The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Re: for future reference

Posted by pancho (Guest) - Saturday, June 17 2006, 17:17:23 (CEST)
from 200.78.119.5 - dsl-200-78-119-5.prod-infinitum.com.mx

Mexico -

Windows XP -

Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

pancho wrote:
>My New Article in the Spring 2006 - Vol. LVIII, No. 1 Issue of the Assyrian Star
>
>Posted By: Fred Aprim (184.san-francisco-20rh16rt.ca.dial-access.att.net)
>Date: Friday, 16 June 2006, at 10:31 a.m.
>
>Assyrians in the World War I Treaties: Paris, Sèvres, and Lausanne
>
>By Fred Aprim*
>
>The treaties of Paris 1919, Sèvres 1920, and Lausanne 1923 are important in history as they decided the fate of many nations in Europe, Asia, and Africa post World War I. These treaties impacted the future of the Assyrians greatly.
>
>Great Britain Asserts Control of Mosul Province, Northern Iraq
>
>During World War I, Russia was supportive of the creation of an Assyrian homeland in northern Mesopotamia. Russia was present during the Sykes-Picot agreement (1916) that put the foundation for the partition of the Ottoman Empire and Middle East. Unfortunately for the Assyrians, Russia's role in the
>subsequent negotiations between the Allies and the Ottomans became reduced after the Bolshevik Revolution (October 1917) when Moscow's attitude toward earlier Tsarist secret treaties changed. The Bolsheviks repudiated Tsarist secret treaties to gain favor with the belligerent countries. With this shift, the major weight in the negotiations regarding the Near East tilted towards Great Britain. The latter favored keeping open and friendly channels and with the majority Arab groups in the Middle East at the expense of smaller ethnic groups.

...all you ever need to know about the probability of being SAVED by other countries is contained in this paragraph...in other words if all you have to offer are the "martyred" bodies of your dead...you will be obliged and disposed of by anyone who cares to use you. Making empty promises is one way of using people...it keeps them hoping. You know...with "faith".
>
>The British occupation of Mesopotamia began in 1914, moving from south to north slowly. On November 1, 1918 they planned to enter Mosul despite the fact that an armistice had become effective the day before (October 30). After much haggling about armistice terms, the British occupied Mosul on November 10 and
>the Turks withdrew. This occupation of Mosul was to be disputed by Turkey for decades to come.
>
>The British insisted on applying universal ideals to a society that had functioned on tribal bases and lacked the minimum requirement for a modern civil society.

...excuse me...the Brits, the French, the Russians and the Germans seem to me to have had far LESS of what it takes to be a civilized society...it was THEY who started that war over oil..it was THEY who would soon be grinding up millions of their young men and women in a fuitle war aimed at stealing as much as they could from impoverished people around the world..it would be THEY who would come back in barely the time needed to grow another crop of canon-fodder, in something called a SECOND world war...who would again kill countless millions of their own CIVILIANS, including six million Jews they cooked and ate...THESE are civilized people?

Despite the advice of Arnold T. Wilson, the Civil Administrator in Mesopotamia (1918 -1920), who understood the problem of multi-ethnic divisions among Shi'ite Arabs in the south, Sunni Arab in the center and Sunni Arabs, Assyrians, Kurds, and Turkmen in the north, the British government failed to take such issues into serious consideration.

...that`s what you think. The more divisions, the better...for any occupying power.
>
>After the end of military operations of World War I, preparations began by Great Britain, France, and the other Allies to dictate terms of peace to the defeated countries at the Paris Peace Conference (1919 - 1920), the venue for these negotiations. Eventually, five treaties resulted from the Conference that dealt with the defeated powers. These took their names from towns around Paris: Versailles, St. Germain, Trianon, Neuilly, and Sèvres. At Sèvres, the Allies dealt with the Ottoman Empire.
>
>Assyrian Hopes from the Peace Process
>
>Earlier, when World War I was approaching an end, President Woodrow Wilson laid down a set of principles for world peace called the Fourteen Points. These principles contained his vision for how the Allies should build peace after the war was won.

...that was for public consumptiom you numbskull. The real issue was how to sneak in and CONTROLL weaker nations, without becomming colonial powers.

The critical twelfth point states: "The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested
>opportunity of autonomous development." Taking heart from this key principle, Assyrian leaders prepared to argue for the creation of an independent Assyrian state.

...that was their mistake. Nothing in that statement even HINTS at "independent STATE". Even if you HAVE an independent state, no one in their right mind is going to say that state MUST "be assured an undoubted" anything...else why was the WORLD WAR just fought? Why wasn`t the independent state of Turkey left alone then? Why wasn`t Iraq left alone?
>
>Three main Assyrian groups were scheduled to participate in the Paris Conference: the United States, Mesopotamia, and Iran. The Iran delegation included Jesse Malek Yonan, Abraham Yohannan, Shimun Ganja, and Lazar George. Britain worried that the Iran delegation would jeopardize its control over the Assyrians since it could not exercise direct authority in Iran. Therefore, the British forced the Assyrian Iran delegates to leave Paris.

