Introduction
One of the most significant topics of the Middle East history that is considered to be Arab cultural awakening is undoubtedly Arab nationalism. On the one hand, it gathered strength and coherence during and after the First World War. On the other hand, little light is actually shed on that recent phenomenon. A lot of scholars may even get into a mess in defining Arabs, as well as determining what is meant by Arab nationalism. However, taking into consideration the fact that the twenty-first century is characterized by a considerable political activeness, much attention should be paid to Arabs history and various manifestations of feelings of Arab-speaking people (Goldschmidt, 2010, pp. 197-2003). The 1936-1939 Arab riots in the Mandate of Palestine and the 1941 coup in Iraq should be discussed as good examples of such nationalist uprisings. The obsessive political as well as military control of Great Britain over Arab residents, especially after World War I, is the main cause of nationalism that had also led to both the 1936-1939 Arab riots in the Mandate of Palestine and the 1941 coup in Iraq. The principal force that organized riots proved to become the discontented army which decided to fight for its rights against the excessive ruling of British monarchy.
The Roots of Arab Rebellions
It was actually Great Britain which could be named the principal creator of modern Palestine. Since the end of World War I, the country decided to bring the area on both banks of the Jordan under its fail-safe control. The British, for instance, announced mentioned area as one of international responsibility and in such a way deprived Arab residents of rights to rule themselves (Townshend, 1989, pp. 13-14). In addition, it appeared to be an idea of the British to separate what was created as a single mandate into two parts. As a result, there emerged the Mandate of Palestine on the west bank and the Mandate of Trans-Jordan on the east. According to the policy claimed in the Balfour Declaration, Great Britain was going to give Palestine special status, as well as promised to exert every effort in order to promote the foundation of a national home for the Jewish people on the territory of Palestine (Townshend, 1989, p. 14). Beginning from 1921, the Mandate of Palestine began to feel effect of British rule, while the Mandate of Trans-Jordan managed to avoid such overpressure.
British attempts to implement the Mandate were though, faced with the appearance of Palestinian nationalism. Nationalism there should be perceived as a case of person’s search of his roots and origin with the purpose of defining his personality in the existing world (Israeli, 2002, p. 230). Great Britain did not take into account the fact that in the path of creating constructing Palestine, it was gradually creating Palestinian national consciousness as well. It is important to understand that the excessive Jewish domination allowed by the Mandate, was seen by the majority of the Arabs of Palestine as the violation of their own rights. Most of Arab leaders disagreed with the suggestion that the Jewish minority deserved to be treated the same way as the Arab majority. They also did not approve the operation of the Jewish Agency, the formally acknowledged body which was responsible for the promoting of the economic, medical and educational infrastructure of the Jewish community in Palestine. The increased Jewish immigration that was an everyday occurrence at that time only sharpened existing contradictions, inciting the Arabs of Palestine to obtain justice, as well as the reforming of root and branch.
The situation that existed in Palestine at that date resembled the one in the 1920s, when the Arab residents dared to organize several riots against the Jews. Though Arabs achieved the establishment of the Supreme Muslim Council after the 1921 riots, this institution could not be called an equivalent to the Jewish Agency at all. The fact that Arabs were allowed to join the British administration and police did not make a difference, since they were never able to reach the highest positions (Townshend, 1989, p. 14). The British government was not determined to answer the demands of Arab residents, so the emergence of new risings followed by violence and even murders was a definite probability. The endeavors of the British to rectify the situation and reduce the number of Jewish immigrants, who would become lawful residents in the future, did little good (Townshend, 1989, p. 14). As a consequence, two Jews were killed in 1936 by Arabs that served to be the sparking event which led to the 1936-39 Arab riots in the Mandate of Palestine.
Within the Mandate of Palestine, the British military presence tended to be the only established military army. As for the Arabs, they did not have any fighting services. There, however, existed the Supreme Muslim Council, the body responsible for the ensuring of nationalist rights. At the beginning of Arabs nationalist uprising, there emerged a new kind of Arab organization, the National Committee. After its meeting in Nablus on the twentieth, there was announced a general strike.
The majority of Arab towns responded to this strike. National committees in almost every town repeated the strike call, which ended by the final strike organized by a Higher Arab Committee in Jerusalem on the twenty-fifth (Townshend, 1989, pp. 15-16). The great number of demands that the Higher Committee was making efforts to obtain for Arab residents, included the termination of Jewish immigration, interdiction of land sales to Jews, the formation of representative government, granting of independence to Palestine and the completion of the mandate (Cohen, 1977, p. 379). According to the majority of historians, those demands clearly demonstrated true and understandable Arab worries, regarding the growing Jewish presence in Palestine.
After the six month of rebellion’s first phase, a lot of innocent people, including police and soldiers were killed. More than one hundred police officers and about one hundred five soldiers were seriously wounded. No matter if it was a Palestine or Jewish, hundreds of people simply died because of the inability of two nations to adjust their conflict by peaceful means and avoid the use of violation. Palestinians in their pursuit of independence unfortunately were fighting with the wrong enemy. Completely engaged in the eternal confrontation with Jewish and pressing for the stoppage of their immigration, as well as prohibition of Jewish land settlement, the patience of Arab residents was gradually ruining (Stein, 1990, p. 66). However, their main opponent that is Great Britain and its dominant ruling was still there to be confronted.
