Skip to content
Blogster on GitHub

How Britain and France carved the Middle East - Book Review

I recently finished reading 'A Line in the Sand' by James Barr. I wanted to learn more about the region after feeling a little ignorant when the conflict between Israel and Palestine heated up again in October. This book was recommended by the FT, as it gives a good background into how the region has been shaped by its colonial past.

The book is close to 400 pages long and took longer to read than I was expecting, mainly because it was sometimes hard to keep track of names and places!

Here are some of the things that I learned or found super interesting.

France vs France

During WW2, after Nazi Germany occupied France, the country was split into two groups: the existing 'Free French' government and the Vichy French.

Vichy

The Vichy French decided to collaborate with the Germans, partly out of necessity to try and preserve some of their French culture and to avoid further bloodshed in Nazi-occupied areas. Now, the dilemma for France's many colonies at the time was: which government should they serve?

Many of the generals in these colonies were already nearing retirement and had family back in France, whose safety they feared. This meant that a lot of the colonies ended up siding with the Vichy French and therefore became aligned with the Germans.

One big controversial event that happened during this time was the British sinking of the French fleet in Algeria. See, Britain was worried that the Vichy French would either hand over the fleet to the Germans or that the Germans would simply seize it. So, the British made the decision to sink the entire fleet, resulting in over 1,200 French sailors dying. Many still see this as a betrayal.

mers-el-kebir

Furthermore, with the French colonies siding with the Germans, there was a large conflict between the Allies, including Britain and the Free French, versus the Vichy French in North Africa. Essentially, it was France vs. France.

The drawing of borders

The Sykes-Picot agreement, an agreement between a French and British diplomat, was the deciding factor in how the Middle East was split up post-WW1 between the two colonial powers. This agreement still has consequences today, with many modern borders in the region shaped from the agreement.

Skyes-Picot

The agreement is controversial, firstly because it ignores a lot of local history, including complex tribal, cultural, and religious differences in the region. Furthermore, the agreement contradicted many promises that the British had made during WW1 when it suggested that it would support an independent Arab state if they were to help overthrow the Ottoman Empire.

France and the UK really didn't like each other

A recurring theme throughout the book, is that even though during both WW1 and WW2, Britain and France were on the same side, really the governments didn't trust each other at all.

Both sides worked to undermine each other's positon in the Middle East, and this went as far as promoting independence movements in each others territory.

The distrust extended so far that decades after WW2, France tried to block Britain from joining the European Economic Community.

Jewish immigration to Palestine

Before and after WW2, Britain was actually opposed to mass Jewish immigration to Palestine, which was still a British colony at that time.

Britain wanted to maintain good relations with the surrounding Arab countries, on which it relied for oil.

However, intense lobbying from Zionist groups in the US, which had real influence on elections, resulted in the US government putting pressure on Britain. Furthermore, Jewish terrorist organizations, including the Stern Gang which had secret French support in Palestine, put intense pressure on the British government, which eventually decided to step back.

If you'd like to read the book, you can find it here