...wait a minute...the Brits "could not exercise direct authority in Iran"...but the British COULD "force" the Assyrians to leave Paris? How? How did the Brits "force" people to leave Paris? How come Agha Potrous remained?
>
>Rev. Joel E. Werda led the Assyrian delegation from the USA, representing the Diaspora community. He accompanied Bishop Aphrem Barsoum (Patriarch Barsoum I in 1933) and his secretary, Capt. A. K. Yousuf (1866-1924).

...the diaspora community will NEVER count. Our diaspored boys were NEVER forced out...that is something YOU claim. Until today there are THOUSANDS of Christians all over the MidEast...the Jews WERE forced out...Christians left for better opportunities abroad...period.
>
>The Assyrian Mesopotamia delegation received conditional permission to travel from the British authorities on July 21, six months after the Conference had begun. The condition placed on Lady Surma, sister of the assassinated Mar Benyamin Shimun (1887-1918) and head of the delegation, was to stop in London first. There she was kept until the Conference ended. Later, she was allowed to address Assyrian demands but only in Britain.

...this, again, is not history. This is a highly slanted reading of events for obvious reasons.
>
>Other representatives comprised of a deputation led by Sa'aid Namiq and supported by the Chaldean Catholic Church patriarchate and a delegation from the Caucasus led by Lazar Yacouboff, President of the Assyrian National Council of the Transcaucasus (Yacoub, p. 9).

..and since we know since then that these religious sects can`t plan a picnic...we know why no one wanted them at any conference where grown-ups were in attendance. You boys STILL can`t get the time of day from anyone...till you`re reduced to hiring someone to do it FOR you. All except for Kenfuck who, apparently, can meet with any number of wurld leaders any time and anywhere he wants to.
>
>From the start therefore, the Assyrian delegation met with obstacles, the most serious from Britain, and the Mandate power most directly involved with the fate of Assyrians once Russia stepped out of the picture.

...no no. Their most serious obstacle, then as now, is TRHEMSELVES. No one is so much a masochist as to want to sit through the competing harrangues that would come their way if they dared sit down with any bunch of you...not even YOU can stand each other...you want strangers to?
>
>Assyrian Demands
>
>The Assyrian Delegates brought two sets of demands: The American Assyrians demanded the establishment of an Assyrian independent territory, as the Allies had promised repeatedly, to include northern Mesopotamia, beginning from the lower Zab River, Diyarbakir and extending to the Armenian mountains, with access to the Mediterranean Sea, and under the protection of the super powers (Werda, p. 205).

...refer back to the the broken trail of tears trailing behind these super-powers and you should know what to make of future promises...except you didn`t learn a damn thing.
>
>A national home for the Assyrians had been discussed earlier. In April 1917, Dr. Fraidon (Aturaya) Bet-Avraham (1891-1926) had completed the Urmia Manifesto of the United Free Assyria. His vision was for an Assyrian self-governing national home in the regions of Urmia, Mosul, Tur Abdin, Jazira, and Hakkari with economic and military ties with Russia (Melta, p. 4).

...dream all you want to...have all the visions and faith you want to...then ask those super powers if they got their wishes fulfilled by dreaming and wishing..or did they fight and kill and steal to become the POWERS they are...the powers YOU beg from?
>
>Great Britain and the US delegates denied the Assyrian right to present this petition under the pretense that President Wilson was having strong reservations about any plans to divide Turkey.

...no one...absolutely NO ONE was going to put Christians on top of oil wells.
>
>Lady Surma demanded basic freedoms and the release of all prisoners and the punishment of the criminals responsible for the atrocities committed against the Assyrians during the Great War (Matviev, p. 119). These demands included allowing the Assyrians of Hakkari to return to their homes. Although there was nothing about the establishment of an Assyrian autonomous area, even these modest demands were ignored over the coming decades.

...Turkey would have liked to demand punishment for the war brought to it by the Brits and other European powers, who then stole their wealth...so what?
>
>Post Paris Peace Conference Events
>
>The League of Nations was conceived in 1919 as an instrument to maintain the peace and security thought achieved in World War I, and to promote international cooperation. Its Charter, called the Covenant, consists of the first twenty-six articles of the Treaty of Versailles.