Speaking about the nationalism in Iraq, its origin resembled to the great extent that one of the Mandate of Palestine. The Mandate of Iraq was created by the British after World War I, according to the same scheme that the Mandate of Palestine was created some years earlier. Great Britain’s control over the Mandate of Iraq tended to be extremely immoderate, so there were gradually originating first manifestations of nationalist sentiments. The British government did not take into account desires and usually ignored what residents of the Mandate of Iraq requested. In spite of the disaffection of the Hashimite monarchy by the majority of the Iraqi population, British government imported a Hashimite king, Faysal, from Saudi Arabia in the wake of World War I. Furthermore, even after the declaration of the independence of Iraq, the British did not diminish their constant presence in the country, as well as their excessive control over the whole Arab state. Their first and foremost responsibility continued to be the ensuring of Faysal’s reign (Porch, 2003, p. 135).
It would be though a great mistake to claim that that the nationalist feelings in the Mandate of Palestine and the Mandate of Iraq were completely the same. There exist several principal differences between them that deserve to be discussed. The main source of Iraqi nationalist sentiments could be found in the army. Especially active nationalists proved to be the officer corps who had always disapproved foreign impact that refused to support Iraqi fighting services and was not going to stop Jewish emigration to Palestine (Porch, 2003, p. 135).
In order to keep British monarchy under their steady review, Iraqi officers decided to form special secret society. As a result, there emerged unique organization known as the Golden Square which was responsible for the keeping of Great Britain under scrutiny. Even the infinitesimal inclination of the king towards the British monarchy had to be immediately reported. Some of the residents were so distrusted by Great Britain and its suspicious politics that they used to believe that the monarchy was somehow participating in the automobile accident with King Faisal. In other words, a lot of Iraqis were sure that the automobile accident which happened with their king in 1939 was deliberately secretly plotting by British agents (Porch, 2003, p. 135).
Soon after the death of King Faisal, the popularity of the Golden Square organization considerably increased. The way was cleared for some powerful brokers, so the Golden Square was ready to act that principal role in the country. At the time when the World War II broke out, Iraq, according to the concluded treaty, was compelled to be the ally of Great Britain and to fight on its side. The government of the four-year-old king directed by an uncle who served as regent appeared to be too fragile and insufficient to conquer the counterstand of the prime minister. The most prominent personality of that time proved to become Rashid Ali el Gailani. That skillful lawyer and cofounder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization which had its members all across the Middle East, passionately contributed to the Arab success in the teeth of Zionist penetration of Palestine.
Another important figure of Iraqi history became Amin al-Husseini. This grand mufti of Jerusalem was exiled in 1973 and some years later, was searching some accommodation in Baghdad. The man was also a former Ottoman artillery officer who because of his participation anti-Jewish riots in 1920 had to be sentenced to ten years in prison by order of the British government (Porch, 2003, p. 135). However, fortunes looked up at him and instead of several years spent in prison, Amin al-Husseini got the remission of punishment. His task for the following year was to turn into grand mufti, visit jurists and arbitrate their disputes with the use of Koranic law interpretation. Since the man did not have any supporters in the Arab community, the British government permitted Amin al-Husseini to play that role as nothing bad could happen because of it. The man, however, greatly influenced the Arab-Jewish confrontation that was emerging at that time. He soon led the Supreme Muslim Council and spread his attacks on Jewish settlements in his religious schools, courts and different trust funds (Porch, 2003, p. 136).
Finally, there came a moment when nationalist feeling with the Iraq army reached its peak which resulted in the 1941 coup in Iraq (Eppel, 1998, pp. 227-228). The organizer of such movement became Rashid Ali who was spreading anti-British posturing and considerably threatened British interests concerning Iraq. As a consequence, British government was obliged to fundamentally remount the monarchy clearing a lot of the anti-British elements in the Iraqi army and government.
Thus, the principal force that led to both the 1936-1939 Arab riots in the Mandate of Palestine and the 1941 coup in Iraq proved to become the discontented army which was determined to fight for its rights against the excessive ruling of British monarchy. It was the obsessive political as well as military control of Great Britain over Arab residents which actually instigated both the 1936-1939 Arab riots in the Mandate of Palestine and the 1941 coup in Iraq.
References
Cohen, M. J. (1977). Secret diplomacy and rebellion in Palestine, 1936-1939. International
Eppel, M. (1998). The elite, the effendiyya, and the growth of nationalism and pan-Arabism in
Hashemite Iraq, 1921-1958. International Journal of Middle East Studies 30, 227-50.
Goldschmidt, A. Jr., & Davidson, L. (2010). A concise history of the Middle East (9th ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview, 197-2003.
Israeli, R. (2002). State and religion in the emerging Palestinian entity. Journal of Church and State 44, 229-248.
Porch, D. (2003). The other Gulf War: British intervention in Iraq, 1941. Joint Force Quarterly 35, 134-140.
Stein, K. W. (1990). The intifada and the 1936-39 uprising: A comparison. Journal of Palestine
Studies 19, 64-85.
Townshend, C. (1989). The first intifada: Rebellion in Palestine, 1936-39. History Today 39, 13-19.
