File No. 763.72119/1708
Extract from Report of the Special Agent at Cairo (Yale)
[Received December 26.]
Before the Russian revolution took place the Allies came to a mutual understanding concerning the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the partition of its various parts. It was agreed that the Armenian vilayets of Bitlis, Erzereum and Van should go to Russia, France should take Syria, perhaps including Cilicia, while Great [Page 491] Britain should have Mesopotamia; Palestine was to be internationalized, an independent Arab kingdom, composed of the hinterland of Syria stretching east as far as Mosul was to be created as a buffer state separating the interests of the three great allies. Such appears to have been the program agreed upon by the Allies previous to the Russian revolution.
After the revolution the Russians repudiated this agreement by proclaiming that they had no territorial ambitions and relinquished previous pretentions to the Armenian provinces of Bitlis, Erzereum and Van. As a result, the program of the other two allies, England and France, had to be somewhat changed. The Armenian Committee at Paris received formal assurances from France and Great Britain that the Armenian provinces would be freed from Turkish tyranny, and that an autonomous Armenian state under the protection of the Allies would be created. It was understood that Great Britain would have Mesopotamia and France, Syria; Palestine and its problems were to be left to be decided later, the future status as yet unsettled.
Early in the year 1917, when the military occupation of Palestine and Syria by the British forces seemed probable, there came to Egypt representing France, Monsieur Picot, former French Consul at Beirut, and Mr. Mark Sykes, an Orientalist and lover of the Orient, who has traveled extensively in the East, representing Great Britain. These two gentlemen, representing respectively French and British interests in Syria, were to all intents and purposes working together in entire harmony. Monsieur Picot called a meeting of all the prominent Syrians in Egypt, Moslems and Christians, and announced to them that he had been appointed by the French Government the future Resident of Syria, and in his speech implied a French protectorate over Syria, and an international control over Palestine or at least over the Holy Places. Mark Sykes likewise interviewed several of the prominent Syrians in Egypt and questioned them in regard to their views. He practically admitted a French occupation of Syria, guarded a discreet silence in respect to Mesopotamia, from which it was implied that Great Britain intended to hold Mesopotamia 5 spoke of a special arrangement in regard to the Holy Places in Palestine, and asserted that a certain part of Syria, which he said he was not at liberty to disclose at that time, would be independent. His remarks implied that the rule of one of the sons of the King of the Hedjaz over this independent Arab state would be favored by the British.
Military events on the Gaza front proved most disappointing, the political situation in Europe following the Russian revolution was [Page 492] very obscure, and Monsieur Picot and Mr. Mark Sykes returned to their respective countries without accomplishing anything further.
Then followed the entrance of America into the war, and the declaration by President Wilson of the aims of the United States. England and France later declared their aims, denied the fact that they were fighting a war of conquest, and reiterated the statements in regard to the rights of small nations and oppressed nationalities. And so, in spite of the statements made by Monsieur Picot and Mr. Mark Sykes, the Syrians began to hope and plan for their independence. But among them uncertainty and uneasiness existed and still exists concerning the real intentions of these two powers. There is a doubt in the minds of the Syrians as to whether Great Britain and France will carry out the letter and the spirit of the declarations of their statesmen as regards the rights of small and oppressed nationalities.