..it was never intended to do that..it was meant to give the Western nations the upper hand...sure, if they could get what they wanted without another world war, so much the better....but there were few illusuions...no way was the "peace" going to last...no way.
>
>On August 23, 1921, Great Britain brought to Baghdad Faysal (son of Sharif Hussein the Hashemite ruler of the Hejaz) who had lost his throne in Syria, and proclaimed him king of the newly established Kingdom of Iraq. It included the three Ottoman provinces of Baghdad, Basra and Mosul, although the status of the latter had not been decided internationally.

...and he made a great point of extending his hand in brotherhood to all Iraqis...including the Christians.
>
>Besides the diplomatic efforts at the Peace Conference, other Assyrians, such as Agha Potros d-Baz (1880-1932), continued to pursue steps to establish an Assyrian autonomous state. In confidential letters written (April 1921-March 1922) the office of the British High Commissioner in Baghdad and the Director of Repatriation and the Divisional Advisor in Mosul discussed Agha Potros' comprehensive proposal, which was accompanied by a map (Yusuf Malek, pp. 212-213). The two officials discussed the difficulties and complications with a plan that demanded the inclusion of territories within Iraq, Persia, Turkey, and Syria. This involved the French as well. The efforts of Agha Potros were giving the British troubles; they decided to get rid of him. He was called to Baghdad, accused of collaboration with the French, and exiled to France in 1921 (Nirari, p. 147).

...the hero of many a revolution has become a thorn in the side of the new powers installed by that revolution.
>
>San Remo and the Treaty of Sèvres
>
>The Paris Peace Conference did not succeed in resolving the partition of the Ottoman Empire. The denunciation of the secret treaties by the Bolsheviks and the attitude of President Wilson had forced the Allies to leave Paris with agreements on the principles of partition and revision in the issue of British and French mandates. The interested parties gathered in April 1920 at San Remo for further deliberations. Great Britain's Lloyd George dominated the meetings and dictated demands: the Turkish government in Constantinople, having lost the war, capitulated to Allied demands. Turkey gave up its rights in all the regions it had dominated, including Mesopotamia (Howard, p. 243).

...shit happens. Ask Aprim.
>
>Bishop Aphrem Barsoum addressed the delegates through his memorandum dated February 1920. In his address, he mentioned that he was instructed by his patriarch with the task of laying before the conference the sufferings and the wishes of our ancient Assyrian nation that resides mostly in the upper
>valleys of Tigris and Euphrates in Mesopotamia. The bishop asked for the emancipation of the vilayets of Diarbakir, Bitlis, Kharput, and Urfa from the Turkish yoke. He protested against any plans to establish a Kurdish authority or state and demanded compensations for all loses the Assyrians had suffered as well as guarantees for the future survival of the Assyrian nation and its religion.

...at this same time, the Hindus were suffering under Britiah rule....as were many an Islander and national along Britain`s rise to such a status that Christians would come crying to THEM! Being so cloistered perhaps Aprim doesn`t realize that world history, not his selected readings of it, is filled to bursting with stories of the sufferings of millions upon millions of people...maybe then he wouldn`t come crying to the very nations who CAUSED so much of that suffering around the world.
>
>A month later, Bishop Barsoum addressed the conference by letter again. He repeated the earlier demands and reminded the Conference that the massacres were not against the Armenians alone; but against all Christians, and that half of the Assyrian people were victims of the Turkish sword and Kurdish dagger. He
>protested against the return of Turkish rule in Diyarbakir, Mardin, and Urfa.

...like I said...to tell the British that people out there are "SUFFERING" is merely to remind them of all they have done to MAKE people suffer themselves...it`s hardly going to come as news to them..or be much of a shock or prod to their bloody consciences.
>
>In August 1920 the Treaty of Sèvres was signed. The Fertile Crescent came under British and French mandate. Mosul was awarded to the British Mandate in Mesopotamia and made part of the new Iraq in keeping with an earlier agreement regarding Mosul reached between Britain and France. France gave up its interest in Mosul, granted under Sykes-Picot, in exchange for a twenty-five percent share in Mosul's oil and a free hand in the whole of Syria.

...typical...what do you think they attacked Turkey for in the first place...halvah?
>
>Racial and religious minorities received mention in Treaty articles 62, 63, 140, 141, 142, 147, 148, 149, and 150. Article 62 declares: "The Scheme shall contain full safeguards for the protection of the Assyro-Chaldeans and other racial or religious minorities within these areas, and with this object a commission composed of British, French, Italian, Persian and Kurdish representatives shall visit the spot to examine and decide what rectifications, if any, should be made in the Turkish frontier where, under the provisions of the present Treaty, that frontier coincides with that of Persia."

