Nasser, and the leaders either executed or given long jail sentences. The Communist Party remained illegal and socialist and trade union activists were jailed. All the old political parties were banned, a measure which didn't meet with much opposition at first since all these parties were thoroughly corrupt and tied to the monarchy. Nevertheless, this meant that the Nasser regime was able to continue as a nationalism.
When Nasser's main rival Naguib argued
for the setting up of a limited parliamentary regime and a restricted legalisation of political parties Nasser was able to mobilise massive demonstrations of the workers of Cairo and Alexandria who, of course wanted no truck with the former "parliamentary" system and no concessions to the old parties. Having defeated Naguib Nasser then turned against the mass lack This of movement. democracy in Egypt was to have a major effect on the outcome of future struggles that were soon to erupt. For however limited the reforms, and however brutal his regime, Nasser's willingness to oppose imperialism and to speak of the "Arab nation" provided a huge inspiration for the workers and peasants throughout the Arab world to renew their fig