..this is a mere sop tossed out there to make their meddling acceptable...did you really take this sertiously? Wanna buy a bridge....cheap?
>
>Treaty of Lausanne
>
>Three years after signing the Treaty of Sèvres, Turkey began to demand reconsideration of the Mosul frontiers and amendment of certain articles in the Treaty of Sèvres. A new round of deliberations commenced on November 20, 1922, between Turkey and the Allies that concluded with the Treaty of Lausanne signed on July 24, 1923.
>
>The reason for this drastic change in Turkish policy stemmed from the success of the Kemalist movement, both military and political, based in Ankara, the capital of the new Republic. However, it was the Istanbul government and Sultan Mehmet VI that had participated in the Paris Peace Conference and signed the Treaty of Sèvres. With the change in both the form of the Turkish state and its leadership, the Treaty of Sèvres became a dead letter.
>
>During negotiations for this second treaty, the issue of the many national minorities in Turkey, addressed in the Treaty of Sèvres, remained unresolved. The representative of the League of Nations at the round of negotiations, Dr. Fridtjof Nansen, Director of the League of Nations High Commission for Refugees, raised the issue of the minorities on December 1, 1922. He had traveled to the region and reflected the League's concerns regarding minorities in Turkey. These concerns lingered. According to the Nansen International Office for Refugees, there were still thousands of Assyrian refugees in the early 1930s (League of Nations, p. 180).

...as there are tens of thousands of refugees TODAY round the world...part of the Act is to APPEAR to be concerned about this sort of stuff.
>
>In response, the League of Nations formed a sub-committee to address the issue: its report was made twelve days later. Lord Curzon, the British Foreign Minister emphasized the interest of the international community in the welfare and protection of the Greeks, Armenians, Assyrian Christians, and Jewish
>minorities in Turkey. Mr. Child, the American observer, agreed that strong measures ought be taken to protect those minorities.

...which is the reason you people are never trusted...because through your crybabies you DEMAND foreign Christians come "save" you...and you ALWAYS find an Aprim or Jassim who believes he`s been wronged for being Christian, or some such nonsense...therefore you are ALWAYS a potential fifth column...as we can see you are STILL crying for "protection from Muslims" when it is Christians, AGAIN, who have fucked you over the most.

The sub-committee presented its report in which it asked for written guarantees for the protection of minorities in Turkey and suggested a League commission in Constantinople to supervise the process.

...had Turkey been on its toes, it would have convened an international commission to look into all the lynchings and rapes of Black American CHRISTIANS in America at that time...it would have placed several prominant Black leaders on the commission and had a great deal of fun sitting back and watching the United States JUSTIFY its own brutality and denial of basic Human Rights AND legal protections within its OWN Constitution which were routinely denied to American citizens merely because of the color of their skin. Alas...no sense of the ridiculous.

However, after further deliberations and with strong Turkish opposition, a revised report was submitted. "The report of the sub-committee on minorities was presented on January 9, 1923. In essence, it was almost a complete Turkish victory, for it provided guarantees by treaty, but abandoned the plan for an international commission... under supervision by the League of Nations." (Howard, p. 302-304).

...how typically hypocritical for the Christians to pose as the defenders of any Darky`s rights. These would be the same Christians who, twenty years down the road, would be ROASTING Jewish babies!!!
>
>Assyrians, yet again, were not allowed to participate at Lausanne, as Great Britain stood in their way, but Agha Potros attended the opening ceremonies of the conference. Agha Potros did not give up. He tried again by submitting a letter to the British authorities, dated October 26, 1923. Agha Potros' suggestion for the Assyrian enclave was the land between the Rivers Tigris and Zab, and Mount Sinjar (Nirari, p. 191).

...well...how come they couldn`t "force him to leave"?
>
>The Assyrian state proposed by Agha Potros covers in reality the Assyrian Christian historical homelands, lands that have been inhabited by Assyrian Christians (Nestorians, Chaldeans, and Jacobites) for 2000 years.

...bullshit. This is where you all fall flat. These lands were inhabited by PEOPLE...people of various religions and no religions. Plus which these lands were DOMINATED for over 1400 years by MUSLIMS, twice as long as any Christians lived there...plus which the Christians, in all those years, NEVER built the kind of empire Islam did...the fact that they "inhabited" that region gives them no ownership rights whatsoever...you can own what you can TAKE and KEEP...not what you SAT ON once upon a time!

...more later.

.

---------------------

- BACK TO INDEX - REPLY - QUOTE - EDIT - DELETE -

The full topic:

for future reference pancho - Friday, June 16 2006, 20:11:56 (CEST)
- Re: for future reference pancho - 06/17 17:17
- the rest... pancho - 06/18 04:10

Content-length: 23002
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-excel, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, applicatio...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: es
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf4/rkvsf_core.php?for_future_reference-Ncgl.HJXb.QUOTE
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; HbTools 4.7.7)